Auroxis
-
Posts
1747 -
Joined
-
You have to consider popularity the way I see it. If an average player spends significantly more time in ITF's than in Carnie missions with his level 50, that's something to consider in terms of damage distribution.
-
I'll give you my guesstimations about damage type percentages, but they are completely based off of my experience of high level TF's, and I participate in some TF's more than others simply because they are more popular.
Smashing/Lethal I would put at 66% like you initially had. Like I said, the hardest hitting AV's are smashing/lethal centric. Their hardest hitting attacks are usually S/L based(Recluse's KOB for example). The ITF is very popular as well as relatively hard to tank, and S/L is very prevalent there.
That leaves 34% for everything else, which I would put at:
40% Energy
20% Negative Energy
15% Psionic
10% Fire
10% Toxic(Apex)
5% Cold
Note that I have almost no knowledge of the Issue 20 trials. It might be heavier on psi. -
Quote:I would suggest you answer instead of telling me to read the entire thread again, as your numbers don't come close to mine. Dechs might be right about the Dark Regeneration bit, how did you calculate it?Originally Posted by slainsteel
I think you might be a bit disconnected from the rest of the thread here. Those questions have been clarified many times over in many different posts.
I would suggest reading through the thread again to get familiar with the discussion before getting into it.
I'm not saying they are wildly incorrect. I just don't think these particular guesstimates are a good idea for these sort of comparisons. It's pretty agreed upon that Negative Energy isn't as common as Energy, and Cold isn't as common as Fire. Also consider that TF's like Apex and Tin Mage are largely S/L/E based, and those force you into facing level 54 mobs which do more damage. Add to that the fact that defense debuffing mobs are largely S/L/E based, and that the game's hardest hitters are primarily S/L(Lord Recluse, Battle Maiden, Venged Bobcat, Goliath War Walkers).Quote:Originally Posted by ArcanavilleI'm not sure I understand what you mean by that. Although the damage ratios used in the composite score are admittedly guestimates, you seem to be suggesting they are wildly incorrect. I would assume, if you're going to make that assertion, you have an actual counter-estimate for the relative ratios of damage a tanker is likely to see in-game without cherry picking content.
Basically I think the 60% S/L and 40% everything else numbers not very agreeable. I personally find S/L more important than that, and the remaining damage types not even in importance. Another person might disagree with me based on his personal experiences. -
Quote:1. Composite score is flawed as I stated. Just because content exists doesn't mean it's popular.Originally Posted by slainsteel
Maybe you're looking at the wrong build?
Iggy's invuln: Composite score - 1629
Iggy's WP: Composite score - 1745
My Dark build: Composite score - 3118
What other build are you talking about?
2. Did you take Aid Self and SoW into the calculations?
3. How many targets are surrounding, and for how long?
I find the chart Dechs has more telling. -
Quote:You're looking at the wrong builds then. Try Iggy's.Originally Posted by slainsteel
I plugged the numbers in, Dark is coming out to be way ahead than WP or Invuln, any of the builds.
-
Quote:I'd say WP is more survivable than Dark(and Inv more survivable than WP), looking at the max HP and HP/Sec numbers. But it's pretty close.Originally Posted by slainsteel
No, I totally agree that Stoney's are better. In fact, I put in my stoney's numbers and they beat the Dark, if I factor in my aid-self numbers (44% every 5.8 seconds), despite the fact that he isn't optimized for defense, but more for speed. If I put aid-self on the dark, he loses on the defense cap which will make aid-self much harder to use, considering it's interruptible nature.
So what I am saying is that this would clearly put Dark as the *next* most survivable tanker to Stoney? KB prot can be built in easily, ddr would still be an issue - but other than DDR, there doesn't seem to be anything that would prevent us from placing dark as clearly the second most survivable tank?
In terms of offense there's no clear victor either. A damage aura is great, but dark has some endurance issues. WP has no damage aura, but it has good end management in Quick Recovery, and relies on passive mitigation to stay alive(meaning more time to attack). I still think that the damage aura trumps over anything WP offers offensively. -
Quote:Yes I was wrong, thank you for digging up this thread to remind meOriginally Posted by Katten
Did you just mention -recharge on an ice tank thread?
Ice tanks are completely IMMUNE to slows, this makes them good on at least that aspect of fighting psy.
