Please upgrade your browser for the best possible experience.

Chrome Firefox Internet Explorer
×

A new kind of question on shield vs. accuracy.

STAR WARS: The Old Republic > English > Classes
A new kind of question on shield vs. accuracy.

Eternalnight's Avatar


Eternalnight
05.19.2013 , 05:49 PM | #11
Quote: Originally Posted by XAtrophi View Post
erm, just a quick fyi here but Passive and active arent the same as damage type
Considering that the text you are quoting is not talking about damage types (Kinetic, Energy, Internal or Elemental), but ability types, I do not see why you feel need to say that.


Quote:
they just describe the type of ability
And they describe the type of ability by listing Active and Passive as completely separate category from Melee, Ranged, Force and Tech.


Quote:
Active being one you actively use(meaning you click it)
Passive being an ability thats always on
While it is true that "active" abilities are clickable and "passive" are not, this is not the actual definition of them.

Melee, Ranged, Force and Tech abilities are clickable just the same way, but they are not listed as "active" in the abilities window.
Only abilities that are not listed as melee/ranged/force/tech are listed as active/passive, making active and passive a separate ability type.

grallmate's Avatar


grallmate
05.19.2013 , 06:18 PM | #12
Quote: Originally Posted by Eternalnight View Post
Considering that the text you are quoting is not talking about damage types (Kinetic, Energy, Internal or Elemental), but ability types, I do not see why you feel need to say that.

And they describe the type of ability by listing Active and Passive as completely separate category from Melee, Ranged, Force and Tech.

While it is true that "active" abilities are clickable and "passive" are not, this is not the actual definition of them.

Melee, Ranged, Force and Tech abilities are clickable just the same way, but they are not listed as "active" in the abilities window.
Only abilities that are not listed as melee/ranged/force/tech are listed as active/passive, making active and passive a separate ability type.
To be honest, I think you are drawing a conclusion based on correlation rather than causation. Key example of this: taunt used to be able to be resisted on PTS until it was adjusted. Similarly, Sleep Dart and Mind Maze can both be resisted. The fact that Resilience allows you to overcome these (interrupts included), combined with this not being an issue before mobs were given a Resist chance gives a greater argument for them being Force/Tech abilities than for a different attack type.
The Kae-Sare Legacy - The Harbinger
<Vindication> <Retribution>

Gralleh Grall'eh Khyar
Gralleh's Guide to Guardian Tanking [UPDATED for 2.0]

Eternalnight's Avatar


Eternalnight
05.19.2013 , 09:44 PM | #13
Quote: Originally Posted by grallmate View Post
To be honest, I think you are drawing a conclusion based on correlation rather than causation.
What correlation?

One way to define what is or isn't force/tech ability is by what is or isn't listed as such in the abilities window.
This may have problems, but it was mostly an example why someone might say certain abilities are not in this categories.

There seem to be some things that suggest that some abilities not listed as such there still might be force/tech, but it is hard to say for sure.

It's not entirely without problems to define what is or isn't force/tech by just what can or can't be resisted by force shroud/resilience because even though the tooltip for force shroud/resilience does only mention force/tech attacks, we already know that its tooltip is not exactly accurate and correct but is an oversimplification that does not tell the whole truth (for example the tooltip says increases your resist chance by 100% but if you open your character menu and check the on-mouse-over-popup tooltips of defensive numbers it actually increases by 200% (supposably reason for this is so it would not drop below 100% by the accuracy over 100% reduces resistance mechanic in pvp)) so we can't exactly rely on tooltips alone as a source of information.

Now having other things supporting the assumption that taunts etc. are F/T, then you have a stronger case.

grallmate's Avatar


grallmate
05.19.2013 , 10:28 PM | #14
Quote: Originally Posted by Eternalnight View Post
What correlation?

One way to define what is or isn't force/tech ability is by what is or isn't listed as such in the abilities window.
This may have problems, but it was mostly an example why someone might say certain abilities are not in this categories.

