its not like i quoted anyone. the point is 1 of the 2 stats this thread ia about is now blown out of the water on warbirds. its pretty hard to hit one on the move with less then acc 3 weapons
Lack of tone, my thing wasn't meant to be snarky - was just wondering if I'd switched the two somewhere...
...but yeah, the rate of hits in general have me wondering if the hit table has been changed.
Still, with the diminishing returns that exist on Bonus Defense - the rate's not going to be as long as one might think. 85% BA vs. 200% BD is still a 46.5% to-hit. To get to that 25% min or so, would require 0% BA vs. 290% BD or so...
Lack of tone, my thing wasn't meant to be snarky - was just wondering if I'd switched the two somewhere...
...but yeah, the rate of hits in general have me wondering if the hit table has been changed.
Still, with the diminishing returns that exist on Bonus Defense - the rate's not going to be as long as one might think. 85% BA vs. 200% BD is still a 46.5% to-hit. To get to that 25% min or so, would require 0% BA vs. 290% BD or so...
Base Hull = 1,000
Standard incoming DPV (1 second per volley) = 100
Example 1: 85 BA vs 200 BD
115 difference 46.5% hit rate or 53.5% volleys miss
EHP = 2150
Time to Explode = 22 seconds
Example 2: 0 BA vs 290 BD
290 difference 25% hit rate or 75% volleys miss
EHP = 4,000
Time to Explode = 40 seconds
Those diminishing returns don't look that bad from what I can see. Remember going from 0% attacks missing to 50% attacks missing doubles your effective health. Going from 50% attacks missing to 75% attacks missing doubles your effective health once again.
Seriously armor has worse DR than that I thinks. It's just %s tend to mess with peoples perception.
PS: All evasion systems function mechanically exactly like any % damage reduction system other than the added random factor.
Which is why what you said is incorrect. There is no standardized incoming damage. It is highly variable. The amount avoided could only be looked at after the fact - while with mitigation you can tell regardless of what damage is done, how much is mitigated.
Avoidance is 100% mitigation.
Say you have the following:
10% Damage Resistance
10% Bonus Defense (vs. 0% Bonus Accuracy) for a to-hit of 90.9%
Take each of those to 50%:
50% Damage Resistance
50% Bonus Defense (vs. 0% Bonus Accuracy) for a to-hit of 66.7%
From 10% to 50% DR is straight up 5 times the difference.
From 10% to 50% BA is 3.66 times the difference.
~73.2% of the change.
Take each of those to 75%:
75% Damage Resistance
75% Bonus Defense (vs. 0% Bonus Accuracy) for a to-hit of 57.1%
From 10% to 75% DR is straight up 7.5 times the difference.
From 10% to 75% BA is 4.71 times the difference.
~62.8% of the change.
Would be one argument somebody could make were they trying to compare the diminishing returns of the two (by the way, I was neither comparing the diminishing returns of BA/BD to anything nor stating that it was the worst - simply pointing out that diminishing returns existed)...however, again - because Avoidance = 100% Mitigation...it would be a faulty hypothesis to state one was worse than the other...
Even were one to try to compare the 75% DR to the 57.1% To-Hit, they couldn't do that...say there were a series of 20 shots doing 2500 damage each.
With the 75% DR you could tell that 12500 damage was done. You can't do that with the 57.1% To-Hit. A 57.1% To-Hit doesn't mean that 57.1% of the shots hit. That doesn't mean that 11 of the shots hit. It's a 57.1% To-Hit roll per shot. Although not very probable, all 20 shots could either hit or miss. The avoided damage could be anywhere from 0 to 50000. You're looking at 57.1^20 for them all to hit and 42.9^20 for them all to miss...it's not very probable. But since it is a case of talking about probabilities, you can't say. So that comparison can't be made either. And, you're still dealing with Avoidance = 100% Mitigation beyond that...
Where you can make the comparison, is with itself.
65% BA vs. 80% BD is a 86.9565217% to-hit.
65% BA vs. 85% BD is a 83.3333333% to-hit.
3.6231884% is the advantage a Rom in a Warbird has over a non-Rom in an Escort given the 65% BA and 9 Maneuvers, Elusive, 24+ Impulse, and either +10% Escort or +12.5% Trait BD.
