Claw of Lightning is disappointing (ranger)

[Snaggles]

While I don’t dispute the dominance (and affordability) of a Meljeldin, with a short parse a lucky extra double attack means a lot more.

For example:
Dps Time Total Damage
93 58 5436

Remove one double attack for a max round of 275x2 and you get 84dps from this same parse. In a similar way, it’s entirely possible a big crit (warrior or BFG) or rogue double backstab will push a parse far higher in a sub 1min fight than it would on an 6+ minute one. I know crits are not relevant in this situation but just using as an example why a bit of lucky RNG can mean a lot more with less time to smooth out that curve.

Also, I haven’t added up all that damage and divided by time on target to get a true average. Maybe that would be a more accurate way to measure this data (presuming buffs are the same)?

Finding that balance between raid-level mitigation, controlling variables (buffs), and surviving for 10+ minutes of parsing is the hard part.

Anyway, great data!! I have a lot of Vindi parses at this point and while I can’t recall all the specifics of each my own testing generally tips to favor the 2h. It’s a bruiser even with EC haste and Shissar.

[kjs86z2]

no raid mob is not going to die over a rangers weapon choice

[Snaggles]

Originally Posted by kjs86z2 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

no raid mob is not going to die over a rangers weapon choice

A+ contribution. Liked and Subscribed.

[TytosOfEight]

Originally Posted by Snaggles [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

While I don’t dispute the dominance (and affordability) of a Meljeldin, with a short parse a lucky extra double attack means a lot more.

For example:
Dps Time Total Damage
93 58 5436

Remove one double attack for a max round of 275x2 and you get 84dps from this same parse. In a similar way, it’s entirely possible a big crit (warrior or BFG) or rogue double backstab will push a parse far higher in a sub 1min fight than it would on an 6+ minute one. I know crits are not relevant in this situation but just using as an example why a bit of lucky RNG can mean a lot more with less time to smooth out that curve.

Also, I haven’t added up all that damage and divided by time on target to get a true average. Maybe that would be a more accurate way to measure this data (presuming buffs are the same)?

Finding that balance between raid-level mitigation, controlling variables (buffs), and surviving for 10+ minutes of parsing is the hard part.

Anyway, great data!! I have a lot of Vindi parses at this point and while I can’t recall all the specifics of each my own testing generally tips to favor the 2h. It’s a bruiser even with EC haste and Shissar.

The last line on each parse group is just that - the total damage / time. It showed basically the same overall dps for both weapons.

[Ennewi]

Originally Posted by kjs86z2 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

no raid mob is not going to die over a rangers weapon choice

Oakwynd should be a weapon of choice for rangers by now. This long into SoV, let at least one or two rangers live the dream.

[Snaggles]

Originally Posted by TytosOfEight [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

The last line on each parse group is just that - the total damage / time. It showed basically the same overall dps for both weapons.

Oh thanks. I’m seeing that now but recall you mentioned this when you initially posted it.

[TytosOfEight]

Originally Posted by bcbrown [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Yes. The only data that I provided in that thread demonstrates that against a level 40 mob, a druid, cleric, and ranger all have similar response to adding AC; that there's no cap whether hard or soft up to 160 worn ac; that adding ac makes otherwise-max-hits into min hits; and that above a (mob-specific) "squelch point" of 160 ac for this mob there's no longer much if any value to ac. Sogundordor provided data against a level 45 mob with a ranger and sk that are in line with my conclusions. No one has yet provided similar data against higher mobs.



I think you missed a couple words. Between 100 ac and what? I would be very appreciative if you read through that thread, especially the last 4-5 pages, and added some data from your testing. Ideally hit distribution charts similar to the ones I provided.

And I have an open offer to anyone who wants to do some ac parsing to heal them on either blue or green.

I couldn’t find my monk log files (probably on a different partition), so I parsed more: I did 20 Geonids with 1237 AC and 20 Geonids with 1312 AC, a difference of 75 AC. I expected to see at least a small difference, but with 1237 AC I took 12.4 dps worth of damage (Dmg to PC 23851 / time 1922) and with 1312 AC I also took 12.4 dps worth of damage (Dmg to PC 25296 / time 2052). No difference.

On my ranger, I did 30 Geonids with 1055 AC and took 10.5 dps worth of damage (Dmg to PC 31149 / time 2966); and did 30 Geonids with 1160 AC and also took 10.5 dps worth of damage (Dmg to PC 33635 / time 3218). No difference again.

So you must be correct, that AC is related to a mobs atk and that ranger AC is working correctly.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

Originally Posted by TytosOfEight [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I couldn’t find my monk log files (probably on a different partition), so I parsed more: I did 20 Geonids with 1237 AC and 20 Geonids with 1312 AC, a difference of 75 AC. I expected to see at least a small difference, but with 1237 AC I took 12.4 dps worth of damage (Dmg to PC 23851 / time 1922) and with 1312 AC I also took 12.4 dps worth of damage (Dmg to PC 25296 / time 2052). No difference.

