|
Post by ralkain on May 8, 2018 15:29:38 GMT
Ok, at the risk of creating another dead horse for folks to beat upon, I had another idea for how to make Classic Armored Tanks (usually Str toons) more viable at 3T.
What if Medium/Heavy armor granted 5% undispellable conceal per point of armor AC protection (including shield AC)? So a full plate tank with tower shield would get 55% undispellable conceal.
It may be ok to include light armor too (not sure), it can be discussed. I don't yet know how parry would fit into this, but I/we can figure that out if folks think this is a good idea on its own. After all, isn't heavy armor intended to passively "parry" blows?
|
|
|
Post by psv38 on May 8, 2018 16:11:50 GMT
I also liked an earlier idea on the other thread to add % DR to armors I think it was for warrior classes (fighters, maybe pure ones).
|
|
|
Post by jonlun on May 8, 2018 16:35:07 GMT
I like % dr if its not usable by shifters
|
|
|
Post by ralkain on May 8, 2018 19:49:31 GMT
I don't yet know how parry would fit into this, but I/we can figure that out if folks think this is a good idea on its own. After all, isn't heavy armor intended to passively "parry" blows? Well I should have thought of this a bit more before posting, how about if the above were all parry bonuses instead of undispellable DR. That way unless you're parrying or take the Parry Widget, it has no effect on the game. I'm ok with armor adding DR too if folks like that, but IMO parry bonus of 55 (for full plate/tower shield) would make getting full parry widget benefits easier for Classic Tanks and free up gear selections otherwise. You may also want to count the Armor/Shield Enhancement bonus into the parry bonus too...
|
|
ReePeR
Arakan Scribe
Posts: 95
|
Post by ReePeR on May 11, 2018 10:16:42 GMT
I would prefer the conceal over DR, AC means plenty will hit end game and the crits are huge, a small amount of DR won't help much
|
|
|
Post by gin on May 17, 2018 5:54:54 GMT
5% conceal barely matters considering BF-rerolls. Percentage based DR would have a much bigger impact. Also agree with Jon, this bonus should not be granted to shapeshifted toons.
I think a widget, granting 1% physical resistance per Armor Enhancement Bonus on Fullplates, would be fair.
The phys resistance would slowly scale as you lvl up and buy higher EB armors.
So currently, most high lvl armors are +7, which would result in a 7% dr bonus.
Access to the highest smith tier (consumable applying +1eb to armors) would make this 8% for the majority of armors, with a few exceptions on tier 11 which currently includes +9 EB armors, thus granting a maximum of 10%.
If towershield EB were to be included in this equation and I think it would make alot of sense, you could get an additional 5-6% DR.
So basically,the average classic armored tank would have mediocre AC, but a nice layer of additional protection with at least 13% (+7 fp, max smith rep, +5 tower) up to 16-17% dr (+9 fp, max smith rep, +6-7 tower).
Now, if you manage to combine 15%+ Damage Immunity, which is applied before, therefore stacks with damage resistance and elly DR, you would reduce damage from crits,sneaks even,considerably.
Widget of the classic armored tank. Could actually make alot of builds viable, from your oldschool heavy armor battleclerics clerics and paladins to maybe dualwielding ranger wms utilizing the FP % DR.
I also think % damage immunity agrees more with the flavour of a heavy armor tank, rather than conceal, which in my eyes is more of light armored dex thing.
Edit: barbs lol
|
|
|
Post by ralkain on May 17, 2018 15:42:16 GMT
I also think % damage immunity agrees more with the flavour of a heavy armor tank, rather than conceal, which in my eyes is more of light armored dex thing. Well conceal is more in line with the parry widget, whether you block by weapon skill or armor worn, its the same game effect. But %DR is also a valid view, it hits, but the armor absorbs some of the damage. Since conceal would greatly interact with the already balanced Parry widget, it might be simpler to do %DR. I would make the %DR equal to 3% of AC bonus, so +6 Full Plate / +5 Tower would block (66%, max 65%) of the damage with no widget needed, its a side effect of heavy armor. This is in line with the 65% conceal of the Parry Widget, and cap it at 65%. Someone with a +5 Tower shield alone would take 76% of the damage (duck behind that huge highly magical shield for DR: 24% . Under this a 4th level with full plate/large shield would have their normal ac, but also take only 70% of the damage (DR: 30%). A nice bennie for low level grinding and making maybe some areas more soloable. And a high level 40 char would have at most DR: 65%, I would say that this is applied last (after soak and xxx/- stuff). This is nice as it also applies to damage from spells and not just weapons. This means a fully Armored/Parry Widget Classic Armored Tank would receive 12.5% (.35*.35) of the weapon damage they would normally receive (as opposed to 35% with max parry alone). And also receive only 35% of magic damage (you could exempt lightning, positive/negative (heal/necro) spells from the magic reduction effect if possible armor doesn't reduce those). Can you see the classic armored tank with full plate/tower shield duck behind the shield to reduce, but still take dragon breath damage? (I can This seems reasonable to me, doesn't muck with Parry, soak, other DR effects, and of course exempt shifted forms for receiving this Armor benefit. P.S. I'm ok with leaving this for any armor, even light armor (DR would be low for those), but it would be nice if this were only for non-shifters wearing Heavy armor (makes it a Tank only effect), dexers don't seem to need any such bennie .
