Why elves are not the end-all tanks.

Feedback, bugs, and general gameplay related discussion.
Gormal
Sojourner
Posts: 3917
Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2001 6:01 am
Location: A Whale's Vagina
Contact:

Why elves are not the end-all tanks.

Postby Gormal » Tue Jun 10, 2008 10:29 am

I myself am a victim of the current trend of grey elf warriors nancing around, pretending to kick ass over all other tanks because of the supreme elven agility. After spending the night talking to Klandan and using math based on Sservis' Stat Spoilers, I can show that elves are on par with if not inferior to gnomes as a good race tank.

To understand this argument at all, you'll need to understand a little bit more about AC that you probably know. Armor class matters only in increments of 10. 1-10ac is the same, 11-20, and so on. For your armor class to affect your character's performance, you must reach the next "+1" plateau.

A human with 100 agility can get -130ac with no max_agi gear, because his racial agility modifier is 100. A grey elf has a racial modifier of 130 and can obtain -151 armor class with no max_agi equipment, and a gnome caps out at -145 with a modifier of 120. Compare the naked armor class of a human, elf, and gnome warrior:

Code: Select all

Level: 1   Race: Human   Class: Warrior     
Age: 17 yrs / 0 mths  Height: 71 inches  Weight: 220 lbs
STR: heroic     AGI: perfect    DEX: good       CON: heroic
POW: mundane    INT: mundane    WIS: mundane    CHA: average
Armor Class: 70  (100 to -100)


Code: Select all

Level: 1   Race: Grey Elf   Class: Warrior     
Age: 120 yrs / 0 mths  Height: 60 inches  Weight: 99 lbs
STR: mighty     AGI: perfect    DEX: mighty     CON: good   
POW: mundane    INT: average    WIS: mundane    CHA: average
Armor Class: 49  (100 to -100)


Code: Select all

Level: 1   Race: Gnome   Class: Warrior     
Age: 90 yrs / 0 mths  Height: 42 inches  Weight: 77 lbs
STR: good       AGI: perfect    DEX: good       CON: heroic
POW: mundane    INT: average    WIS: mundane    CHA: average
Armor Class: 55  (100 to -100)



So what does this mean for max_agi gear? Well, I'm glad you asked because its pretty important with how many of us have been running around with piles of the stuff on thinking that its been doing us good. An elf can reach -151ac with 100 natural agility, which means that you need 10ac from notching your agility to receive any benefit. The problem is that the first agility notch for an elf is 5ac, the second is 4ac, and the third is 3ac. Meaning that you have to wear 123 agility to hit the next effective ac notch. I know it sounds outrageous, but its the simple truth.

The great part about playing races with high natural stats is that they benefit more from max_stats as the racial bonus is factored in after equipment bonuses. 160/1.3=123.08 where 1.3 is the racial adjustment for grey elf agility. Refer to the Notches Table for a clearer picture of what I'm talking about. The AC value for 148 MinValue is 4ac, and while I don't know exactly what the ac value is for 160, its at least 1, which is the next notch so it really doesn't matter. Yes, 123 agility is obtainable but its fairly difficult and forces you to sacrifice a fair amount of hitpoints and saves.

Now lets look our big-nosed friends, Gnomes. Gnomes have 120 adjusted agility granting them a natural ceiling of -145ac. To reach the next armor class plateau of -151 (precisely what elves have until they reach 123agi), a gnome needs to wear 3 max_agi. (124/1.2=103.33) It will take them substantially more to reach the next ac notch than it does as elf (160/1.2=133.33) but as far as I'm concerned, 10 ac doesn't compare to the large difference in hitpoints between the two races.

Warriors have 337 base hitpoints before factoring in race. At certain con notches, you get a +1 modifier which grants you 50 hitpoints. Elves, with 85 adjusted con are granted a +3 bonus, but have a racial penalty of -1 placing them at +2, with their first con notch obtainable with 101 con (86/.85=101.18) Gnomes have 100 adjusted con, and no racial penalty granting them a +4 bonus to hitpoints with their next bonus at 101 con.

Edit: In the interest of fairness, gnomes do have lower strength and dexterity than elves which may affect parry/shieldblock to some degree. No testing has ever been done to determine exactly how much stats affect actual blocks/parries/dodges, but its generally agreed to be minimal.


TL:DR - It takes 123 agility for an elf to have more armor class than a gnome with 103 agility, where a gnome will always have 100 extra hp and much more versatility in equipment selection.
Last edited by Gormal on Tue Jun 10, 2008 1:35 pm, edited 3 times in total.
Gormal
Sojourner
Posts: 3917
Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2001 6:01 am
Location: A Whale's Vagina
Contact:

Re: Why elves are not the end-all tanks.

Postby Gormal » Tue Jun 10, 2008 10:39 am

Another quick couple of notes on armor class:

Spells that affect your ac cannot boost you beyond your agility-determined cap. Tanks that wear 200ac worth of gear receive no benefit from armor, barkskin, etc.

Sservis wrote:A max of 200 worn/spell Armor Class counts, and then the Agility adjustment is applied.


This is still under debate/testing about how exactly the hidden ac is calculated.