There seem to be some things that suggest that some abilities not listed as such there still might be force/tech, but it is hard to say for sure.

It's not entirely without problems to define what is or isn't force/tech by just what can or can't be resisted by force shroud/resilience because even though the tooltip for force shroud/resilience does only mention force/tech attacks, we already know that its tooltip is not exactly accurate and correct but is an oversimplification that does not tell the whole truth (for example the tooltip says increases your resist chance by 100% but if you open your character menu and check the on-mouse-over-popup tooltips of defensive numbers it actually increases by 200% (supposably reason for this is so it would not drop below 100% by the accuracy over 100% reduces resistance mechanic in pvp)) so we can't exactly rely on tooltips alone as a source of information.

Now having other things supporting the assumption that taunts etc. are F/T, then you have a stronger case.
The correlation is a number of abilities existing that are "active" but not listed as Force or Tech. Your conclusion based on this correlation is that there is a 3rd attack type. There is no direct causal link in this.

However, we know these abilities previously couldn't be resisted (or miss) prior to 2.0 unless you were using them on a Shadow with Resilience (or the 2% chance from Kinetic Combat procced and wasn't overridden by accuracy). Similarly, I know these types of abilities could previously be resisted by a higher level NPC. In 2.0 NPCs were given a Force/Tech resist chance and now they can be resisted (or miss). It also appears (although no one has tested) that having 100% accuracy prevents this from happening. Based on this information, I'd lean toward the assumption that they are tagged as Force/Tech attacks and not as a new "Active" attack type.

At release, this design decision would be fine as resist chance was EXCEEDINGLY rare and player only. As NPC are given a resist chance BW needs to look at which abilities in the utility category should be made "can't miss" or have their native accuracy increased.

I assume w.r.t. Resilience (and Dodge/Evasion) that the 100% increase on the tooltip is actually just confusing wording. Giving someone a 100% chance to do something could be interpreted as: You are guaranteed to do it or it could be interpreted as increasing your chance to do it by 100% additively or even increasing your chance to do it by 100% relatively (5% -> 10% is a 100% increase). Given how it is implemented (ie. +200% on a contested roll), I would assume the intention is the former.
The Kae-Sare Legacy - The Harbinger
<Vindication> <Retribution>

Gralleh Grall'eh Khyar
Gralleh's Guide to Guardian Tanking [UPDATED for 2.0]

Narazumono's Avatar


Narazumono
05.20.2013 , 07:53 AM | #15
I'll be honest. I'm crazy. I can't NOT have accuracy on my assassin tank. Mainly for the fact that when I get a Resist, it absolutely enrages me. My guild has cleared HM S&V so even though I'm giving up ~450 stats in mitigation, it's not enough to cause me to die. Not to mention I get a good dps increase as well as threat generation from not missing. I love my accuracy and I'm crazy for it.
Can't put a gif or image here. I'm a sad panda.

Kitru's Avatar


Kitru
05.20.2013 , 10:57 AM | #16
Quote: Originally Posted by Narazumono View Post
even though I'm giving up ~450 stats in mitigation, it's not enough to cause me to die.
You're giving up anywhere between 20% (if you're mitigation stacked BiS) to ~25% of your mitigation budget, which is going to translate in a *drastically noticeable* increase in total damage taken just to increase your threat DPS by 6%. That's not really a good trade off. In fact, it's absolutely terrible. The only thing you're doing is forcing your healers to work even harder to keep you alive since you're playing the spikiest tank around and giving up the mitigation we rely on so much just makes you all the spikier.

Quote:
Not to mention I get a good dps increase as well as threat generation from not missing. I love my accuracy and I'm crazy for it.
A 6% increase to your damage/threat from ~450 points of itemization is not "a good DPS increase". It's actually friggin' terrible. I'm pulling ~1200 DPS on a tank/spank fight. All of that itemization would add all of ~72 DPS. If you stacked Power instead of Accuracy in all of those places, you'd be getting more than twice that (basic napkin math puts it at ~155 DPS). Accuracy is absolutely *terrible* for tanks and especially Shadow tanks: the 3% additional accuracy we get isn't even a debatable addition like it is for Guards.

