AC softcap and low level hardcap discussion

[TytosOfEight]

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

Interesting. Could you parse that against some mobs? Rile ratio is pretty bad, but curious how much the higher rune and less riposteS offsets the higher dps weapons.

Yeah I definitely can. My char is parked for a little while atm but I'll do some parsing as soon as I'm done here.

[Snaggles]

Shamans have to torp tank when soloing.
Monk solo challenges seem heavily AC/Hp affected
A knight or warrior’s efficiency may result in a pass/fail outcome.

These are the classes who should be interested in the results of the thread. Ones that take more hits/hr than any other class. If they are serious players, they should be doing their own research already.

[kjs86z2]

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

Shamans have to torp tank when soloing.
Monk solo challenges seem heavily AC/Hp affected
A knight or warrior’s efficiency may result in a pass/fail outcome.

These are the classes who should be interested in the results of the thread. Ones that take more hits/hr than any other class. If they are serious players, they should be doing their own research already.

enchanters that stack armor are big brain

[Jimjam]

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

enchanters that stack armor are big brain

Need to stack Agi to 280 for max avoidance under bedlam, obvz.

[Snaggles]

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

enchanters that stack armor are big brain

For specific situations, specific gear goals can be justified. The classes I mentioned are defined classically or situationally as “tanks”.

If a ranger by most definitions should forfeit AC over other melee stats, I’d argue enchanters should do the same.

[kjs86z2]

hey wow rangers want vyem whip + epic combo

never woulda guessed that

[DeathsSilkyMist]

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

3. The softcaps do appear to exist, but I haven't confirmed what the values are yet. When the softcap is found, you should hit the softcap, and then focus on other stats like HP and resists. More AC past the softcap will offer some returns, but they probably won't be large. Haynar said that Warriors get 45% returns past the softcap, and the EQEMU code reflects that number. All other classes in the EQEMU code get lower than 45% returns past the softcap.

There is one caveat for this. On my Shaman stacking AC is still benefitial after the softcap, as harder mobs like 6+ Dragons can have dangerous damage spikes. Reducing how many max hits they can do is quite useful for Torpor Tanking.

https://www.project1999.com/forums/s...&postcount=105

Going from 207 AC to 386 AC reduced my max hits from 67 to 25.

So stacking AC past the softcap can still be a good strategy when trying to avoid spikes in damage, like getting double attacked for max damage on both hits.

[Snaggles]

A Meljeldin has a 23.4% better ratio if you count the relative damage bonuses.

I certainly think it would be a solid tanking weapon, just a matter of if doing less dps but getting a heavy rune makes up for it.

[bcbrown]

I just finished a test against Shiel Glimmerspindel, using a 60 druid. Both sides had 198 worn ac and 61 spell ac for a total of 259. The first side had the lodi shield in the back slot, and the second side had it in the secondary slot. I ended up with 909 hits on the first test and 587 on the second. Back slot had 40 damage/hit, 33.55% min hit, 0.77% max hit. Secondary slot had 39.7 damage/hit, 33.22% min hit, 1.36% max hit.

I was hoping to take 1500-2000 hits per side, but took a peek, saw the hits and intermediate results, and decided to call it there. I'm going to restart the test at slightly lower total AC and compare three treatments: no lodi shield; lodi shield in back slot; lodi shield in secondary slot.

If no-shield and back-slot have the same damage/hit while shield in secondary has lower damage/hit, that means shield AC has an impact on a 60 druid against a 40 mob. If they're all the same that would imply it doesn't have an impact. Either way I'll then do another test with ~20 less worn ac. This'll all probaby be on Sunday; it takes a ton of time so I'm only doing it while watching football.

The preliminary results showed no difference in damage/hit between lodi shield in back slot and lodi shield in secondary slot, which seems to contradict DSM's results. I don't think we can rule out mob-specific AC squelching, but would love for DSM to run some tests at those same AC intervals as he did previously, but against Shiel.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

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

I just finished a test against Shiel Glimmerspindel, using a 60 druid. Both sides had 198 worn ac and 61 spell ac for a total of 259. The first side had the lodi shield in the back slot, and the second side had it in the secondary slot. I ended up with 909 hits on the first test and 587 on the second. Back slot had 40 damage/hit, 33.55% min hit, 0.77% max hit. Secondary slot had 39.7 damage/hit, 33.22% min hit, 1.36% max hit.

I was hoping to take 1500-2000 hits per side, but took a peek, saw the hits and intermediate results, and decided to call it there. I'm going to restart the test at slightly lower total AC and compare three treatments: no lodi shield; lodi shield in back slot; lodi shield in secondary slot.

If no-shield and back-slot have the same damage/hit while shield in secondary has lower damage/hit, that means shield AC has an impact on a 60 druid against a 40 mob. If they're all the same that would imply it doesn't have an impact. Either way I'll then do another test with ~20 less worn ac. This'll all probaby be on Sunday; it takes a ton of time so I'm only doing it while watching football.

The preliminary results showed no difference in damage/hit between lodi shield in back slot and lodi shield in secondary slot, which seems to contradict DSM's results. I don't think we can rule out mob-specific AC squelching, but would love for DSM to run some tests at those same AC intervals as he did previously, but against Shiel.

You should compare equal numbers of hits to check AC mitigation.

That is why I am comparing 400 hits to another set of 400 hits, 1400 hits to 1400 hits, etc.

Your second test has like half of the hits of the first, and we saw with my data that 400 hits can be a bit noisy.

You should compare two sets of 1000 hits, for example. The easiest explanation for your results is due to a significantly different amount of hits for each test, and the second test not having enough hit data to rule out noise.

That is why I did 1400 hits for each test on the level 5 shield/no shield experiment.

https://www.project1999.com/forums/s...8&postcount=68

I'll try to get more data at some point, but kinda busy right now with other things.