This also means that barbarians, dwarves*, and humans need to wear 112 adjusted agility to receive any non-standard ac benefit from it.

*Dwarven modifier is 95, so they must wear 118 (112/.95=117.89).
Last edited by Gormal on Tue Jun 10, 2008 1:43 pm, edited 3 times in total.
ssar
Sojourner
Posts: 1446
Joined: Tue Jan 30, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Newcastle, NSW, Australia
Contact:

Re: Why elves are not the end-all tanks.

Postby ssar » Tue Jun 10, 2008 12:09 pm

(Goodrace)

Headbutt:
Elves' heads are frailer, they are just as likely to break thier own nose. Plus an elf prolly don't want to mess up his/her looks and stoop to such primitive activity. Thumbs down.
Gnomes being short have a great target area to headbutt usually, and they can be aggro little fuc*ers. Thumps up.
Halflings being short also have some good target areas, but they are wussy. Thumbs down.
Dwarves also can find that sweet target, and can be aggro fuc*ers too. Thumbs up.
Barbarians were made to headbutt. Two Thumbs up.

Bodyslam:
All who cannot do it suck.
Barbarians were made to bodyslam. Two thumbs up.

Bash:
Those shortass fuc*ers have all sorts of problems trying to bash stuff. Thumbs down.
Dwarves and Barbarians revel in driving thier foe into the dirt mightily. Thumbs up.

Nance:
All those other races who cannot even comprehend it - Thumbs down.
Elves excel at Nance. Thumbs up. (er, is that really a thumbs up?)

Taste:
Elves and Halflings kinda taste like chicken -> eating incend clouds to cook nicely then gulp. Thumbs down.
All others are a bit tough on the palate. Thumbs up.
BEER
Gormal
Sojourner
Posts: 3917
Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2001 6:01 am
Location: A Whale's Vagina
Contact:

Re: Why elves are not the end-all tanks.

Postby Gormal » Tue Jun 10, 2008 1:42 pm

This is really just a good example of how the hidden stats are silly and should be shown. The code is already in place where anyone could see their true stats, and I don't see why its been held back for so long. There's far too much ambiguity in Toril.
User avatar
Shevarash
FORGER CODER
Posts: 2944
Joined: Fri Dec 29, 2000 6:01 am

Re: Why elves are not the end-all tanks.

Postby Shevarash » Tue Jun 10, 2008 2:31 pm

Some of your assumptions are incorrect. I'm not going to dissect the combat engine in detail here, but here's a couple points:

1) Every point of Armor Class is factored into your chance to hit - NOT just in increments of 10. This has been the case since I rewrote the combat engine in 2001.

2) Agility's bonus to your chance to be hit is calculated separately from Armor Class and is open to modifiers that AC is not. In other words, it is valuable, but not as valuable as "real" armor class.

Also, the "real stats" you refer to really aren't completely available. Sure, we could show you the unadjusted ability scores and the bonus values each notch gives, but the way these values affect you in combat are much more nebulous. The combat engine runs through a lot of factors when calculating to-hit and it's rarely as simple as comparing hitroll to AC.

That said, I agree that it's too ambiguous and this is honestly where the 2.0 project came from originally. I went back into the combat engine and rewrote it to be as straightforward and transparent as possible (just like D&D 3.5) and it kind of snowballed from there. After all, you can't have a transparent combat engine and still hide stats...and you may as well add real weapon skills while you're at it and hey! those might as well be feats, and as long as I have feats I may as well do spells too, and what do you know, these would work better with a new spell engine, and oh! deities! and then....
Shevarash -- Code Forger of TorilMUD
Gormal
Sojourner
Posts: 3917
Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2001 6:01 am
Location: A Whale's Vagina
Contact:

Re: Why elves are not the end-all tanks.

Postby Gormal » Tue Jun 10, 2008 2:43 pm

Awesome feedback. What about the actual AC caps and how much do your stats like strength affect your defensive skills?

Edit: What I mean is, where exactly does armor class go after we pass that invisible wall of -100. How precisely do spells affect it when we're stacking over a hundred ac from just those sources along with well over -150 from gear and stats. Also, does your overall attainable armor class increase with max_agi?
Raiwen
Sojourner
Posts: 430
Joined: Sun Jan 28, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Atlanta, Ga USA
Contact:

Re: Why elves are not the end-all tanks.

Postby Raiwen » Tue Jun 10, 2008 3:59 pm

And.. Why do Ogres suck so bad at tanking more than 3 mobs? If strength was a factor in defensive skills, you should see it in an ogre.

They go down quicker than Adriorn attempting to tank CM epic dragons.
Valendhal
Sojourner
Posts: 42
Joined: Tue Jun 10, 2008 4:36 pm

Re: Why elves are not the end-all tanks.

Postby Valendhal » Tue Jun 10, 2008 4:39 pm

I think halflings make solid tanks as well. They have over 100 base HP higher than elves and low max notches for agil.

Good thing about elves is that they can bash _some_ mobs, whereas gnomes can't bash much of anything .. though atleast halflings can hamstring .. have alot of fun w that one.

My centz.
Gormal
Sojourner
Posts: 3917
Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2001 6:01 am
Location: A Whale's Vagina
Contact:

Re: Why elves are not the end-all tanks.