|
|
|
Post by gin on May 17, 2018 16:41:16 GMT
I also think % damage immunity agrees more with the flavour of a heavy armor tank, rather than conceal, which in my eyes is more of light armored dex thing. Well conceal is more in line with the parry widget, whether you block by weapon skill or armor worn, its the same game effect. But %DR is also a valid view, it hits, but the armor absorbs some of the damage. Since conceal would greatly interact with the already balanced Parry widget, it might be simpler to do %DR. I would make the %DR equal to 3% of AC bonus, so +6 Full Plate / +5 Tower would block (66%, max 65%) of the damage with no widget needed, its a side effect of heavy armor. This is in line with the 65% conceal of the Parry Widget, and cap it at 65%. Someone with a +5 Tower shield alone would take 76% of the damage (duck behind that huge highly magical shield for DR: 24% . Under this a 4th level with full plate/large shield would have their normal ac, but also take only 70% of the damage (DR: 30%). A nice bennie for low level grinding and making maybe some areas more soloable. And a high level 40 char would have at most DR: 65%, I would say that this is applied last (after soak and xxx/- stuff). This is nice as it also applies to damage from spells and not just weapons. This means a fully Armored/Parry Widget Classic Armored Tank would receive 12.5% (.35*.35) of the weapon damage they would normally receive (as opposed to 35% with max parry alone). And also receive only 35% of magic damage (you could exempt lightning, positive/negative (heal/necro) spells from the magic reduction effect if possible armor doesn't reduce those). Can you see the classic armored tank with full plate/tower shield duck behind the shield to reduce, but still take dragon breath damage? (I can This seems reasonable to me, doesn't muck with Parry, soak, other DR effects, and of course exempt shifted forms for receiving this Armor benefit. P.S. I'm ok with leaving this for any armor, even light armor (DR would be low for those), but it would be nice if this were only for non-shifters wearing Heavy armor (makes it a Tank only effect), dexers don't seem to need any such bennie . In order for the parry widget to grant 65% you need 110 ranks in parry and 5 self conceal feats, which is impossible to squeeze in on a decent build. So yea, you can reach 55 conceal with parry easy enough, 65 not so much. In any case DI would be more consistant than conceal, because some % points in conceal beyond the 55%, that can already be obtained with parry, wont make a big impact if you factor in BF rerolls. Also, thinking towards paladins and clerics, which have heals available, I feel like constantly reducing damage has better synergy with them, rather than dodging 6 in 100 hits from 10% more conceal. Especially when we factor in that, heavy armor still sorcs and heavy armor clerics in particular, will benefit from DI, which basically ups their concentrate by the same amount of damage that is absorbed by DI, even to a point where they actually can cast throu a mediocre crit without disruption. Nice buff to very underrepresented archetypes. I think its a common misconception to overvalue single digit conceal (After BF). Dont get me wrong, I like your thinking, I just think that heavy armor clerics, pallys, sorcs need more than a little conceal. I might be a little biased, I do have a soft spot for autostill sorcs and paladins, yet I think DI averaging around 15% wont break the game or work towards powercreep as long as shifter/barbs are excluded from these buffs.