65% BA vs. 80% BD is a 86.9565217% to-hit.
65% BA vs. 95% BD is a 76.9230769% to-hit.
10.0334448% is the advantage the Rom in a Lockbox Escort has over the non-Rom in the same ship given the same as above.
Which again comes to the diminishing returns. A 5% difference results in a 3.62% difference while a 15% difference results in an 10% difference. 72.4% return vs. 66.7% return.
Obviously the diminishing returns on DR are worse than To-Hit. You need a ~290 difference to get a 75% chance to miss. You can't actually get the 75% damage resistance - it's a limit, you never reach 75%...but to get 74.4%, you're looking at 1500 DRR/DRM. It's one of the reasons why I didn't make that comparison (along with it being somewhat meaningless because of Avoidance = 100% Mitigation...where you can't know until after the fact whether the APA3/APO3/Rom Ambush BO3 Critazoonie missed or the plink plink of a Turret missed).
In case somebody wanted to complain about how boring my last post was, how about something better to complain about, eh? Something with some meat on the bone to gnaw on, eh?
A long long time ago ... in a galaxy not so far away PVP existed .
But it was not PVP as we know it today .
There were two ships that really mattered , while the rest were just moving scenery that needed to die fast or move out of the way .
Fun was to be had while shield tanking .
Fun was to be had if you were hull tanking .
Fun was to be had even if you were flying a rainbow boat .
If you were a Tac in an escort , you PVP-ed at your own peril .
Now my memory is fuzzy ... so I don't remember which came first ... :
The need to use one type of shield (after the Omega set got nerfed) .
The introduction and subsequent use of TT on EVERYTHING .
The need to use speed as a defense (APO 3)
The need to counter speed via [Acc]
Or the introduction of the Luna and the +1 ships .
But somewhere along the line , between when the Bug got introduced and the Doff system come about , the old PVP got lost .
And unless we're willing to have everything ripped away and start from scratch , it's never going to go back to the good times that we've had in Year One .
And between the complaining for "balance" and having it all ripped out and re-done , I'm not sure what ppl would really prefer .
And between the complaining for "balance" and having it all ripped out and re-done , I'm not sure what ppl would really prefer .
Like anything, some folks would prefer their burgers with cheese and some folks would prefer their burgers without cheese. Some folks would look at you with puppy dog eyes and ask where the bacon is...
Comments
Lack of tone, my thing wasn't meant to be snarky - was just wondering if I'd switched the two somewhere...
...but yeah, the rate of hits in general have me wondering if the hit table has been changed.
Still, with the diminishing returns that exist on Bonus Defense - the rate's not going to be as long as one might think. 85% BA vs. 200% BD is still a 46.5% to-hit. To get to that 25% min or so, would require 0% BA vs. 290% BD or so...
Base Hull = 1,000
Standard incoming DPV (1 second per volley) = 100
Example 1: 85 BA vs 200 BD
115 difference 46.5% hit rate or 53.5% volleys miss
EHP = 2150
Time to Explode = 22 seconds
Example 2: 0 BA vs 290 BD
290 difference 25% hit rate or 75% volleys miss
EHP = 4,000
Time to Explode = 40 seconds
Those diminishing returns don't look that bad from what I can see. Remember going from 0% attacks missing to 50% attacks missing doubles your effective health. Going from 50% attacks missing to 75% attacks missing doubles your effective health once again.
Seriously armor has worse DR than that I thinks. It's just %s tend to mess with peoples perception.
PS: All evasion systems function mechanically exactly like any % damage reduction system other than the added random factor.
Which is why what you said is incorrect. There is no standardized incoming damage. It is highly variable. The amount avoided could only be looked at after the fact - while with mitigation you can tell regardless of what damage is done, how much is mitigated.
Avoidance is 100% mitigation.
Say you have the following:
10% Damage Resistance
10% Bonus Defense (vs. 0% Bonus Accuracy) for a to-hit of 90.9%
Take each of those to 50%:
50% Damage Resistance
50% Bonus Defense (vs. 0% Bonus Accuracy) for a to-hit of 66.7%
From 10% to 50% DR is straight up 5 times the difference.
From 10% to 50% BA is 3.66 times the difference.
~73.2% of the change.