Postby Gormal » Tue Jun 10, 2008 4:40 pm

Since now we know that ever ac notch does matter, here's a quick chart of gnome, elf, and ogre (for you Raiwen) notches to compare.

It shows adjusted agility, ac bonus for that notch, and the amount of agi you need to reach it for each race. The ?? are because I haven't tested exactly how much AC you gain at those notches, but logic dictates that its going to be a gain of only 2 or maybe 3 ac.

Code: Select all

AdjV    AC     Gnome      Grey        Ogre     Halfling
101    -38     84.17      77.69      134.67     91.82
112    -45     93.33      86.15      149.33     101.82
124    -51     103.33     95.38      165.33     112.73
136    -56     113.33     104.62     181.33     123.64
148    -60     123.33     113.85     197.33     134.55
160    -63     133.33     123.08     213.33     145.45
172     ??     143.33     132.31     229.33     156.36
184     ??     153.33     141.54     245.33     167.27


That should explain why ogres suck so bad at tanking. I think you might be asking why they're gimped so badly, but I think that the answer to that question is simply that they were intended to be more damage-oriented and the warrior class doesn't deliver in that department. Ogres are pretty gimped for any class sadly, since they're one of the cooler races.

Halflings suffer the same problem that gnomes do, the complete inability to bash useful things. Halflings have severely gimped strength, lower agi than gnome/elf, and lower con than any of the the other 3 tanks. They're hands down the worst option for a tank.
Last edited by Gormal on Tue Jun 10, 2008 5:58 pm, edited 6 times in total.
Adriorn Darkcloak
Sojourner
Posts: 1292
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2003 7:11 pm

Re: Why elves are not the end-all tanks.

Postby Adriorn Darkcloak » Tue Jun 10, 2008 4:42 pm

I just finished adding Raiwen to the lemonparty.org mailing list and picture exchange.
Gormal
Sojourner
Posts: 3917
Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2001 6:01 am
Location: A Whale's Vagina
Contact:

Re: Why elves are not the end-all tanks.

Postby Gormal » Tue Jun 10, 2008 4:54 pm

Unless Shev says differently by the way, I'm still running under the assumption that armor class caps at -100 and agility increases that into the realm that we currently can't see. I'm unclear exactly how spells that grant ac are factored in, as I could see them only helping to reach your cap, or having sort of an overflow where they grant additional ac in addition to your equipped ac.
Valendhal
Sojourner
Posts: 42
Joined: Tue Jun 10, 2008 4:36 pm

Re: Why elves are not the end-all tanks.

Postby Valendhal » Tue Jun 10, 2008 5:30 pm

Level: 50 Race: Halfling Class: Warrior
Age: 34 yrs / 16 mths Height: 42 inches Weight: 56 lbs
STR: 95 AGI: 100 DEX: 91 CON: 100
POW: 52 INT: 55 WIS: 72 CHA: 54
Armor Class: 62 (100 to -100) Magic Resistance: 0 percent
Hitroll: 9 Damroll: 3
Alignment: Neutral Good
Saving Throws: PAR[0] ROD[0] PET[0] BRE[0] SPE[0]
Wimpy: 10
Load carried: Not a problem

< 537h/537H 102v/102V >

Naked .. Ac 62 isn't the end of the world .. plus 540 hp is solid for a munchkin! plus we get extra attacks, can bash stuff nobody else can and look cute!!!

.. with my shitty gear i can get to 1k hps easy .. i think its a solid contender yet!
Gormal
Sojourner
Posts: 3917
Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2001 6:01 am
Location: A Whale's Vagina
Contact:

Re: Why elves are not the end-all tanks.

Postby Gormal » Tue Jun 10, 2008 6:00 pm

I updated the agi table to include halflings, I'll do humans for a baseline later and maybe something else. The dexterity really doesn't help you since it only affects riposte which I'm pretty sure can only land on a successful parry, so your strength deficiency hurts you there. The extra attacks do help you if you aren't evil and use scimitar/valhalla for the extra hp, but even then can hurt you as you're going to be chipping scales/stone on shielded mobs even more since you'll rarely get ward.
fobble
Sojourner
Posts: 143
Joined: Mon Aug 01, 2005 7:35 pm

Re: Why elves are not the end-all tanks.

Postby fobble » Tue Jun 10, 2008 7:30 pm

This is strictly goodrace tank choices? If not, I'd love to see Troll and Yuan-ti included in this dissemination.

(But excluding racial innate ability like troll regen and yuan scaleskin factor)


Edit: Oh and I forgot to mention weight/str factor of Gnome/Halfling hurts imo. Need +weight and sometimes +enlarge just to bash certain mobs in few zones while elves generally don't.
Gormal
Sojourner
Posts: 3917
Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2001 6:01 am
Location: A Whale's Vagina
Contact:

Re: Why elves are not the end-all tanks.

Postby Gormal » Tue Jun 10, 2008 8:04 pm

If you look at Sservis' table you can see that yuantis and trolls fall right in with gnomes/elves.