On my ranger, I did 30 Geonids with 1055 AC and took 10.5 dps worth of damage (Dmg to PC 31149 / time 2966); and did 30 Geonids with 1160 AC and also took 10.5 dps worth of damage (Dmg to PC 33635 / time 3218). No difference again.

So you must be correct, that AC is related to a mobs atk and that ranger AC is working correctly.

AC wouldn't be "broken" for Rangers specifically. EQEMU code doesn't have special exceptions for Rangers in the mitigation code. Mitigation uses Defense Skill, AGI, and AC.

The first place Rangers have an issue is with their lower defense. They have like 32 less Defense than a Warrior/Paladin/SK. Using my damage calculator, if Vindi was a Ranger instead of a Warrior, he would be taking about 5-6 more DPS on average from a player 60 ranger using Meljeldin. This is from the lower Defense skill.

Theres a second possible place where Rangers have an issue, but I did not include it in my calculator. If AC softcaps do exist on P99, they can be based on what armor type your class wears. In the EQEMU code they do have a place where they specify armor softcaps for Cloth, Leather, Chain, and Plate.

Unsuprisingly, Plate has the highest softcap value, and the other armor types have lower softcaps. Since Rangers use Chain rather than Plate, they could be getting AC softcapped sooner than Warriors/Paladins/SKs.

[bcbrown]

Originally Posted by TytosOfEight [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I couldn’t find my monk log files (probably on a different partition), so I parsed more: I did 20 Geonids with 1237 AC and 20 Geonids with 1312 AC, a difference of 75 AC. I expected to see at least a small difference, but with 1237 AC I took 12.4 dps worth of damage (Dmg to PC 23851 / time 1922) and with 1312 AC I also took 12.4 dps worth of damage (Dmg to PC 25296 / time 2052). No difference.

On my ranger, I did 30 Geonids with 1055 AC and took 10.5 dps worth of damage (Dmg to PC 31149 / time 2966); and did 30 Geonids with 1160 AC and also took 10.5 dps worth of damage (Dmg to PC 33635 / time 3218). No difference again.

So you must be correct, that AC is related to a mobs atk and that ranger AC is working correctly.

Thanks for going back and running an experiment! If you don't mind sharing the logs either here or in DM I'd like to generate hit distribution graphs like the ones I posted in the ranger AC thread. I'll bet that they all have <3% max hits and around 30% min hits.

I wish the "What is this bullshit we parsed this a decade ago" people would explain what they're talking about because if they're talking about xp mobs I'm pretty sure they're wrong. If they're talking about raid mobs I remain open to the possibility that something is broken, but I would love to see some data showing that.

If in fact the "ranger AC is broken" thing is pure folklore here's my speculation on how it came to be:

* Ranger is an inherently inferior tank due to lower skill caps on defensive skills
* Because rangers are usually pulling or adding DPS and since gear choices always have tradeoffs, most people gear their ranger for strength, dex, and resists. And since all the ranger races start out with fairly low str/sta/dex there's more ground to make up there too.
* Because of those first two points, when a ranger is forced to step in and tank, the healer's gonna notice the difference compared to other tanks
* Because there's mob-specific hardcaps on the impact of AC, it's easy to accidentally run an experiment and conclude AC has no impact
* Because most people look at DPS instead of a hit distribution histogram, it's harder to tell exactly what AC is doing

[DeathsSilkyMist]

Originally Posted by bcbrown [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I wish the "What is this bullshit we parsed this a decade ago" people would explain what they're talking about because if they're talking about xp mobs I'm pretty sure they're wrong. If they're talking about raid mobs I remain open to the possibility that something is broken, but I would love to see some data showing that.

They probably won't provide data sadly. I've asked them before, and they haven't provided anything yet. But we can always hope.

Originally Posted by bcbrown [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

If in fact the "ranger AC is broken" thing is pure folklore here's my speculation on how it came to be:

* Ranger is an inherently inferior tank due to lower skill caps on defensive skills

This is probably the reason. 32 less Defense skill at 60 will be noticeable. Defense affects both mitigation and how often you get hit. It's even worse for a good portion of the server's timeline, because Rangers are capped at 200 Defense skill until the Oct 1, 2001 patch. So people have experienced playing a Ranger with 52 less Defense skill at level 60.

As I said in the post before, if AC softcaps do exist on P99, Rangers may be getting softcapped sooner than Warriors/Paladins/SKs as well. This is because Rangers use Chain instead of Plate, and the EQEMU code does have the option to specify softcaps for Cloth, Leather, Chain, and Plate.

So Rangers kinda get screwed on both Defense Skill and AC. I assume the idea was Rangers are better at dodging/parrying/etc. That's the idea in Dungeons and Dragons, but it doesn't really work in practice on P99.