Take each of those to 75%:
75% Damage Resistance
75% Bonus Defense (vs. 0% Bonus Accuracy) for a to-hit of 57.1%
From 10% to 75% DR is straight up 7.5 times the difference.
From 10% to 75% BA is 4.71 times the difference.
~62.8% of the change.
Would be one argument somebody could make were they trying to compare the diminishing returns of the two (by the way, I was neither comparing the diminishing returns of BA/BD to anything nor stating that it was the worst - simply pointing out that diminishing returns existed)...however, again - because Avoidance = 100% Mitigation...it would be a faulty hypothesis to state one was worse than the other...
Even were one to try to compare the 75% DR to the 57.1% To-Hit, they couldn't do that...say there were a series of 20 shots doing 2500 damage each.
With the 75% DR you could tell that 12500 damage was done. You can't do that with the 57.1% To-Hit. A 57.1% To-Hit doesn't mean that 57.1% of the shots hit. That doesn't mean that 11 of the shots hit. It's a 57.1% To-Hit roll per shot. Although not very probable, all 20 shots could either hit or miss. The avoided damage could be anywhere from 0 to 50000. You're looking at 57.1^20 for them all to hit and 42.9^20 for them all to miss...it's not very probable. But since it is a case of talking about probabilities, you can't say. So that comparison can't be made either. And, you're still dealing with Avoidance = 100% Mitigation beyond that...
Where you can make the comparison, is with itself.
65% BA vs. 80% BD is a 86.9565217% to-hit.
65% BA vs. 85% BD is a 83.3333333% to-hit.
3.6231884% is the advantage a Rom in a Warbird has over a non-Rom in an Escort given the 65% BA and 9 Maneuvers, Elusive, 24+ Impulse, and either +10% Escort or +12.5% Trait BD.
65% BA vs. 80% BD is a 86.9565217% to-hit.
65% BA vs. 95% BD is a 76.9230769% to-hit.
10.0334448% is the advantage the Rom in a Lockbox Escort has over the non-Rom in the same ship given the same as above.
Which again comes to the diminishing returns. A 5% difference results in a 3.62% difference while a 15% difference results in an 10% difference. 72.4% return vs. 66.7% return.
Obviously the diminishing returns on DR are worse than To-Hit. You need a ~290 difference to get a 75% chance to miss. You can't actually get the 75% damage resistance - it's a limit, you never reach 75%...but to get 74.4%, you're looking at 1500 DRR/DRM. It's one of the reasons why I didn't make that comparison (along with it being somewhat meaningless because of Avoidance = 100% Mitigation...where you can't know until after the fact whether the APA3/APO3/Rom Ambush BO3 Critazoonie missed or the plink plink of a Turret missed).
Consider the following...
T4 Romulan Sensor Targeting Assault
T5 Romulan Quantum Singularity Manipulation
KHG Shields
T'varo Singularity Stabilizer
Subspace Field Modulator
Romulan Enhanced Battle Cloak
Infiltrator + 5x Subterfuge
Nimbus Pirate Distress Call
Crippling Fire or Photonic Fleet
Warp Shadows
Singularity Jump
APO3
Evasive
Etc, etc, etc...pretty annoying, eh?
But it was not PVP as we know it today .
There were two ships that really mattered , while the rest were just moving scenery that needed to die fast or move out of the way .
Fun was to be had while shield tanking .
Fun was to be had if you were hull tanking .
Fun was to be had even if you were flying a rainbow boat .
If you were a Tac in an escort , you PVP-ed at your own peril .
Now my memory is fuzzy ... so I don't remember which came first ... :
The need to use one type of shield (after the Omega set got nerfed) .
The introduction and subsequent use of TT on EVERYTHING .
The need to use speed as a defense (APO 3)
The need to counter speed via [Acc]
Or the introduction of the Luna and the +1 ships .
But somewhere along the line , between when the Bug got introduced and the Doff system come about , the old PVP got lost .
And unless we're willing to have everything ripped away and start from scratch , it's never going to go back to the good times that we've had in Year One .
And between the complaining for "balance" and having it all ripped out and re-done , I'm not sure what ppl would really prefer .
Like anything, some folks would prefer their burgers with cheese and some folks would prefer their burgers without cheese. Some folks would look at you with puppy dog eyes and ask where the bacon is...