Elf=130
Yua=125
Gnome=120
Troll=115

If you want the exact numbers, feel free to do some 5th grade math and contribute to the thread.
User avatar
Shevarash
FORGER CODER
Posts: 2944
Joined: Fri Dec 29, 2000 6:01 am

Re: Why elves are not the end-all tanks.

Postby Shevarash » Tue Jun 10, 2008 8:59 pm

Gormal wrote:Awesome feedback. What about the actual AC caps and how much do your stats like strength affect your defensive skills?

Edit: What I mean is, where exactly does armor class go after we pass that invisible wall of -100. How precisely do spells affect it when we're stacking over a hundred ac from just those sources along with well over -150 from gear and stats. Also, does your overall attainable armor class increase with max_agi?


Let's define Armor Class first. Armor Class is the defensive bonus granted to you by equipment or spells. This is one of many defensive bonuses you can receive, and it is capped at -100. That means that if you were to wear -300 AC worth of armor on your body, only -100 of it is ever counted. That other -200 just gets discarded in the combat engine.

Agility provides another defensive bonus depending on the notch, which runs from around 0 to -30 for players. This modifier is displayed as an actual increase to AC in the "attributes" command. This is somewhat misleading though, since the two values are added separately. What this means to you, the player, is that you can receive a full -100 modifier from equipment/spell armor class in addition to the full -30 from agility. That -130 number will never be reported anywhere though, as the "attributes" command itself caps the value it displays at -100.

As for spells, if the spell affects AC directly (Armor, Energy Shield, etc) then it is just manipulating the AC you receive from equipment and is bound by the same limits. Other spells that affect your defensive ability indirectly (blur, displace) provide a defensive bonus that stacks with AC and hence is not affected by the -100 cap.

As for defensive skills, the bulk of the chance to defend is based on skill level, with ability scores making up roughly 15% of the total chance, using a L50 Human Warrior with max skills and 100 in the specific attribute as an example. The ability score bonus is more significant at lower levels but is quickly eclipsed as the skill level rises higher.
Shevarash -- Code Forger of TorilMUD
Gormal
Sojourner
Posts: 3917
Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2001 6:01 am
Location: A Whale's Vagina
Contact:

Re: Why elves are not the end-all tanks.

Postby Gormal » Tue Jun 10, 2008 9:09 pm

You're very confusing with the -30 and -100 modifiers. Can you cite some examples please? Show me the equations, I'm a big boy and can handle it. I'm confused because you say that agility can provide an extra 30 ac, but do you mean max_agi, because we can easily show a much larger change in ac from agi? Hell, on certain class/race combos you can gain 30+ from max_agi. How much is invisible, how much isn't?

Edit: I think I get what you're saying now, but how is this extra -30 calculated? And disregarding that, there is a RIDICULOUS difference between a high-agility race and a lower-agility one when it comes to tanking. Where is this agility going to that makes such a big difference? Does max_agi affect this as well?
User avatar
Shevarash
FORGER CODER
Posts: 2944
Joined: Fri Dec 29, 2000 6:01 am

Re: Why elves are not the end-all tanks.

Postby Shevarash » Tue Jun 10, 2008 9:48 pm

Ok, I'll try to explain. The ability score you see when you type "att" is your relative score. So if you're an elf with the maximum natural int it displays as 100. But that's a relative number - your absolute stat is 150, as that is the maximum for elves. When it comes to determining notch bonuses, it's your absolute stat that matters.

When the combat engine is calculating a hit, it takes the target's absolute agility score and looks up the defensive modifier for the notch that that value falls into. That number is then added to the total defensive score, on top of Armor Class.

Example agility modifiers:

Human with 100 AGI (100 absolute): -15 modifier
Elf with 100 AGI (130 absolute): -25 modifier
Ogre with 100 AGI (75 absolute): -4 modifier

By manipulating your racial maximum with +max_agi gear you can raise your agility score beyond what it is currently capped at, and hence fall into a higher agility notch to receive a better agility bonus.

Does that make sense?
Shevarash -- Code Forger of TorilMUD
Gormal
Sojourner
Posts: 3917
Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2001 6:01 am
Location: A Whale's Vagina
Contact:

Re: Why elves are not the end-all tanks.

Postby Gormal » Tue Jun 10, 2008 10:10 pm

Alright, that falls exactly in line with the stat tables we're currently working with and makes a lot of sense. I'd really like a little more detail into the combat engine with respect to agility, and more detail on where the notches are that put you into the >-100ac range as they obviously aren't the same ones that grant you ac as shown in the table.

Where does our effective ac notch and how can we calculate it?

How does agility precisely factor into (even that one calculation) defensively, and how can we calculate it?

Many of us are big on theorycrafting, and get a hardon at the thought of open information on what the characters we've been playing for over a decade are really doing.
Dalar
Sojourner
Posts: 4905
Joined: Sun Feb 25, 2001 6:01 am

Re: Why elves are not the end-all tanks.

Postby Dalar » Tue Jun 10, 2008 10:21 pm

Shevarash, can you confirm that -30 is the maximum for the defense modifier? This isn't true from my extensive testing.

This is my understanding. For the sake of me not having to argue with Jake anymore, can you verify any truths? Yes, I did read your posts.

