 |
03/06/07, 4:45 AM
|
#351
|
|
Don Flamenco
|
Originally Posted by Quigon
Paladin talk makes me greatly confused. You were crushed with the equivalent of shield block up? What was your total block rating at the time? and avoidance including block would be well past 100%?
|
At the time, my total block+avoidance would be approximately 100.5% (hence why I suspect miscalculation) and block alone around 54.6%. Before changing my gear setup I should have been around 103% with standard buffs and never observed a crush under HS.
|
|
|
|
|
03/06/07, 4:50 AM
|
#352
|
|
Von Kaiser
|
Originally Posted by Arawethion
OP is pretty out-of-date at this point. I believe some Rogues discovered a while ago that their yellow attacks only work on two rolls.
As far as I know, though, all Mob vs. Player damage still works on one roll.
So, my best understanding is that 24% Block will behave exactly the same as 25% Block.
Tell me this: you still see Misses, Dodges, and Parries, with SB up, correct? 99-100% of swings don't actually end in "block."
|
That would just mean block is lower on the priority list, or if the 2 die theory does exist, that your unavoided attacks are the filtered to your block, which is 100%, thus a blocked attack.
Is there anyway(private server?) we can "hack" a warrior to have an insane avoidance number, to the point that instead of relying on near 100% block, we're relying on near 100% avoidance? Let's say 80% avoidance, 25% block. That should make you crushing immune, but if it is based only on blocked attacks, you'd still see 15% of unavoided(20%) attacks crush.
0.15x0.2 = 3%.
Rogue with a shield to EJ forums please, rogue with a shield, to EJ forums please.
|
|
|
|
|
03/06/07, 4:55 AM
|
#353
|
|
Not enough rage
Gnome Warrior
Argent Dawn (EU)
|
Edit: disregard
|
|
|
|
|
03/06/07, 5:01 AM
|
#354
|
|
Bald Bull
Tauren Warrior
Kil'Jaeden
|
PsiVen, so you're saying with less than 100% block, roughly 85%, as a paladin, you have never been crushed.
I'd say that is relatively reassuring, perhaps I'll go socket that belt I was looking at. It is strange how well outgoing damage is understood relative to incoming damage - I guess only the ones being destroyed by the mobs tend to care about it, as the other half just shout catchy things like "WTF He hit me for 27k" into Ventrilo.
Maybe I should gather some absurdly large log over the next week with less than 25% block.
|
|
|
|
|
03/08/07, 9:21 AM
|
#355
|
|
banned
Night Elf Rogue
Wrathbringer (EU)
|
Originally Posted by Redd
Is there anyway(private server?) we can "hack" a warrior to have an insane avoidance number
|
So called "private servers" are just a guess what is really happening on Blizzard's servers.
No one knows for real until some designers / programmers decide to say so.
|
|
|
|
03/08/07, 11:14 AM
|
#356
|
|
Don Flamenco
|
Sorry if this is a remedial question, but from reading the OP and the rest of the thread, I'm not fully understanding how to calculate the chances a mob will dodge my attack.
7. Dodge % (D)
For classes other than Rogues or Hunters:
D = X + Agi/Y + S + T
(X and Y are determined as in Crit%, II.A.5)
For Rogues and Hunters:
D = 2*(X + Agi/Y) + S + T
|
Does this hold when considering a mob's chance to dodge? If so, is the mob considered a Warrior? And how do you determine the mob's agility?
Or do mobs only have skill-based dodge S?
|
|
|
|
|
03/08/07, 1:12 PM
|
#357
|
|
<Druid Trainer> Emeritus
|
Originally Posted by Pater
Sorry if this is a remedial question, but from reading the OP and the rest of the thread, I'm not fully understanding how to calculate the chances a mob will dodge my attack.
Does this hold when considering a mob's chance to dodge? If so, is the mob considered a Warrior? And how do you determine the mob's agility?
Or do mobs only have skill-based dodge S?
|
Mobs don't actually have Agility. I believe the chance that you will be Dodged by a mob is simply (5 + S).
|
|
|
|
03/31/07, 8:25 PM
|
#358
|
|
Piston Honda
|
This isnt really an important question, but rather, just a curiosity of mine.
We know now that parrying an attack will shorten the time between your next swing, or so we've believed in the early past. Now, lets for the hell of it assume you had all of your melee DPS attacking a mob from the front, so that all of their attacks can now be parried as well. Would the mob being attacked in question turn into a flurry machine?
|
|
|
|
|
04/01/07, 6:26 AM
|
#359
|
|
Vula'jin the Void, blessed by the loa
|
Originally Posted by Eylirria
This isnt really an important question, but rather, just a curiosity of mine.
