"Fair and legitimate chance at a target" (cont) - Page 12

Sadiki · #1 02-02-2017, 05:37 PM

Quote:

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

CSR on this server should be forced to participate in their own rules if they want to implement them.

Let's see how long these rules last then.

There is no way Sirken would do a hundredth of the shit he forces everyone else here to do for mobs.

Sirken forms up a GM guild, goes on to FTE 100% of mobs for the next 6 months.

maskedmelonpai · #2 02-02-2017, 05:50 PM

Quote:

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

CSR on this server should be forced to participate in their own rules if they want to implement them.

Let's see how long these rules last then.

There is no way Sirken would do a hundredth of the shit he forces everyone else here to do for mobs.

He don't force anyone to do anything and that is his point. Everyone chooses to track stuff and hanging out at the door in tov. That is his point about socking and why they won't change variance, because people are still hangin' out for the duration of a spawn window waitin' for it to spawn. If you don't want to do it, join a guild with people who do it so you don't have to. It super simple ^^

Naethyn · #3 02-02-2017, 02:05 PM

The problem with AC is that it doesn't reduce the maximum potential damage, it only reduces the number of high damage hits you take. That means no matter how much AC you stack you will always take max hits. For this reason it is far better to just have max HP for targets like AoW, Red Dragons, and Growth minis. Does that mean AC is broke? No, it just doesn't make it impossible to be max hit.

Raev · #4 02-02-2017, 02:35 PM

Quote:

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

The problem with AC is that it doesn't reduce the maximum potential damage

This is neat, simple, logical, and wrong. For example, suppose you are tanking the Avatar of War. A full round requires:

Flurry check (say 0.5)
Dual wield check x2 (say 0.8)
Double attack check x4 (say 0.8)
Hit check x 8 (say 0.6)
Max hit check x 8 (say 0.55 for an HP stacking warrior, or 0.40 for an AC stacking warrior)

So the Avatar will get 8 max hits on an HP stacking warrior approximately every 50,000 attack rounds (p = 0.5 * 0.8^6 * 0.6^8 * 0.55^8) and on the AC stacking warrior every 700,000 attack rounds (p = 0.5 * 0.8^6 * 0.6^8 * 0.55^8).

TLDR: AC does in fact reduce the maximum practical damage.

Naethyn · #5 02-02-2017, 02:48 PM

Quote:

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

This is neat, simple, logical, and wrong. For example, suppose you are tanking the Avatar of War. A full round requires:

Flurry check (say 0.5)
Dual wield check x2 (say 0.8)
Double attack check x4 (say 0.8)
Hit check x 8 (say 0.6)
Max hit check x 8 (say 0.55 for an HP stacking warrior, or 0.40 for an AC stacking warrior)

So the Avatar will get 8 max hits on an HP stacking warrior approximately every 50,000 attack rounds (p = 0.5 * 0.8^6 * 0.6^8 * 0.55^8) and on the AC stacking warrior every 700,000 attack rounds (p = 0.5 * 0.8^6 * 0.6^8 * 0.55^8).

TLDR: AC does in fact reduce the maximum practical damage.

AC will defineatly reduce the total damage taken over the fight, but my point is the mobs maximum hit does not get reduced. With more AC you'll see a 1568 hit from AoW far less often, but it won't prevent it from occurring. This means a tank with more health is preferred over a tank who takes less a damage over time with a rolling ch chain.