Armor class is defined by spells + gear, and your agility modifies that value. When you type ATT, you see your armor class + spells + defensive modifier, but ATT does not report anything below -100. Also, the cap is not -30 for agility defensive modifier right? Elves should be able to reach -60 defensive modifier with 125 agility on character sheet (which is 155 absolute I think? I forget). This means your effective AC (as reported through the stat command that immortals can use) can go below the -100 ac cap a player
Last edited by Dalar on Tue Jun 10, 2008 10:44 pm, edited 2 times in total.
It will be fixed in Toril 2.0.
Aremat group-says 'tanks i highly suggest investing 20 silver in training weapons from cm to cut down on the losing scales to shield'
spunionring
Sojourner
Posts: 173
Joined: Sat Jan 19, 2008 11:17 pm
Contact:

Re: Why elves are not the end-all tanks.

Postby spunionring » Tue Jun 10, 2008 10:23 pm

does barkskin function as a normal ac raising spell?

ive heard that it raises 'natural armor' so it can go beyond the -100 cap, like with agi

Also, just to confirm what im reading, eq with armor bonuses is the exact same as eq with ac bonuses, yes?
Adriorn Darkcloak
Sojourner
Posts: 1292
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2003 7:11 pm

Re: Why elves are not the end-all tanks.

Postby Adriorn Darkcloak » Tue Jun 10, 2008 10:39 pm

So basically if any race has 100 agi, 200ac from armor, the only difference in 'tanks' would be their racial agi modifiers? Then you'd tack on any maxagi bonuses?
Llaaldara
Sojourner
Posts: 998
Joined: Fri Aug 16, 2002 5:01 am
Location: Dobluth Kyor

Re: Why elves are not the end-all tanks.

Postby Llaaldara » Wed Jun 11, 2008 10:58 pm

Sorry, just wanted to interject something, but not change the topic..

Best Thread Ever! True give and take feedback and dialogue between players and staff about the MUD.

I <3 This Thread!! =^)

(please continue)
Ashiwi
Sojourner
Posts: 4161
Joined: Thu Jun 14, 2001 5:01 am

Re: Why elves are not the end-all tanks.

Postby Ashiwi » Wed Jun 11, 2008 11:24 pm

Agreed, Llaal! Thumbs up to Shev and Gormie. That makes you two almost as cool as elves.

Almost.
Gormal tells you 'im a dwarven onion'
Gormal tells you 'always another beer-soaked layer'

Inama ASSOC:: 'though it may suit your fantasies to think so, i don't need oil for anything.'

Haley: Filthy lucre? I wash that lucre every day until it SHINES!
Gormal
Sojourner
Posts: 3917
Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2001 6:01 am
Location: A Whale's Vagina
Contact:

Re: Why elves are not the end-all tanks.

Postby Gormal » Wed Jun 11, 2008 11:25 pm

I've been trying to make more sense of how ac is calculated (disregarding the combat engine calculations), and if -130 is the cap, I suppose thats somewhat inline with ac gains you receive from agility. From 101 adjusted agility to 148 (114 for grey elves), you gain 30 bonus ac, however the next notch does give you ac. I just have no idea if your max_ac is still impacted beyond that point and if that ac is treated merely as normal. I guess what I'm asking is: Is the gain in AC we see as we notch agility a direct reflection of our gain in max_ac (max_ac being ac gained from anything beyond -100).

Even with that in mind, I think we need some testing on someone wearing exactly -100 ac, someone wearing -130 with and without agility bonuses, and someone wearing -150 or more ac with triggers running to collect data. Maybe the ac we see in our attributes screen is a converted value just like statistics too.
Dalar
Sojourner
Posts: 4905
Joined: Sun Feb 25, 2001 6:01 am

Re: Why elves are not the end-all tanks.

Postby Dalar » Wed Jun 11, 2008 11:39 pm

You guys realize this information has been around for the past 5 years right?

-130 is not the cap.

Wear 200 AC worth of gear/spells and then add in your ac bonus from your agility to determine it. Elves are the best because they have the highest absolute agi. HPs don't matter as much since you will rarely die from melee, especially now with blur potions and blur procs on items.

This is what I have been saying for the past 5 years, yet all of you Inames still don't listen. For example, a spectre (extremely high natural agility) can go past -160 (I forget the exact number) if you put gear on him and the proper spells (barkskin, protect undead, armor). Only downside is he's lvl 45, but you get the point. Agility ac bonus gain also diminishes by 1 as your absolute agility value goes higher and higher. Example, max agi notches, your naked AC goes from 92 x x 70 62 55 49 45 40.

I'd like to thank Nokie and the god whoever made him a myconid and sent him the stat command stats. Back in the DSR days.
It will be fixed in Toril 2.0.

Aremat group-says 'tanks i highly suggest investing 20 silver in training weapons from cm to cut down on the losing scales to shield'
Dalar
Sojourner
Posts: 4905
Joined: Sun Feb 25, 2001 6:01 am

Re: Why elves are not the end-all tanks.