|
|
|
Post by ralkain on May 17, 2018 17:10:19 GMT
In order for the parry widget to grant 65% you need 110 ranks in parry and 5 self conceal feats, which is impossible to squeeze in on a decent build. So yea, you can reach 55 conceal with parry easy enough, 65 not so much. In any case DI would be more consistant than conceal, because some % points in conceal beyond the 55%, that can already be obtained with parry, wont make a big impact if you factor in BF rerolls. Yes, we wan't DR to be more consistent than conceal since it applies only to Classic Armored Tanks (CATs), they should have consistent DR. Anyone can use parry conceal, but we are trying to make CATs more playable against parrying dexers as well as other toons with jiggering as few other rules as possible. With the above, the damage mitigation in total would be 45% of max damage for all max effective parry users (55% parry) and a max DR: 65% CAT woulld receive 35% of max damage, but this would increase to 15.75% of max damage (.55*.35) for CAT toons with full reasonable parry (55%). So Parrying high AC dexers won't take damage often and even when they do will only take 45% of the potential. CATs would take damage very often (low ac), but take 35% of the potential damage, so still much more damage in total than parrying dexers. However, if they also are parrying CATs (55% conceal), then the damage taken is reduced to 15.75%. If they get hit 3x as often as dexers, then its close to a wash, but if they only get hit twice as often, then they take slightly less damage, IMO this brings them more in line with Dexers at the end game and makes them playable, but I'll defer to others as to how often they think high ac/parry dexers get hit as compared to STR CATs.
|
|
|
Post by gin on May 17, 2018 17:53:40 GMT
Yes, we wan't DR to be more consistent than conceal since it applies only to Classic Armored Tanks (CATs), they should have consistent DR. Anyone can use parry conceal, but we are trying to make CATs more playable against parrying dexers as well as other toons with jiggering as few other rules as possible. With the above, the damage mitigation in total would be 45% of max damage for all max effective parry users (55% parry) and a max DR: 65% CAT woulld receive 35% of max damage, but this would increase to 15.75% of max damage (.55*.35) for CAT toons with full reasonable parry (55%). So Parrying high AC dexers won't take damage often and even when they do will only take 45% of the potential. CATs would take damage very often (low ac), but take 35% of the potential damage, so still much more damage in total than parrying dexers. However, if they also are parrying CATs (55% conceal), then the damage taken is reduced to 15.75%. If they get hit 3x as often as dexers, then its close to a wash, but if they only get hit twice as often, then they take slightly less damage, IMO this brings them more in line with Dexers at the end game and makes them playable, but I'll defer to others as to how often they think high ac/parry dexers get hit as compared to STR CATs. Not quite following the math here. However, I do not agree with bringing CATS in line with dexers. I mentions this in the previous thread, STR toons will have more damage and HP. Higher damage directly translates to survivalability as does hp. Ill give your equation another read tomorrow and report back.
|
|
|
Post by ralkain on May 17, 2018 18:24:56 GMT
Not quite following the math here. However, I do not agree with bringing CATS in line with dexers. I mentions this in the previous thread, STR toons will have more damage and HP. Higher damage directly translates to survivalability as does hp. Ill give your equation another read tomorrow and report back. Well I'm not saying bring them in line with dexers, but in line with our intent. I'll leave it to the folks with much more L40 experience than mine to say if L40 CATs take 4x as much damage as a high AC dexer. I'd suspect they'd take more given how much more often they will be hit and how many more crits will be confirmed. We can ignore parry as in both cases parry or not the above would propose that CATs take @1/3 damage (No Parry: DR: 35% compared to 0% dexer, CAT with full 55% parry = 15.75% damage, full parry dexer = 45%, so still @1/3 in both cases). The question is, does a heavy armored low dex toon take 4x the damage (not hits, you have to count crit confirmation too, so its damage) of a high ac dexer, if yes then the 3% above is probably correct and still gives the dexer better damage avoidance.
|
|
|
Post by gin on May 18, 2018 6:35:01 GMT
Ill give your equation another read tomorrow and report back. Well I'm not saying bring them in line with dexers, but in line with our intent. I'll leave it to the folks with much more L40 experience than mine to say if L40 CATs take 4x as much damage as a high AC dexer. I'd suspect they'd take more given how much more often they will be hit and how many more crits will be confirmed. We can ignore parry as in both cases parry or not the above would propose that CATs take @1/3 damage (No Parry: DR: 35% compared to 0% dexer, CAT with full 55% parry = 15.75% damage, full parry dexer = 45%, so still @1/3 in both cases). The question is, does a heavy armored low dex toon take 4x the damage (not hits, you have to count crit confirmation too, so its damage) of a high ac dexer, if yes then the 3% above is probably correct and still gives the dexer better damage avoidance. In case of dexers, once more, AC is extremly unrealiable. So I dont think a flat calculation of the best case scenario of toe to toe melee combat is appropriate. I already mentioned this in the previous thread dex/dodge based ac is not relevant half of the time. Heavy Armor / Shield AC cannot be lost which makes it more realiable.
