Registered User
Nbr post: 3
Register: 12/14/04
|
|
Posted: 11/17/06, 3:32 AM
|
|
|
Tanks, AC then HP.
Int casters and priests, Mana then HP.
Melee-casting DPS, HP then Mana.
Melee DPS, HP then AC
|
|
|
|
Registered User
Nbr post: 4
Register: 8/14/04
|
|
Posted: 11/17/06, 4:45 AM
|
|
|
For Warrior / SK / Pally
AC then Hps
Also, is there anyway that you can have the class and server saved when you do a search. This was a nice tool / feature that was saved on eqrankings instead of having to scroll to my server and select it and my class everytime. If not no big deal was just a nice feature.
|
|
|
|
Registered User
Nbr post: 79
Register: 5/17/03
|
|
Posted: 11/17/06, 4:56 AM
|
|
|
I think basing a character's ranking on any single stat is in all but a few cases not really going to give you any clearer idea, for a tank his AC might be the best indication of his ability to mitigate damage, but he/she also needs vital AA to be taken into account along with that.
Not to put too fine a point on it but no current ranking system could fairly represent a character, guildleaders/recruiters for guilds have varying criteria, raiding guilds that would require a magelo or similar profile to use as a guide to player's character's assests don't look at just ac for example, they look at the gear itself to see where that player has raided what mobs they have hit to get it, what their aa are & where they've been spent, etc etc it's not a simple process.
If you want to create a ranking system that has a better "indicator" of a player's "power level", you are on the right track asking for which stats are most important to a class, however it really depends how deeply you want to go, if it's possible to develop on that idea & assign points to stats based on their "value" to that particular class, you also have to take into account the caps in place for certain things...for example my toon has 170+ accuracy, but the cap is 150, so after the cap in a stat has been reached no further points could be ascribed to it.
To give an idea of what I mean, lets say that you have a sliding scale for points you would ascribe to the top ten stats for a class, using a tank as an example. (i'd get the classes themselves to vote on this list but a top 10 attributes seems a "standard" that could be used to develop a new "power level" ranking system.
Purely hypothetical list.
Warrior.
10 AC
9 HP
8 def aa (per "tier" of avoidance aa)
7 mitigation aa (as above)
6 shielding
5 avoidance (% mod on gear)
4 weapon ratio (maybe aggro could be decided as a component of this "top ten" for wars, but thats a big subject by itself)
3 spellshield/dotshield
2 stun resist
1 offensive aa
For a Berserker it'd probably look like:
Again, purely hypothetical.
10 Weapon ratio (anything over 1:1 gains 10 per point, divisible by way of each 0.1 gains 1 point maybe)
9 Attack
8 Accuracy
7 Crit multiplier AA (per tier)
6 Double attack AA (per tier, eg ferocity)
5 Flurry AA
4 HP
3 spellshield/dotshield
2 defensive aa/mitigation aa
1 strikethrough aa / worn mod.
Anyway that's my opinion.
|
|
|
Registered User
Nbr post: 5
Register: 6/18/02
|
|
Posted: 11/17/06, 6:15 AM
|
|
|
Wizard: 1st = AA, 2nd = MANA
With Patient Harvest effectively giving a 6K boost to our burst damage mana pools, it is more important IMHO how much damage you can do with your mana rather than how much of it you actually have. HP and AC are irrelevant for us as far as ranking is concerned; it's all about the damage, particularly burst.
|
|
|
|
Registered User
Nbr post: 50
Register: 11/11/01
|
|
Posted: 11/17/06, 8:47 AM
|
|
|
Magician:
HP then AA (Mana is never an issue for a raiding mage)
Shaman:
HP then AA
Warrior:
AC then HP
Druid:
HP then Mana ? not 100% sure here
Necro:
HP then AA
Berserker:
HP then AA
Beastlord:
HP then AA
That is what i have in toons... mind you, all of them are from the view of a raider, casuals will have different needs.
