Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 118
  1. #41
    Community Member Teh_Troll's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Under the bridge
    Posts
    5,874

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Inoukchuk View Post
    The solution to this is easy:

    Scrap what PRR armor currently gives and instead institute this:

    Heavy armor: applies 100% of your AC to PRR and 30% elemental absorption
    Medium armor: applies 75% of your AC to PRR and 20% elemental absorption
    Light armor: applies 25% of your AC to PRR and 10% elemental absorption
    Robes/outfits: applies 0% of your AC to PRR and 0% elemental absorption

    So, if you had 150 AC in plate you'd have 150 PRR + whatever you get from other sources. The better your armor the more AC and PRR you get, and the heavier your armor the more PRR you get. You could add in some modifier for BAB, but I don't really see that it matters. Keep in mind a 300 PRR is still < 62% DR.

    Now you'd actually have to consider whether evasion + centered is worth the trade off.

    I might go a step further and say armor (and only armor) grants DR after PRR equal to ML of the armor x.5 / .25 / .1 / 0. You could call this something else like AR (armor reduction)

    So ML 10 heavy armor with a character AC of 50 would give 50PRR, and after that applies give AR 5/-. ML26 heavy armor with an character AC of 160 would grant 160PRR, and 13AR after that's applied. ML26 light armor with 160 AC would give 40PRR and after that apply AR 2/-. Then you could release special equipment with AR on it if you want.

    Oh... and they should implement all this by armor type (i.e. half-plate, leather, hide, etc) so that mithral full plate gives heavy armor bonuses as it should.
    Your idea has some merit, I'm not sure I agree with the devils in all the details but I like your concepts.

  2. #42
    Community Member Nightmanis's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    923

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by axel15810 View Post
    Two things I would like to see -

    - Slightly raise the 75% soft cap. Make it give a higher benefit once you reach a certain level rather than trailing off completely. It should give some benefit for a moderate investment, plateau and then go up again once more to give a big benefit once you reach a very high AC number.
    - Make AC more equipment based, monks running around in robes with higher AC than full plate fighters makes no sense

    I do like the current system better than the old, but we do need to modify it to make AC mean something in EE. Right now the Full Plate dodge penalty hurts more than the increased AC helps. I'm finding I should just have all my fighters/clerics wear pajamas on EE since the AC does nothing.
    Easy fix: Remove the Wis to ac feature. When you're done doing that, then adjust the whole AC setup.

  3. #43
    Community Member Qhualor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    10,026

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DrakHar View Post
    Okay.... then why are you talking about AC on the previous page and saying how monks shouldn't have AC like tanks? If all you wanted to talk about was PRR, why did you post that sidetrack?

    You've made a few claims, and I can't follow it.

    Pajama wearers should not have AC like metal wearers.
    Pajama wearers don't equal monk...presumably because you aren't counting people with monk levels but not mostly monk as monks.
    Pajama and metal wearers should have the same AC because PRR is all that matters.

    I agree with your last point, but then why the heck were you saying #1 earlier in the topic? And don't say because AC doesn't matter, because what you said was that they SHOULDNT have the same ac... even though you just backtracked on that in your latest post.
    pajama wearers should not have AC like metal wearers. that's my opinion because it doesn't make sense that cloth can be just as impenetrable as metal. using things like we currently have to increase AC to make cloth tougher doesn't make sense to me. adding something like Mage armor, armor bonus or barkskin I can understand.

    pajama wearers are not always monk. my ranger was using cloth for the longest time but that will change when I upgrade his armor. casters do wear robes.

    pajamas and metal wearers should not have the same AC. since the AC changes and how its no longer all or nothing, PRR, dodge, blur and incorporeal have becomes replacements to AC.

    maybe my posts were a little confusing because I was mixing my opinion with how it is in DDO now and was.

  4. #44
    Community Member voodoogroves's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    North Cackalacky
    Posts
    9,593

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FuzzyDuck81 View Post
    Not being an uber power-gamer, on my characters AC never really used to work at all beyond the mid levels or so. Now, it actually means i don't get hit all the time, even if not 100% reliably. I see nothing to dislike about this from my own perspective.
    Yeah, you're missing my point.

    It works to varying and obscured degrees. Bigger number is better.

    Compare to something with a hard goal to aim for - the DC to be able to land an instakill in Storm Horns. That's a target - that's something we can aim for, strive for, build for.

    If the AC range had been expanded to a simply larger scale than a single d20, we'd have goals to aim for in terms of to-hit and AC.

