Parsing Agility?

[magnetaress]

so in true EQ fashion gear and stats makes less difference then levels and the standard devation requires a very large parse...

if agi saves u 1 dmg it will take 300,000 hits at lvl 1

need a /tesbuff server, and I wouldn't really have a super ton of faith in the combat code on p99 tho it 'feels' OK ish

maybe you just have statistically really bad luck or your quantum feels towards dwarves make your /rolls biased, it is quite possible

also parry, block, dodge, and riposte per the wiki don't use agi for anything they are flat skill checks, that is why monks have straight up better avoidance than any other classic class, with rogues coming in next on avoidance.

warriors and knights have the highest mitigation

warriors and knights get the most benifit from AC, monks, rogues, and rangers get OK benifit from AC and AGI helps them more then max AC because their AC is capped in the system

basically how it works, always worked, and I am pretty sure how Nilbog made it if you can bother parsing a 60 monk vs war vs rogue

even cons always ploued thru peoples ac/mitigation, u should test a mob that is dark blue, 4 lvls below u and see what the difference is when u add and subtract ac or agi as they will not bound out of the lower ranges of your mitigation then, essentially making combat code meaningless, because the nuance is not calculated when the mob just max hits regularly

[fadetree]

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

so in true EQ fashion gear and stats makes less difference then levels and the standard devation requires a very large parse...

if agi saves u 1 dmg it will take 300,000 hits at lvl 1

need a /tesbuff server, and I wouldn't really have a super ton of faith in the combat code on p99 tho it 'feels' OK ish

maybe you just have statistically really bad luck or your quantum feels towards dwarves make your /rolls biased, it is quite possible

also parry, block, dodge, and riposte per the wiki don't use agi for anything they are flat skill checks, that is why monks have straight up better avoidance than any other classic class, with rogues coming in next on avoidance.

warriors and knights have the highest mitigation

warriors and knights get the most benifit from AC, monks, rogues, and rangers get OK benifit from AC and AGI helps them more then max AC because their AC is capped in the system

basically how it works, always worked, and I am pretty sure how Nilbog made it if you can bother parsing a 60 monk vs war vs rogue

even cons always ploued thru peoples ac/mitigation, u should test a mob that is dark blue, 4 lvls below u and see what the difference is when u add and subtract ac or agi as they will not bound out of the lower ranges of your mitigation then, essentially making combat code meaningless, because the nuance is not calculated when the mob just max hits regularly

They wouldn't be generally testing how AC works, just how AGI affects avoidance. It's all good to keep in mind though. Testbuff servers and the like are not available. How the wiki and everything else says it works does not matter, we can just get data from the parse. I agree it might be handled differently for individual classes...but we are trying to answer the question - does AGI have any real effect on anything? It's a good point though, should probably test with melee rather than caster because that's the class type that is interested in AGI and also where you would expect it to have the most effect.

[Ivory]

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

should probably test with melee rather than caster because that's the class type that is interested in AGI and also where you would expect it to have the most effect.

Actually I think it would be more useful for casters.... since AC is more difficult to get from armor (especially to stack high enough to mitigate enough damage), but you can get high agility items....which might also make casting while being attacked easier (since more likely to avoid the attacks and get it off).

My necromancer I play as a tank (since I can far outtank my pet and add a lot of melee damage). If agi is better for that, then it seems like a good option.

[magnetaress]

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

Actually I think it would be more useful for casters.... since AC is more difficult to get from armor (especially to stack high enough to mitigate enough damage), but you can get high agility items....which might also make casting while being attacked easier (since more likely to avoid the attacks and get it off).

My necromancer I play as a tank (since I can far outtank my pet and add a lot of melee damage). If agi is better for that, then it seems like a good option.

AGI does not increase avoidance


none of ur parses will ever show dat

[fadetree]

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

AGI does not increase avoidance


none of ur parses will ever show dat

I think you are wrong. It specifically does affect avoidance only.

[fadetree]

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

Actually I think it would be more useful for casters.... since AC is more difficult to get from armor (especially to stack high enough to mitigate enough damage), but you can get high agility items....which might also make casting while being attacked easier (since more likely to avoid the attacks and get it off).

My necromancer I play as a tank (since I can far outtank my pet and add a lot of melee damage). If agi is better for that, then it seems like a good option.

You misunderstand my point. I was saying that it probably would have the most noticeable effect on a melee, and thus the signal in the parse would be greater.

This thread is starting to get offtrack. If anyone tries the parsing, good luck and let me know if you need any help.

[magnetaress]

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

You misunderstand my point. I was saying that it probably would have the most noticeable effect on a melee, and thus the signal in the parse would be greater.

This thread is starting to get offtrack. If anyone tries the parsing, good luck and let me know if you need any help.

not sure but both servers are probably running custom code from the first pvp box which did have a ton of custom code lol

don't think p99 was ever stock emu

[Vizax_Xaziv]

Speaking anecdotally, my Shaman Wolf seems to be noticably tankier when I buffs his AGI vs when I don't.

For what (very) little that info is worth!

[Jimjam]

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

even cons always ploued thru peoples ac/mitigation, u should test a mob that is dark blue, 4 lvls below u and see what the difference is when u add and subtract ac or agi as they will not bound out of the lower ranges of your mitigation then, essentially making combat code meaningless, because the nuance is not calculated when the mob just max hits regularly

I think it is important to parse things that are ‘realistic’. It doesn’t matter if agi adds a tonne of avoidance against a player’s pet as you won’t often be having that fight.

I did datamine my ranger’s logs in the past, back when he was levelling in KC. Back then i found a bunch of characters of various levels which were tanking the level ~51 mobs (knights, bodyguards, etc) and their mitigation was almost identical. I can’t remember if this was before the AC ‘fix’ or not. What I do remember is rangers had ATROCIOUS avoidance compared to to monks and knights. Their low avoidance and smaller hp pool is the real reason they were bad tanka; my parsed ranger mitigated fine.

Rangers have (during kunark and earlier velious) poor defence caps, especially above 50, compared to other melee, and as the formula posted earlier claims this is a large part of avoidance.

[magnetaress]

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

I think it is important to parse things that are ‘realistic’. It doesn’t matter if agi adds a tonne of avoidance against a player’s pet as you won’t often be having that fight.

I did datamine my ranger’s logs in the past, back when he was levelling in KC. Back then i found a bunch of characters of various levels which were tanking the level ~51 mobs (knights, bodyguards, etc) and their mitigation was almost identical. I can’t remember if this was before the AC ‘fix’ or not. What I do remember is rangers had ATROCIOUS avoidance compared to to monks and knights. Their low avoidance and smaller hp pool is the real reason they were bad tanka; my parsed ranger mitigated fine.

Rangers have (during kunark and earlier velious) poor defence caps, especially above 50, compared to other melee, and as the formula posted earlier claims this is a large part of avoidance.

low skill cap on dodge, riposte, parry, RIP

may as well not even bother training that 75 dodge on a caster, but lol it has saved me on rare occasion i have seen myself dodge during a gate or somethin

das EQ...

I too think they should have made it better, but tbh, the strength of this game comes from the group interplay not the gear we can farm, except maybe on live at high lvl, i am bout to test that out [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.] [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I would be curious to see what equiping a 2hander or a real beeeefy shield would prase in those situations on a ranger, bet it would be a lot better, i don't see why rangers cant hold agry while wielding either sword and board or 2h

--------

anyway thx for sharing your story, that is what i would expect! also