Every Shadow should be managing 94% accuracy without any gearing which means that the chance you're going to get more than one miss in a row in the beginning is .36%. To put that in context, that's once in every ~277.77 pulls. The only time you'll ever have threat problem is if you get a multiple miss string in the beginning and, comically enough, you can just *taunt* during those times since no fight requires a tank swap in the first 20 seconds.

There is no good reason to have any tank stack accuracy: it's worse than any other stat you could possibly stack for increased threat generation, and you don't even *need* accuracy to maintain a massively oversized threat cushion.
Walls of Text? I *love* Walls of Text!
My New Class Idea
Shadow Class Rep - Suggest/Review Questions Here
Quote: Originally Posted by Fende View Post
Listen to Kitru. Kitru knows all.

Narazumono's Avatar


Narazumono
05.20.2013 , 02:08 PM | #17
Like I said, I'm crazy. Likewise, I've never encountered a situation where we've wiped due to the fact I was 'too hard too heal'. I plan on getting a pure mitigation set, but if I don't need it, why would I use it? Make life easier on the healers? Got to make this game enjoyable for them somehow.
Can't put a gif or image here. I'm a sad panda.

dipstik's Avatar


dipstik
05.20.2013 , 03:45 PM | #18
im pretty sure i would refuse to heal u in SnV or TfB HM if u walked in missing 450 points of shield.

MGNMTTRN's Avatar


MGNMTTRN
05.21.2013 , 08:39 PM | #19
For fun I investigated whether increasing accuracy would help you to get more accelerated project procs and thereby increase the rate at which your Shadow fires off Harnessed Darkness Telekinetic Throws. Here are the results...

For a 94% accuracy rating and 2 independent hits of double strike/thrash, you have a 0.8836 chance of hitting with both attacks, 0.1128 chance of hitting with one of the two attacks, and 0.0036 chance of hitting with neither attack.

Each hit has a 30% chance of triggering an accelerated project. For two hits, p(project proc) = 1 - p(no project proc) = 1 - 0.7^2 = 1 - 0.49 = 0.51. For one hit, p(project proc) = 0.3, and for 0 hits p(project proc) = 0.

Taking a weighted average of these results (0.8836 * 0.51 + 0.1128 * 0.3 + 0.0036*0) I found that each usage of double strike/thrash has a 0.484476 chance of triggering a project proc.

Whereas with 100% accuracy all double strikes will connect, so you have a 1 - 0.7^2 = 0.51*1 = 0.51 chance with any double strike to trigger a project proc.

The 2.5524% increase in p(project proc) is probably not worth the hit in shield that you would suffer.

The more useful takeaway from this post is a reminder that double strike typically will have a 48.5% chance of triggering a project proc, not a 30% chance.

===

Once I get my Shadow into some decent tank gear I'd examine the results of the sequence [melee attack, Project] where melee attack can be Shadow Strike or Double Strike. I know on my shadow in Tank spec and DPS gear (165% surge) my non-crit Shadow Strikes are hitting for ~2033, non-crit Double strikes are hitting for 625 damage each (x2 = 1250) and my Projects are hitting for ~ 1450 non-crit/2385 crit, with the secondary project at 45% damage being ~675 damage non-crit.

Since Shadow Strike is a melee attack, it has a 94% chance of connecting and a 30% chance of proccing an accelerated project, or 0.282 chance overall of proccing, compared to Double Strike's 0.485, and on my toon Shadow Strike does an extra 750 damage but the procced project is hitting for 900 extra damage.

Since we know shadows want to fire off those Projects as fast as possible and Shadows apparently have more Force available, it might turn out that Double Strike becomes slightly more useful than before, maybe even more useful than Shadow Strike.

dipstik's Avatar


dipstik
05.21.2013 , 09:37 PM | #20
very interesting analysis. this might free up 2 points in the build