|
|
|
Post by ralkain on May 18, 2018 10:47:51 GMT
In case of dexers, once more, AC is extremly unrealiable. So I dont think a flat calculation of the best case scenario of toe to toe melee combat is appropriate. I already mentioned this in the previous thread dex/dodge based ac is not relevant half of the time. Heavy Armor / Shield AC cannot be lost which makes it more realiable. Which is why I'm saying that you need to look at damage taken in endgame areas between the two. Its my impression that folks think dexters are much more survivable, so they play them over CATs. Not only do Dexers have AC, they have Evasion (most of the time) and rarely fail their saves making AoE spell damage negligible. No one is saying CATs should be as good a dexers at damage mitigation, but they should be playable. This is an attempt to do that. If we had some endgame logs with a party of maxed out dexers and CATs we could see if CATs are taking 4-8 times the damage of melee dexers overall, if so, the above proposal would make CATs playable, but dexers still quite a bit ahead ahead. Maybe the DMs could schedule some endgame runs with some made up characters with nonxferable gear and with experienced players and generate some in various endgame areas, then delete those toons. That seems like some work with player DM rewards when done, but I was hoping some folks here had an idea for how much more damage CATs take than dexers to see if this is balanced with Dexers still having damage mitigation superiority.
|
|
|
Post by gin on May 18, 2018 11:55:55 GMT
In case of dexers, once more, AC is extremly unrealiable. So I dont think a flat calculation of the best case scenario of toe to toe melee combat is appropriate. I already mentioned this in the previous thread dex/dodge based ac is not relevant half of the time. Heavy Armor / Shield AC cannot be lost which makes it more realiable. Which is why I'm saying that you need to look at damage taken in endgame areas between the two. Its my impression that folks think dexters are much more survivable, so they play them over CATs. Not only do Dexers have AC, they have Evasion (most of the time) and rarely fail their saves making AoE spell damage negligible. No one is saying CATs should be as good a dexers at damage mitigation, but they should be playable. This is an attempt to do that. If we had some endgame logs with a party of maxed out dexers and CATs we could see if CATs are taking 4-8 times the damage of melee dexers overall, if so, the above proposal would make CATs playable, but dexers still quite a bit ahead ahead. Maybe the DMs could schedule some endgame runs with some made up characters with nonxferable gear and with experienced players and generate some in various endgame areas, then delete those toons. That seems like some work with player DM rewards when done, but I was hoping some folks here had an idea for how much more damage CATs take than dexers to see if this is balanced with Dexers still having damage mitigation superiority. I consider myself to be quite experienced in playing various builds of both archetypes. Im not even sure how we ended up with the assumption that dex builds are "playable". What are those viable dex builds? You shut down the earlier thread, where already mentioned, that neither Dex nor CAT is viable without PM lvls. If we aim to empower CATs, great, but lets not do it on the false assumption, that dex builds are better by default and viable in endgame. Its certainly not the case. I think % points in physical damage immunity based on armor Bonus, could be the way to go for Cats, without further conceal. This to me looks like a nice way to balance out things, without giving in to yet another powercreep. Cats would have mediocre ac and conceal but a good health pool, fort, damage, discipline and damage resistance. Dex will have higher AC on paper, which in truth is not reliable and will fail them very often, they will almost never exceed 55% conceal, because no one in the right mind would pick up self conceal feats. Therefore, I feel the suggestion I posted is already bordering on powercreep. Frankly, it could already be too much in certain heavy armor class combinations Again keep in mind, that physical damage immunity percentages stack with each other as well as phys and elly damage resistance. Ill make this my final contribution to this thread, so that the actual suggestions you and I made, dont take a backseat and get lost in debate again. Maybe a poll for people to decide would be the next best step?
|
|
mogliuth
Wheaton Pixie
Playing on EE
Posts: 31
|
Post by mogliuth on Mar 24, 2024 9:25:35 GMT
I offen play damager builds like fighter/WM/rouge or monk and yeah i think this %DR should depend on your fighter and WM builds. Or may be only WM builds, because I think the WM had many feats and other requirements which wont get the benefits they earned....
I think Fighter WM builds can't be played solo on 3t, but i think with that %DR there might be a nice new options for careful and experienced players....
|
|