Please upgrade your browser for the best possible experience.

Chrome Firefox Internet Explorer
×

MFW I started to look Rakata gear

STAR WARS: The Old Republic > English > Classes > Commando / Mercenary
MFW I started to look Rakata gear

Yazule's Avatar


Yazule
02.16.2012 , 11:31 AM | #11
Quote: Originally Posted by Jodou View Post
The problem with accuracy is that it affects very few abilities in our arsenal (pun intended) and even less of the population wastes enhancement slots on defense given this. If you want to lose damage on your hardest hitting abilities (Tracer/HSM/DFA), then by all means run with bad mods. I challenge anyone to run with 0 accuracy and tell me how their damage from the extra surge/power has suffered from deflections.

It won't happen.
firstly it CANT happen, this is all just "gut feels" we have no combat log for data collection.

secondly our biggest hitter single target is Unload which you do not mention, probably because it is affected by accuracy. HSM may beat it out once and a while, but for bread and butter biggest hitter it is unload which can hit for up to 7.5k easy if all three procs crit (not even counting the offhand ticks there fyi).. that is very rare i will grant you that, 1 crit is very common, 2 is sometimes, once in a great while it just pummels someone.

do i think accuracy in pvp matters? not a major priority for me, i am just passing on what i read to help people make informed decisions.
Remember this: Noobs have the most fun, they gain joy from things you disdain. They find value in that you find worthless. At the end of the day they have more fun per hour than any elitist I have ever known.

Snagulus's Avatar


Snagulus
02.16.2012 , 05:54 PM | #12
Quote: Originally Posted by Jodou View Post
The problem with accuracy is that it affects very few abilities in our arsenal (pun intended) and even less of the population wastes enhancement slots on defense given this. If you want to lose damage on your hardest hitting abilities (Tracer/HSM/DFA), then by all means run with bad mods. I challenge anyone to run with 0 accuracy and tell me how their damage from the extra surge/power has suffered from deflections.

It won't happen.

ALL special attacks, which is everything but Rapid Shots, has a base 100% accuracy. This includes "white damage" from Unload, Rail Shot, and Sweeping Blasters.

Most classes have 5% defense chance base. Running with absolutely no Accuracy from any source will cause you to miss 5% of ALL your special attacks on average, not counting OH attacks. Mercenaries get 3% accuracy from Advanced Targeting in the Pyrotech tree. You'll need an additional 2% to hit the 105% cap.

If someday you play another class/spec that doesn't have enough accuracy from talents, getting to 105% accuracy for PVP is the best value per rating point in terms of overall damage done.

Edit: Removed me being an ***. Corrected some information. Sorry.

Aikinoodles's Avatar


Aikinoodles
02.18.2012 , 12:02 PM | #13
Quote: Originally Posted by Snagulus View Post
...
ALL special attacks, which is everything but Rapid Shots, has a base 100% accuracy. This includes "white damage" from Unload, Rail Shot, and Sweeping Blasters.
Well um.. so why the "white damage" you refer to is classified as RANGED (sweeping, railshot, unload, rapid) and not TECH (missiles and stuff) and so, btw, we have a ranged accuracy AND tech accuracy ?
Luke .. Je ..
Spoiler

Amonet's Avatar


Amonet
02.18.2012 , 02:59 PM | #14
Quote: Originally Posted by Snagulus View Post
...

I keep reading this thread and hoping that somebody else will come along that has read the character sheet fully. I'm just going to keep this simple:

ALL special attacks, which is everything but Rapid Shots, has a base 100% accuracy. This includes "white damage" from Unload, Rail Shot, and Sweeping Blasters.

Most classes have 5% defense chance base. Running with absolutely no Accuracy from any source will cause you to miss 5% of ALL your special attacks on average, not counting OH attacks. Now, Mercenaries have this fantastic talent that provides 2% accuracy per point. If you have 3 points in this talent, you do not need any accuracy on your gear to PVP.

If someday you play another class/spec that doesn't have enough accuracy from talents, getting to 105% accuracy for PVP is the best value per rating point in terms of overall damage done.
might want to actually READ the talent trees you are discussing before berating someone else. Bodyguard has a talent that increases ranged and tech CRIT by 2% per talent for a total of 6% crit. Pyro has a talent that increases range and tech ACCURACY by 1% per talent for a total of 3% accuracy.

Snagulus's Avatar


Snagulus
02.18.2012 , 07:57 PM | #15
Quote: Originally Posted by Amonet View Post
might want to actually READ the talent trees you are discussing before berating someone else. Bodyguard has a talent that increases ranged and tech CRIT by 2% per talent for a total of 6% crit. Pyro has a talent that increases range and tech ACCURACY by 1% per talent for a total of 3% accuracy.
Well, now I feel like a *******. A blind *******. I stand corrected, and you need 2% accuracy from gear to reach 105%.

That aside,
Quote:
Well um.. so why the "white damage" you refer to is classified as RANGED (sweeping, railshot, unload, rapid) and not TECH (missiles and stuff) and so, btw, we have a ranged accuracy AND tech accuracy ?
That question is a little broken as far as english goes, so if my answer isn't what you're looking for I'm sorry.

We do have a "Ranged" and "Tech" accuracy, but all special attacks have a 100% base chance to hit, and accuracy rating affects both equally. Rapid shots is not a special attack, and uses 90% as its base MH accuracy. OH attacks also incur some penalties, but they do incredibly low damage. It doesn't really matter too much if OH attacks miss.

The way the character log is laid out does make it fairly confusing, I just snapped a little bit because of all the blanket statements that get thrown around on the forums. Also, when I get frustrated, I apparently hallucinate new numbers on talents and end up being a bit off the mark.