    Now, more is clearly better but there's no real hard and fast. There are no mobs that have a hit of X, so to avoid them you need an AC of x+40.

    Instead, lots of things add to AC and you get big numbers ... and you're still hit 25% or so of the time and still missed 25% of the time. We aren't doing or not doing the deed, we're negotiating the price.


    Maybe 5/10/15/20% of AC added as PRR for cloth/light/medium/heavy armour? and specific tank trees could presumably have an ability to boost that by a bit too. Would add extra reward for those that had focussed on AC, while not overly powerful due to the diminishing returns.
    PRR is fine conceptually - it's like elemental absorption similar to how elemental resistance is like DR.

    What's lame is all the kinda haphazard "this adds 5% AC, this adds 10% to your shield AC, this adds whatever more AC" for an abstracted and unclear benefit. Yes, you get hit less - but it isn't something you can or should build for.

    Earth stance being the best defensive and offensive stance is dumb tough.



    Imagine if spell DCs were a nebulous sliding scale ... there'd be no real reason to strive for the best casting stat, or the best tactics DCs. They will always work 25% of the time, always fail 25% of the time and more than a passing investment in the middle won't make them something you can really count in.
    Ghallanda - now with fewer alts and more ghostbane

  5. #45
    Community Member voodoogroves's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    North Cackalacky
    Posts
    9,593

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Teh_Troll View Post
    Your idea has some merit, I'm not sure I agree with the devils in all the details but I like your concepts.
    I'd agree with it more if they also took out the crazy high-AC scaling on the armors and stances and brought AC back down into a smaller number range.
    Ghallanda - now with fewer alts and more ghostbane

  6. #46
    Community Member
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    819

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by voodoogroves View Post
    I'd agree with it more if they also took out the crazy high-AC scaling on the armors and stances and brought AC back down into a smaller number range.
    That's just not going to happen, plain and simple. The old system was too abusable by the power gaming crowd. They don't want anyone hitting 95% of the time or anyone missing 95% of the time and same for getting missed. They simply don't want you being able to make a build that's invincible, regardless of the downside. In the old system it was a matter of (for example) against x boss 130AC might as well be 0 and 150 AC can only be hit on a natural 20 because they have a 130 attack bonus. So if you put some effort into being a decently armored character and had 110 AC... it was all wasted. They needed and wanted more scalability, I'm just not sure they achieved what they were aiming for.

    I agree, the current mechanic is bad. Just not as bad as the old mechanic, which was awful.

  7. #47
    Community Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    913

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Qhualor View Post
    pajama wearers should not have AC like metal wearers. that's my opinion because it doesn't make sense that cloth can be just as impenetrable as metal. using things like we currently have to increase AC to make cloth tougher doesn't make sense to me. adding something like Mage armor, armor bonus or barkskin I can understand.

    pajama wearers are not always monk. my ranger was using cloth for the longest time but that will change when I upgrade his armor. casters do wear robes.

    pajamas and metal wearers should not have the same AC. since the AC changes and how its no longer all or nothing, PRR, dodge, blur and incorporeal have becomes replacements to AC.

    maybe my posts were a little confusing because I was mixing my opinion with how it is in DDO now and was
    .
    Alright, now that makes more sense.

  8. #48
    Community Member Teh_Troll's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Under the bridge
    Posts
    5,874

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Inoukchuk View Post
    That's just not going to happen, plain and simple. The old system was too abusable by the power gaming crowd. They don't want anyone hitting 95% of the time or anyone missing 95% of the time and same for getting missed.
    You are ignorant of the old game mechanics. There was no such thing as 95% miss after they added in grazing hits.

  9. #49
    Community Member redspecter23's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Toronto, Ontario
    Posts
    3,688

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Inoukchuk View Post
    That's just not going to happen, plain and simple. The old system was too abusable by the power gaming crowd. They don't want anyone hitting 95% of the time or anyone missing 95% of the time and same for getting missed.
    This is the part of the logic that I don't get. Perhaps this is what Turbine is thinking, but then why was the AC system reworked and not everything else with a DC like spells and tactics? You propose that they don't want us with 95% mitigation, but isn't that what a high reflex and evasion does currently? Casters aim for 95% success with their spells like Wail or Implosion. Why is this seemingly fine, while all melee activity requires a complicated formula to determine success. Spells, tactics and saves all work fine on a d20 system, but AC somehow breaks down? I say if that's the case, then the d20 was never the problem to begin with and Turbine "fixed" AC by addressing the wrong issue.
    Kaarloe - Degenerate Matter - Argonnessen