-
Quote:Yep, Iggy's Inv build is better.Originally Posted by WillDriven
Well, I'm not great with the numbers being used to compare all the tank builds posted on this forum, but as far as building a good WP tank, I have one for you if you'd like to compare it to the Invuln tank that you're referring to.
More resists, more defense cushion, more DDR, more HP/Sec with 1 foe in range. -
Quote:Some people prefer certain content. For example, the ITF is pretty common, so people will face S/L more often. The STF, Apex, and Tin Mage TF's are pretty common, and those pack a lot of S/L and Energy damage.Originally Posted by Arcanaville
Something around two thirds of all damage is, in fact, smash/lethal, based on a lot of analysis I did long ago, which I don't think has been invalidated by content that was released since then.
Of the remaining damage, energy and psionic are more common than the other types, but I don't have solid numbers on how much. The difference is small, though, given that each is currently set to about 6.7% of the total.
Perception seems to vary on this, and I don't know why. At one point everyone seems to have been convinced that psionic damage was the third most common damage type after smash/lethal. Now its energy. And at one time, even earlier, there were a lot of people who even doubted that smash/lethal was the most common.
I suppose I could run a new damage survey across the game to try to recompute these values, but its tricky to do this in a way that doesn't introduce observer bias.
Even the typed calculations include some heavy approximations, because attacks aren't single-typed. What I should do is subject the builds to various kinds of attacks of various typing (energy blasts typed energy/smash/range with 60/40 energy/smash damage, etc) but that would become excessively complicated.
This, along with the other reasons you stated makes me believe an accurate damage aggregation cannot be done(at least without some serious data mining), and it's best to just provide mitigation numbers with single damage types on charts such as these. -
Quote:I knew that much, silly.Originally Posted by Arcanaville
Basically, "combined." It is to damage mitigation what quarterback rating is to a (American) football quarterback: a way to combine a set of statistics into one representative score.
What made you decide to go for 60% S/L and 40% everything else? I don't see Psionic, Fire, and Cold as common as Energy, for example.Quote:In my spreadsheet, composite score represents something analogous to this: suppose you're a tanker facing off against a mix of critters, and they are throwing a mix of damage at you. If that damage comes in a certain proportion - 60% smash/lethal divided evenly between the two, and 40% everything else divided evenly between the other six, and psionics itself is divided 50/50 between positionally defensible psi and non-positional psionics - how much damage could the build take if that damage was apportioned that way.
So if you are interested in just smash/lethal performance, you could just look at those numbers. But if you want some way to combine them so you can compare different builds that may be strong in some areas and weak in others, this is one way to do that. -
Quote:What does the composite stand for?Originally Posted by Arcanaville
Iggy's Willpower build is arguably more impressive: it scores higher than his Invuln build in overall survivability on my composite scoring system (both builds are in my linked comparison spreadsheet).
Incidentally, I'm working to port my old proliferation spreadsheet and my PvP DR calculator to google docs for reference as well, but the proliferation spreadsheet in particular will take a lot of work due to the extensive use of formatting. -
Quote:I remember your build Dechs, it's awesome(softcapped S/L/N/E). Not as survivable as that Inv build though.Originally Posted by Dechs Kaison
I've got one of each. That's assuming you're talking about the build on the first page with the purples and a few PvP IOs.
Neither of my builds use either purples or PvP IOs. They're even pre-incarnate. -
Quote:I have not seen a Dark or a WP build more survivable than the Inv build posted in this thread.Originally Posted by Arcanaville
I would tend to not agree with this statement.
First, the easiest thing to get from the invention system is defense. Ice, Stone, and Shields will benefit the most right out of the gate because they have the highest intrinsic defenses. For almost no cost (relatively speaking) they can reach the soft cap and start out-tanking the other tankers for most content. Invuln is right behind them: as you increase the amount you're willing to spend you can get enough defense and/or enough recovery to run enough power pool powers to soft-cap Invuln to most types, especially with Invincibility.
Dark Armor is all over the place. Its not *that* strong out of the box. Invuln I'm pretty sure comfortably outperforms it. But a soft-capped Dark? Now we're talking about a very strong tanker. And look at the posted Willpower build. Willpower tends to be vulnerable to spikes but with enough influence you can soft-cap it *and* cap its health: its spike vulnerability gets significantly softened and its strong healing starts to make a huge difference: its performance in real-world play makes a huge swing with enough expense.