We know now that parrying an attack will shorten the time between your next swing, or so we've believed in the early past. Now, lets for the hell of it assume you had all of your melee DPS attacking a mob from the front, so that all of their attacks can now be parried as well. Would the mob being attacked in question turn into a flurry machine?
|
Yes, all those parries would increase the mob's DPS.
|
|
|
|
|
04/01/07, 6:34 AM
|
#360
|
|
Piston Honda
Tauren Druid
Vek'nilash (EU)
|
Originally Posted by Quigon
PsiVen, so you're saying with less than 100% block, roughly 85%, as a paladin, you have never been crushed.
I'd say that is relatively reassuring, perhaps I'll go socket that belt I was looking at. It is strange how well outgoing damage is understood relative to incoming damage - I guess only the ones being destroyed by the mobs tend to care about it, as the other half just shout catchy things like "WTF He hit me for 27k" into Ventrilo.
Maybe I should gather some absurdly large log over the next week with less than 25% block.
|
I was tanking the Magtheridon trash with my Fury specced warrior, roughly 20%ish block, got crushed while having SB up.
::Edit:: Got about 11% Parry and 16% Dodge aswell. 491 defense.
|
[04:04:29] <Malan> Kaubel just laid the smack down in the the blizzcon thread
[04:05:07] <Kaubel> fucking idiots. i need to go on a banning rampage and put things right once and for all.
[04:05:20] <Kaubel> our forums are infested with pussy.
|
|
|
04/01/07, 10:04 AM
|
#361
|
|
Piston Honda
Blood Elf Paladin
Mal'Ganis
|
Originally Posted by Vulajin
Yes, all those parries would increase the mob's DPS.
|
Are you sure about this? The original question itnerests me...It might mean having a much slower weapon might be beneficial (for say a paladin tanking weapon who doesnt rely on speed for heroic strike).
Anyone know about this?
|
|
|
|
|
04/01/07, 10:54 AM
|
#362
|
|
banned
Night Elf Rogue
Wrathbringer (EU)
|
Test it.
Grab your self a fast, low damage weapon and start beating mobs.
Type /combatlog and after some minutes, check the average time between the mob's attacks. Then look for a parry, and note down how much time passed between these two attacks.
I did so when I tested if parrying decreased the time between attacks for my warrior (it does), but I didn't think about looking at the mob.
|
|
|
|
04/01/07, 11:26 AM
|
#363
|
|
Piston Honda
|
Originally Posted by Nutron
Are you sure about this? The original question itnerests me...It might mean having a much slower weapon might be beneficial (for say a paladin tanking weapon who doesnt rely on speed for heroic strike).
Anyone know about this?
|
Well, if you exceed 2.0 speed you'd be missing out on reckoning charges, right? But if missing one charge is irrelevant in a certain scenario, and you're dealing with a really hard hitting mob, then it definetaly gets interesting.
|
|
|
|
|
04/01/07, 12:33 PM
|
#364
|
|
Von Kaiser
|
I've done extensive testing on the 'mob parries increases its attack speed' in the past, and have found that yes, it does work in exactly the same way as with players.
By constructing a simple mod that filters out parries and the mobs swing speed, using time stamps, i could see that their attack speed increased markedly. It came to the point in Naxx where i (as MT) would die, and look back through my combat log and go "hit hit crushing *Parried attack* hit" and that last, faster hit would be enough burst damage to kill me.
It got to the point where i effectively banned people from attacking the boss from the front (and even on patchwerk hunters had to position themselves so that when they sent their pet in, it attacked from behind.)
|
|
|
|
|
04/01/07, 6:27 PM
|
#365
|
|
Glass Joe
Dwarf Warrior
Turalyon (EU)
|
Based on the quote from a CM that states how weapon skill drastically reduces the chance to be parried by an enemy, consider the following scenario.
With enough +skill to totally negate the enemy's chance of parrying you, you in turn prevent the enemy from resetting its swing as a result of parrying your attack, which would decrease its auto attack damage by say 5% over the fight (from the tanks attacks)?
|
|
|
|
|
04/01/07, 6:41 PM
|
#366
|
|
Piston Honda
|
Originally Posted by Yussef
Based on the quote from a CM that states how weapon skill drastically reduces the chance to be parried by an enemy, consider the following scenario.
With enough +skill to totally negate the enemy's chance of parrying you, you in turn prevent the enemy from resetting its swing as a result of parrying your attack, which would decrease its auto attack damage by say 5% over the fight (from the tanks attacks)?
|
Wouldnt that amount of +skill equate to something like +28 weapon skill (378) (not the rating, i dont know the conversion top of my head) to not be parried?
|
|
|
|
|
04/01/07, 7:09 PM
|
#367
|
|
Bald Bull
Night Elf Druid
Stormreaver
|
Would take 25 weapon skill with the numbers he gave us (0.6% parry reduced per skill and boss mobs appear to have ~15% parry rate).