  10. #50
    Community Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    913

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by redspecter23 View Post
    This is the part of the logic that I don't get. Perhaps this is what Turbine is thinking, but then why was the AC system reworked and not everything else with a DC like spells and tactics? You propose that they don't want us with 95% mitigation, but isn't that what a high reflex and evasion does currently? Casters aim for 95% success with their spells like Wail or Implosion. Why is this seemingly fine, while all melee activity requires a complicated formula to determine success. Spells, tactics and saves all work fine on a d20 system, but AC somehow breaks down? I say if that's the case, then the d20 was never the problem to begin with and Turbine "fixed" AC by addressing the wrong issue.
    Casters generally don't have a 20 point swing in DC at each level. Unless one is completely ignoring DC, an I mean completely. Whereas a 40 point AC swing wasn't uncommon, even if one was trying to have a reasonable AC. And 20 wasn't impossible even when both were building for AC.

  11. #51
    The Hatchery
    2014 DDO Players Council
    Dandonk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    5,282

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Teh_Troll View Post
    You are ignorant of the old game mechanics. There was no such thing as 95% miss after they added in grazing hits.
    Repeat after me, The Troll Is Right.

    Quote Originally Posted by redspecter23 View Post
    This is the part of the logic that I don't get. Perhaps this is what Turbine is thinking, but then why was the AC system reworked and not everything else with a DC like spells and tactics? You propose that they don't want us with 95% mitigation, but isn't that what a high reflex and evasion does currently? Casters aim for 95% success with their spells like Wail or Implosion. Why is this seemingly fine, while all melee activity requires a complicated formula to determine success. Spells, tactics and saves all work fine on a d20 system, but AC somehow breaks down? I say if that's the case, then the d20 was never the problem to begin with and Turbine "fixed" AC by addressing the wrong issue.
    Also very true. Turbine did not fix anything with the new system, it's just broken in new and (possibly, depending on your fetish) exciting ways.
    It's definitely an N-word.

  12. #52
    Community Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    913

    Default

    I want to make clear I'm not saying I like the changes with my last post - only showing how it's a different beast than, say, casters DCs.

  13. #53
    Community Member redspecter23's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Toronto, Ontario
    Posts
    3,688

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DrakHar View Post
    Casters generally don't have a 20 point swing in DC at each level. Unless one is completely ignoring DC, an I mean completely. Whereas a 40 point AC swing wasn't uncommon, even if one was trying to have a reasonable AC. And 20 wasn't impossible even when both were building for AC.
    So you agree that it's the amount of swing that was the issue and not the d20 itself? If spellcasters one day also have a 40 point swing in effectiveness, would a similar change be in order and would it be received well by the community? Casters with even moderate investment having 90%+ success rate with spells due to the 25% hit bonus they would all get. Nobody ever saving more than 75% of the time on anything ever, no matter how much you invest in a save.
    Kaarloe - Degenerate Matter - Argonnessen

  14. #54
    Community Member
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    819

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Teh_Troll View Post
    You are ignorant of the old game mechanics. There was no such thing as 95% miss after they added in grazing hits.
    No I'm not, I was aware of the "grazing hit" mechanic, but technically a grazing hit is not a hit. That was a crappy bandaid fix to the problem that they scrapped in favor of a new system. It's just that the new system isn't really any better. Never-the-less, the intent is obvious, they wanted a system where building for some AC would get you some mitigation without making it so min-maxed AC would make you nearly invincible.


    This is the part of the logic that I don't get. Perhaps this is what Turbine is thinking, but then why was the AC system reworked and not everything else with a DC like spells and tactics? You propose that they don't want us with 95% mitigation, but isn't that what a high reflex and evasion does currently? Casters aim for 95% success with their spells like Wail or Implosion. Why is this seemingly fine, while all melee activity requires a complicated formula to determine success. Spells, tactics and saves all work fine on a d20 system, but AC somehow breaks down? I say if that's the case, then the d20 was never the problem to begin with and Turbine "fixed" AC by addressing the wrong issue.
    I agree, I think AC was done first as a test of sorts with casting maybe intended to be next. Instead what they did to casting in the interim was to assume every caster is min-maxed and raise mob saves to ridiculous levels to prevent anything approaching 100% success. DC casting is even more broken than AC right now, and frankly needs a fix much more urgently. Nobody plays a DC caster anymore if they intend to play EE, they all play shiradi.... cause it makes sense that the best arcane ED is in the Primal sphere, that's gotta be by design right?