Postby Dalar » Wed Jun 11, 2008 11:43 pm

Gormal wrote:I've been trying to make more sense of how ac is calculated (disregarding the combat engine calculations), and if -130 is the cap, I suppose thats somewhat inline with ac gains you receive from agility. From 101 adjusted agility to 148 (114 for grey elves), you gain 30 bonus ac, however the next notch does give you ac. I just have no idea if your max_ac is still impacted beyond that point and if that ac is treated merely as normal. I guess what I'm asking is: Is the gain in AC we see as we notch agility a direct reflection of our gain in max_ac (max_ac being ac gained from anything beyond -100).

Even with that in mind, I think we need some testing on someone wearing exactly -100 ac, someone wearing -130 with and without agility bonuses, and someone wearing -150 or more ac with triggers running to collect data. Maybe the ac we see in our attributes screen is a converted value just like statistics too.


Max AC = AC + DM

This game doesn't need the same theorycrafting WoW did.
It will be fixed in Toril 2.0.

Aremat group-says 'tanks i highly suggest investing 20 silver in training weapons from cm to cut down on the losing scales to shield'
Gormal
Sojourner
Posts: 3917
Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2001 6:01 am
Location: A Whale's Vagina
Contact:

Re: Why elves are not the end-all tanks.

Postby Gormal » Thu Jun 12, 2008 12:14 am

Then I just wanna hear Shev support what you're saying.
User avatar
Shevarash
FORGER CODER
Posts: 2944
Joined: Fri Dec 29, 2000 6:01 am

Re: Why elves are not the end-all tanks.

Postby Shevarash » Mon Jun 16, 2008 8:39 pm

Dalar wrote:Shevarash, can you confirm that -30 is the maximum for the defense modifier? This isn't true from my extensive testing.

This is my understanding. For the sake of me not having to argue with Jake anymore, can you verify any truths? Yes, I did read your posts.

Armor class is defined by spells + gear, and your agility modifies that value. When you type ATT, you see your armor class + spells + defensive modifier, but ATT does not report anything below -100. Also, the cap is not -30 for agility defensive modifier right? Elves should be able to reach -60 defensive modifier with 125 agility on character sheet (which is 155 absolute I think? I forget). This means your effective AC (as reported through the stat command that immortals can use) can go below the -100 ac cap a player


Let's get our terms straight here first. Defense Modifier is the sum of all of the modifiers that affect your defense. This includes AC, agility modifier, various positional modifiers, spell modifiers, etc. Agility modifies your total defense, not your AC. This is key to understand how it all works. Also, here's something interesting that may blow your mind: ATT currently reports double the agility bonus that you actually receive. For example, if you have -50 AC from pure armor, and a real AGI bonus of -25, ATT will report you as having -100 AC, when it should say -75 AC. I discovered this when researching the answer to these questions, and am considering fixing it to show the two numbers separately.

The theoretical maximum for the agility modifier is -47, but achieving this level is impossible for PCs and is actually attained by only one NPC race (any guesses?). I said -30 because that's on the high-end as achievable by players, but probably not the limit. I'd have to take a look at how much +max_agi one could possibly wear to tell you what the current maximum PC limit is.

As I alluded to above, there are several other modifiers that affect your overall defensive modifier, including positioning, status effects (such as blind, para), load carried, etc.
Shevarash -- Code Forger of TorilMUD
User avatar
Shevarash
FORGER CODER
Posts: 2944
Joined: Fri Dec 29, 2000 6:01 am

Re: Why elves are not the end-all tanks.

Postby Shevarash » Mon Jun 16, 2008 8:41 pm

spunionring wrote:does barkskin function as a normal ac raising spell?

ive heard that it raises 'natural armor' so it can go beyond the -100 cap, like with agi

Also, just to confirm what im reading, eq with armor bonuses is the exact same as eq with ac bonuses, yes?


Yes, it is a normal AC raising spell just like Armor/Energy Shield. It does not allow your AC to go below -100. And yes, the "Armor" bonus is functionally equivalent to the "AC" bonus on identify.
Shevarash -- Code Forger of TorilMUD
User avatar
Shevarash
FORGER CODER
Posts: 2944
Joined: Fri Dec 29, 2000 6:01 am

Re: Why elves are not the end-all tanks.

Postby Shevarash » Mon Jun 16, 2008 8:57 pm

Dalar wrote:
This is what I have been saying for the past 5 years, yet all of you Inames still don't listen. For example, a spectre (extremely high natural agility) can go past -160 (I forget the exact number) if you put gear on him and the proper spells (barkskin, protect undead, armor). Only downside is he's lvl 45, but you get the point. Agility ac bonus gain also diminishes by 1 as your absolute agility value goes higher and higher. Example, max agi notches, your naked AC goes from 92 x x 70 62 55 49 45 40.


Barkskin and Armor both modify armor class, protect undead is a separate defense modifier. It can effectively result in < -100 AC when stacked with -100 worth of armor, unlike the other two.

A spectre's maximum attainable defense modifier, before spells that are figured separately (prot undead, displacement) is -138. You can't blur immaterials,but there are other spells that will boost their defensive modifier from there.
Shevarash -- Code Forger of TorilMUD
Gormal
Sojourner
Posts: 3917
Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2001 6:01 am
Location: A Whale's Vagina
Contact:

Re: Why elves are not the end-all tanks.