25 Weapon Skill would also remove 2.5% dodge and 5% miss so thats not too bad and would only take 97.5 Weapon Skill Rating.
Basically if Blizzard was to itemize weapon skill across a variety of item pieces instead of only here and there it would be easy to hit.
I mean if a druid wants they can reach +84 Feral Combat Skill Rating. Only problem the only tanking item its actually itemized is the Earthwarden which you hopefully can replace with the SSC staff as fast as possible.
Edit: Its important to stop those parries not because it reduces damage by 5% because it drastically increases the burst/spike damage on the tank.
|
|
|
|
|
04/10/07, 9:24 AM
|
#368
|
|
Von Kaiser
|
I was tanking Fathomlord the other day and noticed that i received a crushing blow with shield block up. My base block % was at around 24% so up to 99% with shield block active. I also had around 15% dodge/parry. I guess the only things that i can conclude from this are either block/crushing and parry/dodge are on different rolls, or that there was something a bit buggy going on (as my shield block wore off a split second after the crush according to my logs). I managed to get a screenshot of it as well
|
|
|
|
|
04/10/07, 9:31 AM
|
#369
|
|
Disharmonious
Dwarf Paladin
Lightbringer
|
Originally Posted by world
I was tanking Fathomlord the other day and noticed that i received a crushing blow with shield block up. My base block % was at around 24% so up to 99% with shield block active. I also had around 15% dodge/parry. I guess the only things that i can conclude from this are either block/crushing and parry/dodge are on different rolls, or that there was something a bit buggy going on (as my shield block wore off a split second after the crush according to my logs). I managed to get a screenshot of it as well
|
How close are we talking here? Is it possible that SB just got misordered in the combat log? Did you scan up and check to see if that was really 3rd hit in 5 seconds possibly?
If you're getting crushed through SB that's certainly interesting (though some of the old rules -do- seem to be gone...) but I know I'm pretty curious about it.
|
|
|
|
|
04/10/07, 10:08 AM
|
#370
|
|
Von Kaiser
|
Hmm, the misorder is probably the most likely explanation. Looking at the screenshot, unfortunately i didnt scroll up enough to see when i had first cast shield block, but I have screenshot information from 5:01:26: (Just showing relevent data)
5:01:27: Fathom-Lord hits you for 3291 (255 blocked)
5:01:30: Fathom-Lord attacks. You dodge
5:01:32: Fathom-Lord hits you for 4192 (crushing)
5:01:32: Shield block fades from you
The latest i could have activated shield block would have been at 5:01:26, so that gives it 6 seconds until it fades.
The thing is that I'm always interested in the data gathering side of WoW, and am always checking logs for various reasons, but this is the first time I've come across this.
|
|
|
|
|
04/10/07, 11:28 AM
|
#371
|
|
King Hippo
Night Elf Warrior
Antonidas (EU)
|
Were you drinking a pot at this moment?
|
|
|
|
|
04/10/07, 2:05 PM
|
#372
|
|
Von Kaiser
|
I could well have been, but ive got no way of knowing. I never knew that drinking pots messed up your defenses O_o. Always thought it was just an animation
|
|
|
|
|
04/10/07, 11:13 PM
|
#374
|
|
Glass Joe
Undead Priest
Destromath (EU)
|
Originally Posted by world
Hmm, the misorder is probably the most likely explanation. Looking at the screenshot, unfortunately i didnt scroll up enough to see when i had first cast shield block, but I have screenshot information from 5:01:26: (Just showing relevent data)
5:01:27: Fathom-Lord hits you for 3291 (255 blocked)
5:01:30: Fathom-Lord attacks. You dodge
5:01:32: Fathom-Lord hits you for 4192 (crushing)
5:01:32: Shield block fades from you
The latest i could have activated shield block would have been at 5:01:26, so that gives it 6 seconds until it fades.
The thing is that I'm always interested in the data gathering side of WoW, and am always checking logs for various reasons, but this is the first time I've come across this.
|
I recieved this message from Satrina who is running this homepage: http://evilempireguild.org/guides/
I asked him about this screenshot: http://img100.imageshack.us/img100/613/crit23qw4.jpg
The shield block and crushing happened in the same second by the timestamps.
Slouken in the UI forums has already told us that the order things appear in the combat log in these cases is not guaranteed to be the order the events actually occurred in on the server. Almost certainly, on the server side the crushing blow happened the moment before shield block went up.
|
|
|
|
|
04/11/07, 2:11 AM
|
#375
|
|
Don Flamenco
|
I seem to be reading in other threads in this forum that there is now debate about whether there is truly a one-roll system, or if it's two-roll for special attacks (or perhaps I'm misunderstanding the debate). Can someone give a quick summary of the status on that?
|
|
|
|
|
|