  15. #55
    Community Member Teh_Troll's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Under the bridge
    Posts
    5,874

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Inoukchuk View Post
    No I'm not,
    Yes you are.

  16. #56
    Community Member Teh_Troll's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Under the bridge
    Posts
    5,874

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dandonk View Post
    Repeat after me, The Troll Is Right.
    Best post of the day.

  17. #57
    Hero LOOON375's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Argo
    Posts
    1,692

    Default

    For the most part, I like the AC system in general now. It was absolutely worthless before the changes.

    I like what Im able to achieve on my medium and heavy armor toons. Yes, it takes some work and some gear.

    Having said that, the Monk AC issue is what is blatantly wrong with the current state of AC.

    I have a pure monk thrower that was just made for fun. And without even trying, like I did on my armor guys, the monks AC blows them away. I can also get great DR and PRR without hardly trying on my thrower.

    Heavy armor wearers should blow every other option out of the water.

    Monks should have the AC and PRR capablilties reduced, but give them the best possible dodge in the game.

    This isn't meant as a bash monk or nerf monk post. Im just trying to point out the most glaring problem with AC that I see.
    The Fockers of Argo
    Fuglymofo; LOOON; Hobaggin; Fuglyrobo; Buttscracher; Whoaa

  18. #58
    Community Member voodoogroves's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    North Cackalacky
    Posts
    9,593

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Inoukchuk View Post
    No I'm not, I was aware of the "grazing hit" mechanic, but technically a grazing hit is not a hit. That was a crappy bandaid fix to the problem that they scrapped in favor of a new system. It's just that the new system isn't really any better. Never-the-less, the intent is obvious, they wanted a system where building for some AC would get you some mitigation without making it so min-maxed AC would make you nearly invincible.




    I agree, I think AC was done first as a test of sorts with casting maybe intended to be next. Instead what they did to casting in the interim was to assume every caster is min-maxed and raise mob saves to ridiculous levels to prevent anything approaching 100% success. DC casting is even more broken than AC right now, and frankly needs a fix much more urgently. Nobody plays a DC caster anymore if they intend to play EE, they all play shiradi.... cause it makes sense that the best arcane ED is in the Primal sphere, that's gotta be by design right?
    You're confusing lots of things. Intent, goals, etc. with the mechanics chosen and and overlaying that on how people play and assuming that in the creative process the result of a complex series of changes is always exactly the intent.

    Your Shiradi example is a good one for the counter. It makes sense that most people ignore AC and build for PRR, etc. That has to be by design, right?

    Other mechanical changes could have achieved aspects of a goal of "making AC useful". Frankly, what they did was make a bit of AC more useful on the low end, but lots of AC not very useful in comparable content (no one is arguing that rocking AC doesn't make you invulnerable in Kobold Assault - or if they are they are morons - the people who want max AC are aiming at the hardest content).
    Ghallanda - now with fewer alts and more ghostbane

  19. #59
    Community Member voodoogroves's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    North Cackalacky
    Posts
    9,593

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LOOON375 View Post
    For the most part, I like the AC system in general now. It was absolutely worthless before the changes.

    I like what Im able to achieve on my medium and heavy armor toons. Yes, it takes some work and some gear.

    Having said that, the Monk AC issue is what is blatantly wrong with the current state of AC.

    I have a pure monk thrower that was just made for fun. And without even trying, like I did on my armor guys, the monks AC blows them away. I can also get great DR and PRR without hardly trying on my thrower.

    Heavy armor wearers should blow every other option out of the water.

    Monks should have the AC and PRR capablilties reduced, but give them the best possible dodge in the game.

    This isn't meant as a bash monk or nerf monk post. Im just trying to point out the most glaring problem with AC that I see.
    Armor should be more PRR.

    Is your AC really that good in the highest level content? I get missed a lot with a 50 ish AC at level 9, but that is meaningless - it's a fly-by level.

    It makes no sense that the best monk defensive stance is also the best DPS stance (largely).
    Ghallanda - now with fewer alts and more ghostbane

  20. #60
    Hero LOOON375's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Argo
    Posts
    1,692

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by voodoogroves View Post

    Is your AC really that good in the highest level content?
    It's good enough to cause enough misses to help survive EE content. my toons aren't maxed out like some other guys and isn't close to tops in any way. I just build to get to a point of what works.
    The Fockers of Argo
    Fuglymofo; LOOON; Hobaggin; Fuglyrobo; Buttscracher; Whoaa

Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

This form's session has expired. You need to reload the page.

Reload