Postby Gormal » Mon Jun 16, 2008 9:02 pm

Interesting. How much does agility impact the final DM? One thing you should note is that people have reported benefits from wearing armor that drops their reported armor class below -100. I'm guessing that if everything is working properly then this is a result of the false ac being displayed from agility, which means that even a naked human is displaying -15 more ac than they actually have, and a geared out elf is around -33. There have been (almost purely anecdotal) reports however, that wearing ac even beyond this noticeably affects your ability to tank. Its been speculated that the system has a glitch, but there hasn't been any extensive testing done to prove or disprove it.

I'd love att to show as much information as it could. I know that the final DM is based on a lot of situation things that only happen in combat, but more information would be great.
Dalar
Sojourner
Posts: 4905
Joined: Sun Feb 25, 2001 6:01 am

Re: Why elves are not the end-all tanks.

Postby Dalar » Mon Jun 16, 2008 9:31 pm

noob dwarf is noob
It will be fixed in Toril 2.0.

Aremat group-says 'tanks i highly suggest investing 20 silver in training weapons from cm to cut down on the losing scales to shield'
Gormal
Sojourner
Posts: 3917
Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2001 6:01 am
Location: A Whale's Vagina
Contact:

Re: Why elves are not the end-all tanks.

Postby Gormal » Mon Jun 16, 2008 9:59 pm

yer just jealous cause yer so asian downstairs
Thilindel
Sojourner
Posts: 3173
Joined: Sun Aug 31, 2003 9:09 pm
Location: Indianapolis

Re: Why elves are not the end-all tanks.

Postby Thilindel » Tue Jun 17, 2008 12:25 am

So does Scaleskin improve you beyond the -100 ?
Grundar tells you 'I took on the entire football team once. The only reason my mom knew later was because I had a runny nose'
User avatar
Shevarash
FORGER CODER
Posts: 2944
Joined: Fri Dec 29, 2000 6:01 am

Re: Why elves are not the end-all tanks.

Postby Shevarash » Tue Jun 17, 2008 12:31 am

Stone/Scales doesn't affect your to-hit chances, it absorbs attacks after they hit you.
Shevarash -- Code Forger of TorilMUD
spunionring
Sojourner
Posts: 173
Joined: Sat Jan 19, 2008 11:17 pm
Contact:

Re: Why elves are not the end-all tanks.

Postby spunionring » Tue Jun 17, 2008 12:45 am

Thilindel wrote:So does Scaleskin improve you beyond the -100 ?


Shevarash wrote:Stone/Scales doesn't affect your to-hit chances, it absorbs attacks after they hit you.


I believe thilindel is referring to the yuanti innate. Seeing as it gives an AC bonus, i assume it goes with eq's AC bonuses and does not go beyond -100 (wearing 200 pts)
User avatar
Shevarash
FORGER CODER
Posts: 2944
Joined: Fri Dec 29, 2000 6:01 am

Re: Why elves are not the end-all tanks.

Postby Shevarash » Tue Jun 17, 2008 2:52 am

Oh, my mistake. Yeah, it's just more armor class.
Shevarash -- Code Forger of TorilMUD
Inames
Sojourner
Posts: 177
Joined: Fri Nov 24, 2006 7:27 am

Re: Why elves are not the end-all tanks.

Postby Inames » Tue Jun 17, 2008 2:59 am

Dalar wrote:This is what I have been saying for the past 5 years, yet all of you Inames still don't listen.

i personally find this statement HIGHLY offensive, thank you very much... and i would appreciate it if you NEVER refer to me in this way again.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Shev, so am I correct in my understanding that you are saying that someone with -40ac from gear, plus barkskin and armor which would put them just past -100ac, or someone with 0ac, fire embody, barkskin, and armor, which should also put them just past -100ac would be just as well off as someone wearing -200ac worth of gear?

i just want to make sure because if this is true i could get away with losing half my AC gear and replacing it with high hp gear and be set for tanking with at least 100-200 more hp than i currently have plus some extra saves.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

but then if all this is true how could i deck out my dwarf warrior at lvl 50 in my hitter gear, have greater than -135 ac without bark and armor and get owned by a bugbear in CM when my elf at lvl 35 in the same gear with barkskin and armor could get -230 ac and barely ever drop below 80% of her hp killing the same mobs?
[Dru 50] Inames (Grey Elf)
[Rog 50] Ishiras (Grey Elf)
[Enc 50] Aremat (Grey Elf)
[War 50] Amori (Grey Elf)
[Ran 50] Aninen (Grey Elf)
[Ele 50] Itanul (Grey Elf)
[Inv 50] Aleadis (Grey Elf)
[Bar 50] Ashire (Grey Elf)
[Cle 50] Isila (Grey Elf)
My Deviant Art Page
Ragorn
Sojourner
Posts: 4732
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2001 6:01 am

Re: Why elves are not the end-all tanks.

Postby Ragorn » Tue Jun 17, 2008 4:00 am

I don't play, I'm just interested in the theory.

What I'd like to know is, what is the process for checking a hit? World of Warcraft uses a one-roll system, where parry/dodge/hit/miss/critical are all part of one one table. As you get more defense, the chance of being hit/critted go down (I dislike this system fundamentally... I don't like the idea of using defense to push crits off the table. That's a topic for another thread though, just putting that out there for the WOW people).

