Registered User
Nbr post: 32
Register: 2/12/02
|
|
Posted: 12/4/06, 7:55 PM
|
|
|
Well the round table came up with values, but I am not totally sure they are always really the ones to look at when checking for gear of an applicant.
Reason behind this: I don't dispute the value of AC on paladins (only a fool would do that), but when I look into the rankings one can see the leading Paladins almost exclusively come from not top-notch guilds (no offense), still decent guilds. the reason behind this is that AC-augments are rarely raid-augments (almost exclusively group) and that the armor with highest AC-value is the DON-Armor with Last Blood Augs, which aren't state of the art in other regards as AC alone. Bottom line: many of the people with a bit less AC but much higher HP are "better geared" thus (from my point of view) more interesting when regarding all shapes (mods, resists, effects, clickies etc.).
I stronlgy recommend a mixed calculation of AC/HP on knights as suggested in the thread, as to me the AC-firsf ranking does not provide a view on the "best of the best".
Once again, I don't want to insult anyone or dispute the sheer value of AC, I just look at the profiles of those paladins leading in that category and at their guilds and those thoughts come.
I admit my knowledge on other classes is not high enough to try to judge them, but I suppose it might be the same on other classes also, so maybe a more complex way to have this "ranking" done would help.
Just my 2 cp, maybe I am in a minority in this 
EDIT: Feel free to move this to the suggestion-section if needed, just thought I would put it here because of the sticky.
|
|
|
Advisor
Nbr post: 5271
Register: 11/14/01
|
|
Posted: 12/5/06, 5:05 AM
|
|
|
|
In other words: you would like to see different filtering schemes, depending on if you're looking at a Raid environment or a Non-Raid environment. The idea has merit; not sure how easy such a thing would be to implement, however.
|
|
|
|
Registered User
Nbr post: 66
Register: 12/23/02
|
|
Posted: 12/5/06, 9:05 AM
|
|
|
Just actually looked at the ranking thing as I'll never really use it. You might want to add Endurance to the drop down list. It was completely ignored in the round robin you had, but for example a monk's dps is going to depend somewhat on their endurance pool. For example if they are constantly pulling and use DF or CSF every time they are fighting and it pops then they are going to run out of endurance eventually which drops their dps by more than 40. Also depending on what era content you are pulling it can also directly effect that at various levels. Also, the tanking ability of Warriors is tied to endurance just like the tanking abilities of Knights is tied somewhat to their mana. I think all those tanks who want AC first don't realize the fact that they are going to have less AC than people who have more than 7-9k less hp than them.
Addition of various stats together to get an overall picture would be best. Though for some stats you would need to equate one to the other, or otherwise you will have as was mentioned above high hp tanks with very low AC being considered better than other tanks with less hp but more reasonable AC. You would have to have an arbitrary equvialent for conversion between HP and AC or whatever 2 stats you are combining. I mean is a 15k tank with 1600 AC really better than a 14k tank with 2500AC? I would say no, but only adding them together would say it was.
I just think there should be 3 or even 4 ranking things you pick from the drop down menu. The primary stat, secondary, tertiary (if desired), and tiebreaker. The 2nd and 3rd stats would be converted via formula into the primary stat, then the 3 values then have the primary be worth 2x it's value, 2nd 1.5x its value, and 3rd just its value, and then all 3 added together. The tiebreaker would then be used in case of ties inthe calculated number. This would be a way to rank for a variety of stats without each stat totally ignoring the others.and just using them to break ties.
You'd also have the fix the problem with Magelo ignoring that their are caps on how much shielding, accuracy, avoidance, and such that you can have.
|
|
|
|
Registered User
Nbr post: 32
Register: 2/12/02
|
|
Posted: 12/9/06, 5:36 PM
|
|
|
I meant one should in fact build a quotient from the 2 main stats, built upon a discussion among that class.
Example (Paladin): Tank-Quotient = (5 * AC + HP)/2.
Explanation: AC in itself has a much higher value than HP so I set it at 5. Others may say 6 or 4 were a better number, I just took 5 as it seems appropriate and easy to caluclate to me (1 K HP = 200 AC)- After adding both values I devide them by 2 as I took 2 values to build the quotient.
This would even open up the way to more complex rankings later on (for premium users maybe?) like adding in resists or mana/endurance depending on class.
I know this still can't be "THE" solution (as there can#t be such a thing), but to me it would look more appropraite.
|
|
|
Registered User
Nbr post: 84
Register: 4/21/03
|
|
Posted: 12/10/06, 2:28 AM
|
|
|
|
Could we get some of the bugs and missing features get fixed first (e.g. alt profiles, guild tools etc.) before spending time installing some rather esoteric stats filtering options? While those idea may be interersting to some folks, I think more people would be more interested to see the rather mundane stuff working.
|
|
|
|
Registered User
Nbr post: 75
Register: 3/2/02
|
|
Registered User
Nbr post: 75
Register: 3/2/02
|
|
Posted: 12/10/06, 12:04 PM
|
|
|
>Reason behind this: I don't dispute the value of AC on paladins (only a fool would do that), but when I look into the rankings one can see the leading Paladins almost exclusively come from not top-notch guilds (no offense), still decent guilds. the reason behind this is that AC-augments are rarely raid-augments (almost exclusively group) and that the armor with highest AC-value is the DON-Armor with Last Blood Augs, which aren't state of the art in other regards as AC alone. Bottom line: many of the people with a bit less AC but much higher HP are "better geared" thus (from my point of view) more interesting when regarding all shapes (mods, resists, effects, clickies etc.).
>I stronlgy recommend a mixed calculation of AC/HP on knights as suggested in the thread, as to me the AC-firsf ranking does not provide a view on the "best of the best".
Once again, I don't want to insult anyone or dispute the sheer value of AC, I just look at the profiles of those paladins leading in that category and at their guilds and those thoughts come.
>I admit my knowledge on other classes is not high enough to try to judge them, but I suppose it might be the same on other classes also, so maybe a more complex way to have this "ranking" done would help.
Basically, AC measures how much skill the paladin has in choosing the best gear, whereas HP measures how far along in progression the paladin's guild is at the time.
The fundamental problem is that many paladins in high end guilds have been choosing gear and augs based off of the wrong stats for quite a while. Which explains why paladins in guilds that aren't as far along in progression are ranked higher than those that are farther along.
You can still sort by HP if you're a premium member. But the usefulness of the paladin is more cloesly tied to AC than to HP, in my opinion.
It's quite easy to get high hp with low ac – just raid a lot with a guild and always choose the highest hp gear and augs. However to get high ac, you have to not only choose wisely in raid gear but also put in the effort in one-group situations to get the ac augs. It's very tough to get high ac without also getting high hp – you won't see people with over 4k ac unbuffed that don't also have around 14k hp – which ends up being over 19k hp and 4.5k ac buffed, more than enough hp for anything, and much more valueable hp because the ac is there to make the hp count.
The end results for going all out hp vs all out ac is shown in this thread here:
http://www.evilgamer.net/forums/showthread.php?t=1712
Clearly going all out ac is a better choice, based on the analysis shown.
|
# http://eq.magelo.com/profile/429220
|
|
Registered User
Nbr post: 32
Register: 2/12/02
|
|
Posted: 12/10/06, 5:21 PM
|
|
|
a) I never doubted the value of AC, I also said 1:5 was a proposition, not the actual number (there is no THE number in fact from my point of view).
b) I will stay to the point that everyone going ONLY on 1 stat to show himself on topslot in any statistic (be it HP or AC as tank) is overall doing a worse performance. And yes, this counts also for those AC-maniacs who sacrifice mods and such for that last bit of AC).
c) No objection in regards to shielding/avoidance and such, but that's obsolete in high end anyway as those stats are rather easy to obtain as a tank class.
>Basically, AC measures how much skill the paladin has in choosing the best gear, whereas HP >measures how far along in progression the paladin's guild is at the time.
d) Choosing a 25 AC-augment over a AC 15 HP 180 (or 200) to me shows NOT a more skilled way to distribute loot, but apparently to Bolas, it does *shrug. Everyone to his own liking
Close this thread please, indeed not worth it.
|
|
|
Registered User
Nbr post: 75
Register: 3/2/02
|
|
Posted: 12/10/06, 8:31 PM
|
|
|
a) I never doubted the value of AC, I also said 1:5 was a proposition, not the actual number (there is no THE number in fact from my point of view).
You are correct, there is no THE number, and the reason for this is that the value of ac varies with the mob's attack and the value of hp's varies depending on if the mob has a dd proc or an aoe.
b) I will stay to the point that everyone going ONLY on 1 stat to show himself on topslot in any statistic (be it HP or AC as tank) is overall doing a worse performance. And yes, this counts also for those AC-maniacs who sacrifice mods and such for that last bit of AC).
Not necessarily. The current shd with the top hp also has max'd out avoidance, shielding, spellshield, and dot shield. And several tanks in the top tier of AC also have max'd out shielding and avoidance, notably Brael and myself.
I agree that sacrificing shielding or avoidance for AC is a mistake, but sacrificing other things is debatable as to which is better.
c) No objection in regards to shielding/avoidance and such, but that's obsolete in high end anyway as those stats are rather easy to obtain as a tank class.
It's not obsolete, since frequently you have to make decisions about those stats vs either ac or hp. It's important to keep shielding and avoidance max'd, and sacrificing either of those to increase either ac or hp is a mistake.
I'd like to see a filter where you could display ONLY profiles that have max shielding/avoidance, and filter out those that have made foolish sacrifices to gain some other stat.
d) Choosing a 25 AC-augment over a AC 15 HP 180 (or 200) to me shows NOT a more skilled way to distribute loot, but apparently to Bolas, it does *shrug. Everyone to his own liking
Realistically, nobody's going to make that choice. Even people that value 1 ac at 10 hp will clearly see that 15 ac 180 hp is better than 25 ac.
But they do frequently have to make the choice between 20 ac aug or 90 hp/mana aug, and many will make the wrong choice there.
-Bolas
|
# http://eq.magelo.com/profile/429220
|
|