I suppose you're right about the equal investment part though: Let's take a look at SD and Elec since I ranked Elec higher than SD in survivability. +3% defense from IO's will benefit an SD toon significantly more than an Elec Armor toon(assuming no other defense bonuses). And once an SD reaches the softcap, the Elec benefits much more from IO defense bonuses, though that requires more investment.
If I'm not mistaken, SD needs about 15% exterior defense to softcap after slotting its defense powers. Will an Elec Armor toon with 15% defense be less survivable than a softcapped SD? With the self heals and end drains it's a tough call, you can also add inspirations to the mix as those will likely push Elec ahead by that point. -
Quote:The relative strength gaps may shorten, but no matter how much you invest, the more survivable primary will always be more survivable if an equal investment is given(Except Ice Armor).Originally Posted by Arcanaville
For tankers, the amount you spend does affect their relative strengths. Willpower is not very strong without significant IO investment, but can mature into a monster. Invuln starts off very strong out of the box, much moreso than almost any other set, but at the highest levels of investment its lower protection for non/sl causes other sets to catch up. Ice is hard to strengthen beyond a certain point with inventions, so it never does as well against other primaries as it does right out of the box: it starts giving up ground almost immediately as you escalate build expenditures. Dark seems to have two modes: its very good out of the box, and it can be made very good at maximum expense. My own experience is that it doesn't have a lot of "moderate" builds that do very well against other moderate builds: it feels very all or nothing to me (although its possible I just haven't played around with moderate builds enough), particularly against fewer hard foes rather than a crowd of them.
-
I don't think build investment is at all important when comparing primaries to each other(except Ice Armor-Elec Armor). In terms of being "good enough" to take on current content however, build investment is definitely a factor.
-
Quote:I don't think anyone here was arguing against the fact that the more you invest in your tanker the better it becomes. Your "voice of reason" is completely not needed here, move along.Originally Posted by Severe
has anyone hear noticed that the only arguement is how cheap a player is v.s. how great a tank is?
its funny how influence has some much influence when it comes to whats the "best". Im still not sure though if its laziness or cheapness that keeps this as the only real arguement.i mean really with all these different kinds of ways to get loot in this game and we still have to place limitations on things to win so we cheapen it up to have your opinions matter more.
really ? cause its real sad when im the voice of reason around here while the rest of you keep talking to prove a point based on pure unwillingness to work any harder then absoloutely nesscessary -
No tanker primaries are "bottom rung". Some sets are more offense oriented and some are more survivability oriented.
Electric Armor ranks 3rd on my offense rating(behind SD and FA) because it has a damage aura, top endurance management, and some recharge. Dark Armor only has a damage aura for offense, so if it wasn't better than Elec for survivability(which it is) it would mean a DA buff is in order. -
S/L softcap builds tend to be less slot intensive than 32.5% positional builds, which gives you more room for things like procs, recharge, regen, and HP. They are also more expensive in general, partially due to Kinetic Combat set pieces being pricey(compared with Mako's Bite for example).