A lot of games use a two- or three-roll system. For example, one roll determines whether an attack hits or misses, and if you're hit, then you roll your chance to parry/dodge/evade in some way.

How does Toril determine if you're hit? Does it lump all the defenses onto one table, or are there two sets of rolls? Or something more complicated?
- Ragorn
Shar: Leave the moaning to the people who have real issues to moan about like rangers or newbies.
Corth: Go ask out a chick that doesn't wiggle her poon in people's faces for a living.
Gormal
Sojourner
Posts: 3917
Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2001 6:01 am
Location: A Whale's Vagina
Contact:

Re: Why elves are not the end-all tanks.

Postby Gormal » Tue Jun 17, 2008 5:16 am

Inames: Level of PC and NPC matter, read: thac0. As for getting made fun of, time to learn to toss some shit of your own buddy. That's the whole fun of talkin trash, yo!
Inames
Sojourner
Posts: 177
Joined: Fri Nov 24, 2006 7:27 am

Re: Why elves are not the end-all tanks.

Postby Inames » Tue Jun 17, 2008 7:59 am

you must be very tired gormal, cuz if you were awake enough to read my post you will have noticed i said that my level 50 dwarf warrior was getting owned, while my level 35 elf warrior was doing the owning, on the same mobs. (crafty/muscular bugbears)

now it is my understanding that the mob/player level difference plays a big part in hitting, so my elf, being much lower level than the mobs (9-11 levels lower) should have been getting hit ALOT more than my dwarf warrior (4-6 levels higher than the mobs). now if the major AC difference didnt have anything to do with it.... what did? are elves just that much better than dwarves at tanking? but then all this crap thats been said by shev about AC and stats differences has all been just that, crap... so whats going on here?
[Dru 50] Inames (Grey Elf)
[Rog 50] Ishiras (Grey Elf)
[Enc 50] Aremat (Grey Elf)
[War 50] Amori (Grey Elf)
[Ran 50] Aninen (Grey Elf)
[Ele 50] Itanul (Grey Elf)
[Inv 50] Aleadis (Grey Elf)
[Bar 50] Ashire (Grey Elf)
[Cle 50] Isila (Grey Elf)
My Deviant Art Page
Gormal
Sojourner
Posts: 3917
Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2001 6:01 am
Location: A Whale's Vagina
Contact:

Re: Why elves are not the end-all tanks.

Postby Gormal » Tue Jun 17, 2008 8:21 am

Definitely tired. Shev said that there's an agility modifier that is obviously quite large, exactly how much avoidance it provides is still the question at hand.
Thrand
Sojourner
Posts: 274
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2001 6:01 am

Re: Why elves are not the end-all tanks.

Postby Thrand » Thu Jun 19, 2008 3:24 pm

Hi
I'd like to know what protection from evil/good does if anything in regard to being
hit or not and if it stacks with anything or is canceled out if you have so much ac or not

Lopi
Thilindel
Sojourner
Posts: 3173
Joined: Sun Aug 31, 2003 9:09 pm
Location: Indianapolis

Re: Why elves are not the end-all tanks.

Postby Thilindel » Thu Jun 19, 2008 4:35 pm

may seem redundant but what about prot from fire if a fire ele is attacking even?

Prot from animals..etc
Grundar tells you 'I took on the entire football team once. The only reason my mom knew later was because I had a runny nose'
Gormal
Sojourner
Posts: 3917
Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2001 6:01 am
Location: A Whale's Vagina
Contact:

Re: Why elves are not the end-all tanks.

Postby Gormal » Thu Jun 19, 2008 4:41 pm

As I understand it, there's a check for protections when damage is calculated and you either have it or you don't. If the type of attack is elemental-based (including evil) then the appropriate protection spell provides a little mitigation. Protection from animals does not provide damage mitigation, it simply prevents low level animals from aggroing you.
flib
Sojourner
Posts: 322
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 11:14 pm
Location: Annapolis, MD

Re: Why elves are not the end-all tanks.

Postby flib » Fri Jun 20, 2008 4:35 pm

pretty fascinating read, good work.
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Re: Why elves are not the end-all tanks.

Postby kiryan » Tue Jun 24, 2008 3:27 am

did anyone mention crit avoidance based on agility? It's not all about the chance to get hit AC ect. As far as I'm aware, crits was a double whammy for Ogres, higher rate because of lower AC, less avoidance because of low agility.
Gormal
Sojourner
Posts: 3917
Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2001 6:01 am
Location: A Whale's Vagina
Contact:

Re: Why elves are not the end-all tanks.

Postby Gormal » Tue Jun 24, 2008 5:39 am

Shev mentioned an agility modifier that's factored in after AC, which explains why high-agility races are so tough. No specific mention of crit reduction has been brought up yet in this thread.
Thrand
Sojourner
Posts: 274
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2001 6:01 am

Re: Why elves are not the end-all tanks.

Postby Thrand » Tue Jun 24, 2008 4:46 pm

Thanks to the player that gave an educated guess as to the nature of pfe and pfg.

I'd still like to know what they do,
from someone who actually knows.

Lopi

Return to “T2 Gameplay Discussion Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests