Minimum Deflection Chance vs. Shield Protection Value

Vinka@Antonia Bayle wrote:

You could try but it would be impossible for the SK to avoid what he did with 50% strikethrough. Personally I like the 25% number on this one even though it could be 15% too RNG probably gives 5% either way.

Bruener wrote:

Its not 36% strikethough Bruener. You have to look at the bigger picture here if he did 36% strikethrough the SK would have to be avoiding like 85% of attacks.

BChizzle wrote:

Hmmmm not sure where I went wrong with my math than...because I used the same exact Formula that Vinka was using.
I mean 36% strike-thru from a mob onto somebody that has 34% uncontested block sounds about right to me to end up having an actual block value of 19%. His actual block difference is 55% less than his uncontested numbers and I could easily see how mob level made up the 19% difference.
I guess I am wondering how you are coming up with the number that he would have to avoid 85% of attacks to come up with 36% strike thru?

Vinka@Antonia Bayle wrote:

Thought I would post the numbers that I changed to show how I came up with the different value using Vinka's equations.
Now reversing the numbers into the equation 34 - (.35*34) = 22.1% actual block versus an even level mob with that much strike-thru. Actual number was 19.14% so 2.96% less block avoidance due to mob level/skills. Add in the difference in parry avoidance and mobs actual advantage of wep skills/level is 5.1%

Bruener's math looks fine to me *IF* the SK actually had 34% block in offensive gear. Your SK would have to have a block chance of 62% to have 34 block with the Arc Knight Towershield though, which seems really unlikely in offensive gear. He'd get 23% block chance from his shield, which would leave 39 block chance from other pieces of gear.
I think that's highly unlikely in offensive gear.
It would be an interesting project to calculate strikethrough values for a bunch of high end mobs. The main problem is that due to RNG-ness you'd have to get a pretty big sample size to have a really accurate representation of things.

Bruener wrote:

It is very simple and Vinka's formula takes less examples into account and is more influenced by RNG. Strikethrough procs on any successful avoidance check, as far as we know that includes avoidance lends from a cleric/bard/tank so if you take the total amount avoided and move backwards you can work it out. The tank avoided 55.47% of attacks so in order for your 36% to be correct you just work it backwards.
Its a little closer to 86.5% avoidance actually not 85% but you get the picture. Now I don't know about how Cory tanks but from my experience on my monk I usually avoid 70-75% in raids with my immunity to strikethrough, however that is also with some huge avoidance buffs that really end up messing with the numbers as I usually end up with artificially crazy high riposte due to tsunami. True that I could probably pump my avoidance higher at the cost of mit but that would just end up killing me. It is fair to say Plates usually avoid around 60-65% in raids so immunity to strikethrough makes about a 10% difference thats where I get my 10% number from. Funny that number has stayed the same since last expansion I had about a 10% difference from my plates as well the only real difference I see is that my temps actually work.
EDIT: Ill make it simple for you
Avoidancewithstrikethrough = Avoidance-(avoidance*strikethrough%)

Bruener wrote:

Just a note--you're neglecting to bear in mind that block is calculated after parry, so even if you 34% uncontested block on a mob that has 0% strikethrough you would not expect to see 34% block in your avoidance reports. Only the attacks that didn't make it past parry have a chance to be blocked.
This is the math you should have done if you were trying to work that backwards:
91.2*.34=31.01 expected block
31.01-.35*34=
31.01-11.9=19.11<--very close to 19.14
Also, we only counted uncontested sources of avoidance in these calculations, under the assumption that the SK got diddly squat from any other sources. That 2.96% less from mob level/skills is just the skew from parry being reported first.

BChizzle wrote:

By the logic of this formula you would only see a 7.5% difference in avoidance between you and your plate tanks, not 10%. If I'm understanding you correctly, it seems like you're saying that there's no difference in the uncontested block between you and your plate tank, and that all the difference comes from strikethrough, so they would be doing 75% instead of 65% without it. But if you solve that formula with those numbers...
65=75-(75*S)
10=75S
S=13.3%
Now, I'm not sure that the core assumptions there are true, but there's an issue with your math. What you mean to say is that strikethrough causes a plate tank's avoidance to drop by 10, which is very different from the stat strikethrough being 10%

Vinka@Antonia Bayle wrote:

I have said the difference in avoidance due to immune to strikethrough is around 10% you can't exact science continually fluctuating variables this all you can do it look at what a plate generally does and look at what a brawler generally does, do you or don't you agree the difference is usually around 10%, even Bruener if he goes over his stuff where he can compare him to Cory can see it. Immunity to strikethrough makes around a 10% difference.
EDIT: All you can do it look at the total avoidance and make a general assessment because there are so many factors, does the brawler have higher avoidance or does the plate etc etc etc. One thing to come out of this would be to find out if avoidance lends do in fact get struckthrough, you could probably find that data in BG's.

Ehhhh. I soooort of agree. I do agree that the difference between brawlers and plates ends up being 10%. However, of that 75% avoidance you and I have, about 5% of it is avoidance lends. Of that 65% that plates have, about 25-30% of it is avoidance lends.
This is why I think that the avoidance gap is actually bigger, and the only reason plates are so closeus is because they get a ton of avoidance from us and clerics, while we get very little from them.
It's also even more complicated than we're making out, because it very well may be that the 20-30% avoidance from the brawler's lend can't be struck through.

BChizzle wrote:

I think you are over-complicating it since we know that the SKs avoidance checks are going to be the first to go in before avoidance lends. So what the SK does on his own is his avoidance, the remainder than goes to be checked against avoidance lends, which will really skew the numbers if using a Brawlers avoidance since their both their uncontested avoidance is higher (and not sure if this is true but their avoidance is immune to strike-thru if in defensive?). Plus this may mean that mobs strike-thru is affected differently by avoidance lends, it always seems odd that a priest can block such a high % value for a tank with so low protection of a shield.
When the numbers come down to it the SK avoids 25.8% himself before the numbers go to other classes to be checked against their avoidance. So 34.4% block +8.8% parry = 25.8% actual avoided.
Vinka as far as the SK obtaining that amount of block chance, I know that in my gear which is built for offensive I have 72% block chance. Now I still have Ykesha shield so my uncontested block is usually around 33%, once I see a good lvl 90 shield I expect that to go up. Perhaps you aren't factoring in the SKs AAs?

Vinka@Antonia Bayle wrote:

I usually get anywhere from 10-20% from plate lends. However, if I am avoiding 75% usually a huge portion of that (15%+) is going to come from tsunami.

Bruener wrote:

Actually Bruener I am simplifying it not over-complicating it. Again look at your avoidance when tanking fully buffed its usually around 60-65% right? Now look at Corys he will be 70-75%. That shows you that immunity to strikethrough doesn't have as huge of an impact as some are claiming.

BChizzle wrote:

Perhaps. Will be watching numbers to see how they play out more I guess. One thing I would like to point out though is that a Brawlers avoidance as you claim is 10% than a Plate tanks avoidance with an inferior avoidance buff on them. It would be extremely interesting to see the actual difference in avoidance with say a Monk tanking with the Bruiser avoidance on them. I mean you get lets say 15% from a plate tank that has lower uncontested avoidance. Doing some thinking that would leave 60% of your avoidance coming from yourself and a priest.....what if that other 40% was going to a Bruiser with what 60% chance to use their avoidance which is again greater than plates tanks by 10%+ and they are immune to strike-thru.
Could be quite the power-house combo stacking Brawlers like that.

Bruener wrote:

Brawler on brawler would be the best amount of avoidance, I doubt you would see anyone arguing that, however, because a brawler avoids so much less checks get through to the lend anyways so you wouldn't see a huge impact by this. If I were to guess 3-5%. Moreso if avoidance is so important why don't you do a poll and see who still wears the RE2 cloak or SOH items that offer all that uncontested, I think you will see that people don't wear those because having more avoidance isn't more important then the other things you get from newer items. If it was so important then you would see tanks running around with those items.

BChizzle wrote:

I didn't think we were talking about items or about how relevant avoidance is.....
But I guess we can now. You mention those items with uncontested avoidance...and yet if it isn't that great why does SOE not add it onto current items? Honestly the reason people probably don't use them is because they are bored of them and don't want to use items from 2 xpacs ago...especially since yes there are some decent cloaks out there with blue stats. Raw survivability though those items are probably still a best in slot for the decrease in damage they offer. SOE doesn't make upgrades to those items for the same reason they never made upgrades to the T7 tank boots.
An avoided hit is still way better than a hit taken.

Bruener wrote:

Yet you don't wear them?
Basically you want to cry about avoidance then ignore it when asked about your gear. Fact is avoidance isn't the be all and end all if that were so brawlers would have been the best tank choice for this game since KoS. You crying about avoidance when you fail to realize its no different then the massive damage YOU avoid that gets reflected or the massive amount of heals you put out or that you can die 3 times which all don't show up on an avoidance report makes me laugh. Brawlers can tank in raids now because of the MIT we are able to attain nothing more.
EDIT: And you are completely wrong that an avoided hit is better then a taken hit. Getting hit procs reactives, procs damage shields procs wards etc.

Vinka@Antonia Bayle wrote:

TBH, all I did was scroll down the thread and saw graphs, mathmatical formulas, and massive nested quotes, and I just lol'd a bit. Other than that I'm completely uninterested in the thread and have nothing of value to add. Carry on.

BChizzle wrote:

Lets not be silly, eh? You're combatting one gross exaggeration with one of your own. Obviously avoidance helps when you want to stay alive and it's completely obtuse to suggest otherwise. Like it is completely obtuse to suggest that mit is a non-issue. Lets try and be sensible about this.

steelbadger wrote:

Brawlers are able to tank because of their mit, that isn't an exaggeration. Ask around. Check the end game brawlers, the T3 tanking gear has MIT bonuses but they also have less block chance over T1-2, do you think any brawlers go for more block chance when given the choice? Basically having 10% more avoid is offset by cleric reactives going off, by ward procs going off, by HoT's actually working, etc etc etc.