Here's an S/L softcapped(and way expensive) Elec/SS build that I have:
http://www.cohplanner.com/mids/downl...90FF03977CDA31
Code:| Copy & Paste this data into Mids' Hero Designer to view the build | |-------------------------------------------------------------------| |MxDz;1426;697;1394;HEX;| |78DA6593596F52411480E72E88A520D0164A658756F60BB7A536D6A5A9B64DD492A| |054DF0CB9D2118848C9E5E2F6E48B7F404D7CD17FE3AE7FC5E51FE0E19C29A581E4| |F29D3973F699A93CDF7132F66A8B49CE1B1DA3DFAF1F18DDC7DCB4558C66BBC1EC8| |CB13069EA3BFC11EFF6B9B6DBE10DCB6C37EADBE693233328762BBCC3B9561BF440| |AE5926EF36AD96F766B7C541B4B463C1513D3AEA68B51EE7872E14F7DACD96D5EE3| |69DB8DAE7460F16EEE3C52137FBAD76CFB7DB6B37B4EBE6C0E2F5CAA05E31FA1637| |5F04A0B62C7C9FDCF027C1C78636565618D3D99C8E089410A12222B68AC8E6D9087| |90713BFA1C2AA800493EF10EE223C35C417882E5174458A8090626713884814918D| |233488A7503C9B42F1548AA7523C07C573E4E4517A3D8DF80CD16D145DB63DC5C2C| |EBC243C437C0503BB486F3F953E4E79E354C537B09B213B36B30842987D07D5AC70| |9DAD49A368CE7B8403C4B91CA648C021BB440D2E52891D0F2109066E6A8DB983384| |409545E313D2F753B47DD06A8DB1875ABC354E6C554E6C96E81EC16C8CE4F76FE0C| |8E2396422810DD272AF751D3A153338F50EF4588BE280A5BD4B1D69F50E8129ED75| |05E7A83D1CEBF25BC43AC824F50923176F0833C2A6FF923611394AAC252D4B50A45| |844511611F0E2C7E1B9B5FBE85D0F7103F2063544C3E5A40573FB826482525C835B| |9802843F615715757AE624117AE102E133611A94B84D7883A244A539F6A5A4755A6| |4428123444B68030C03C27CC731BA8CA5F24AC13CA88C21AC20BD56AA25A8DAA2D6| |EC0CAC6D82FE8AD24065C5AC7AD903AF56E9274A2493AD1029D68461DBFCA61F6C4| |67B41C42B0298D3EA5599BD294A734FB539AAA2AD2824642CD8C67FC3287BF1DE3D| |7CC243AACBF272A59BA8F3D16E89914AFE13BFA33E993469F7F933E74CB8A74CBF4| |F7882DB8F4BAE8FEA1633459928D09B93A213F9890FF03977CDA31| |-------------------------------------------------------------------|
-
Quote:Kinetics is the most offensive secondary and Fire Control is the most offensive primary. There's no awesome/clever synergy, it's simply the combination of two brute forces together.Originally Posted by Psiphon
Should the synergy of Fire and Kin be ignored?
Every primary has good survivability synergy with a certain secondary. At most you'll be able to close the gap a bit(which I doubt), but the other primary will still be more survivable than you.Quote:I can understand why you would want to exclude the secondary from the discussion as it adds an additional level of complexity to an argument that's already complicated.
However if one Primary has an espect that can be enhanced by the usage of a particular secondary then personally I feel that it should be considered. -
Here's where I rank em overall:
Survivability
Stone Armor
Invulnerability
Willpower
Dark Armor
Ice Armor(falls down a survivability tier after IO's are considered)
Electric Armor
Shield Defense
Fiery Aura
Offense -
Havoc Punch is skippable. Its damage per activation(damage divided by activation time) is abysmal. Jacobs Ladder is better in that regard and has a bit of AoE.
Lightning Clap is skippable. PBAoE Knockbacks are rarely ever beneficial, and the stun magnitude is only enough to stun minions. -
Quote:Cardiac might make the end issue insignificant, but Gloom does need a ton of recharge(+300% ish, Mu Lightning needs +200%) to seamlessly run the top Tanker SS chain(Jab/Gloom/Haymaker/Knockout Blow/Gloom/Haymaker).Originally Posted by WolfWings
If I go for Cardiac T4 would that change the balance between Mu and Soul since that'd add a significant EndRed right off the top of everything? Or is the Recharge more of an obstacle to fitting Gloom into the normal SS chain?
-
It's either Mu or Soul, IMO.
Mu gives you Mu Lightning and Ball Lightning. A good ST attack and a good AoE attack with an endurance drain component which works well with Elec Armor, letting you drain mobs faster.
Soul gives you Gloom, Dark Obliteration, and Darkest Night. A great ST attack and a solid AoE attack, both with a -tohit component which works well with Elec Armor(being a resistance based set means more defense or -tohit is rarely not helpful). Darkest Night is an enemy AoE toggle which carries a -tohit and -damage component. Very useful in keeping you and your team alive longer.
It's a tough pick, but I went with Mu as the AoE damage is superior, and Mu Lightning is easier than Gloom to fit into a SS attack chain(requires less recharge and endurance). -
If you take out the tier 9, Invuln is the most survivable IMO. Tons of defense, easily capped HP, capped S/L resists and solid DDR. You have the end drain weakness and psi damage weakness, but that's about it.
-
I have tanked almost all of the high level TF's with my SS/Elec Brute. ITF, STF, RSF, LGTF, Dr. Khan, Tin Mage, and Apex. I rarely play my Tanker anymore.