|
Oliadar, Level 70 Magician of Undefined, The Nameless
Leileden, Level 67 Shaman of Undefined, The Nameless
Xiana, Level 66 Cleric of Undefined, The Nameless
Leilor, Level 53 Warrior of Undefined, The Nameless
|
|
Registered User
Nbr post: 75
Register: 3/2/02
|
|
Registered User
Nbr post: 75
Register: 3/2/02
|
|
Posted: 11/17/06, 9:18 AM
|
|
|
Tanks should be ranked by "tank rating", which is calculated as follows:
shielding x 90 (up to max of 35 shielding) + avoidance x 18 (up to max of 100 avoidance) + AC x 6 + hp = tank rating
This adequately factors in the effects of shielding, avoidance, and ac on a tank's performance, and is based off of parses and db/di calculations. See evilgamer.net/forums for more discussion on shielding and relating it to other tanking stats (hint: search "shielding")
Alternately, you could just assume that any tank worth a damn is gonna max out shielding and avoidance, and then rank them based off of AC, with hp (or aa's or hp+mana – see above post) used to break ties.
-Bolas
|
# http://eq.magelo.com/profile/429220
|
|
Registered User
Nbr post: 1
Register: 2/20/02
|
|
Posted: 11/17/06, 12:05 PM
|
|
|
For clerics I'd suggest, if it's doable, to use HP+Mana first. For second it can be Mana, or HP, leading toward Mana myself.
The reasoning for Mana > HP is that at the top of the list you will see raiding clerics. For them, in my opinion, a minimum of HP and AA will be required, but more HP or AA does not translate into better efficiency like Mana does.
For clerics that don't raid and mostly group, I'd say HP first then AA, but they don't show at the top of the list.
It depends on your audience I guess. People that like to appear on ranking will be raiders, and people looking for clerics in a ranking list will most likely be looking for raiders as well.
|
|
|
|
Registered User
Nbr post: 91
Register: 10/31/01
|
|
Posted: 11/17/06, 12:52 PM
|
|
|
Bard
HP - > AC
Or if feasible
HP+AC/2 -> ATK
|
[Dyfrin|javascript:channelProfile("eq",26510)]
Half-Elf Lyricist
|
|
Registered User
Nbr post: 1
Register: 6/10/02
|
|
Posted: 11/17/06, 12:56 PM
|
|
|
Shaman = Hp > Hp regen
Second really isn't that important mana, ac would both work just as well. I just happen to be a huge regen fan least on my shaman.
|
|
|
|
Registered User
Nbr post: 16
Register: 2/5/02
|
|
Posted: 11/17/06, 4:01 PM
|
|
|
Enchanter should be
first HP
then Mana .
HP has ever been our primary stat, possibly because our mana using stats are nerfed to near non existence 
|
Wolja Ladaggio, 85 Chanter, Terror Australis, The Rathe.
|
|
Premium User
Nbr post: 51
Register: 10/10/01
|
|
Posted: 11/17/06, 6:19 PM
|
|
|
Ranger HP->AC
SK AC->HP
Shaman HP->Mana
Cleric Mana->AA
|
|
|
|
Registered User
Nbr post: 1
Register: 10/18/01
|
|
Posted: 11/17/06, 8:36 PM
|
|
|
I'd say:
AC then hp for WAR/PAL/SHD
hp then...AA? for MNK/ROG/BER (not sure what a good secondary sort order would be for them)
hp then mana for everyone else
Specifically my vote is for hp then mana for druids, clerics, and enchanters (the three main classes that I play).
|
|
|
|
Registered User
Nbr post: 26
Register: 4/21/02
|
|
Posted: 11/17/06, 9:51 PM
|
|
|
I think you guys should try and broaden your rank values. Everyone is interested in Hp/Mana, maybe even endurance, but others also wanna check AC, Attack and Resists...would it be hard to have all six available? 
As a bst I look for HP then Mana and then Attack. As a druid I look for HP/Mana or vice versa.
|
|
|
|
Registered User
Nbr post: 12
Register: 4/14/03
|
|
Posted: 11/17/06, 11:59 PM
|
|
|
DRUID suggested ranking = HP.
There are some druids who have a mana preference, but most druids wouldn't sacrifice hp for mana.
|
|
|
|
