Requesting Data for Parry RATE (not amount mitigated)

[Phoenicia]

I haven't gone through all the tests past the second half of page 2, but I noticed no one is accounting crits. Crit attacks cannot be blocked or parried. This makes game table precedence as follows:

Miss > Crit > Block > Parry > Hit.

I think you would get more accurate results if you also remove crits from total hits landed.

Tests done were:

1. Use Sheltron, crit lands, Sheltron buff STAYS. Next hit blocked, Sheltron buff goes away.

2. Raw Intuition: Parrying attacks, still getting non-parried crit from the front.

[Docfiord_Fowling]

Self healing from Bloodbath and Inner Beast is pretty weak.

Having tanked second and final coil as a WAR, Inner Beast is your bread & butter. You underestimate it's healing capabilities.

Nope. Parry is completely random.

No way! Obviously it is random. Play your strengths. Would you value Crit any more? It is RNG as well.

Nope. Parry mostly leads to overhealing.

Parry is not for busters - it is meant to help stabilize the amount of incoming damage. Your job as a tank is to normalize the incoming damage into a predictable amount for the healers. Parry is quite viable over time. If your healers cannot accommodate for random 20% reduction, they need some more practice.

Yeah, tanks stack STR for for more DPS - I'm one of them. However, it is my opinion (maybe soon to be fact) that parry is a VERY useful stat for DRK. It synergizes as well as STR does on WAR.

[Rbstr]

Inner Beast may be bread and butter. But it tops out, in i130, at like 1.2k on a crit. It's nice to top you off...but completely washed out by healer skills. Inner Beast's healing is just a small bonus for taking more strength.

Parry is a VERY useful stat for DRK. It synergizes as well as STR does on WAR.

It's not even close. The only place it works is the miniscule gains in parry percentage give you a tiny bit of increased uptime for Reprisal.
Any DPS gains an accessory with parry would add from resetting the Low Blow timer are totally insignificant compared to using a parry-less strength accessory instead.

[Erim-Nelhah]

It's not even close. The only place it works is the miniscule gains in parry percentage give you a tiny bit of increased uptime for Reprisal.
Any DPS gains an accessory with parry would add from resetting the Low Blow timer are totally insignificant compared to using a parry-less strength accessory instead.

Miniscule? If the numbers I'm reading are right, the difference between Baseline (354) and Max Reasonable (about 600 atm), is about 7-10%, depending on whose data you believe. That might not be much in terms of raw mitigation from parry, but it's quite significant both in terms of "normal" reprisal uptime and in our ability to "force" a reprisal proc with Dark Dance, and Reprisal is very significant mitigation.

--Erim Nelhah
(Master, Astral Descendants <AD>, Malboro)
(60 DRK Main)

[Zfz]

Just a note. Could people please not litter the thread with opinions unfounded by actual data? This is a fact finding thread, not a place to assert your opinions. If you want to say what is worth or not worth it, please back it up with data and a quantitative analysis of that data.

I haven't gone through all the tests past the second half of page 2, but I noticed no one is accounting crits.

Are you assuming the game does multiple rolls per attack? Because even with a one-roll table, it's possible that all the skills do is filling up the "remaining" attack table with parry. So for example:

• Awareness: cannot be crit. It reduces the Crit section of your attack table to zero.
• Bulwark: add 60% block rate. It expands the Block section by 60%, pushing off firstly any Hit, then any Parry until the full 60% is added.
• Raw Intuition: push off all Hit sections and replace them with Parry.

This would explain how crit doesn't seem to be affected by the various skills, because it cannot be nullified except by Awareness, and the only way to push off Crit is to have such a high level difference that Miss fills almost all of the attack table.

If that is the case, we should actually be calculating our parry rate including all the swings, i.e. including the misses and crits. Else we'd be over-estimating our parry rate. Because as long as there are still normal hits, our parry hasn't filled the attack table.

Also I seem to recall some people say that block eats into parry. But under the one-roll model, as long as you still take any regular hits, your block isn't high enough to actually eat into parry.

So how does FFXIV resolve its combat events, anyway?

[Ultimatecalibur]

Are you assuming the game does multiple rolls per attack? Because even with a one-roll table, it's possible that all the skills do is filling up the "remaining" attack table with parry.

So how does FFXIV resolve its combat events, anyway?

Seems fairly obvious that it is proc/multiple rolls instead of a table because of it being the simplest programing method and that using a table would require recalculating the table between every attack.

Hit roll -> Crit Roll -> Block Roll -> Parry Roll -> Damage Roll if a Physical Attack
Hit Roll -> Crit Roll -> Elemental Resist Roll -> Damage Roll if a Magical Attack

[Zfz]

Seems fairly obvious that it is proc/multiple rolls instead of a table because of it being the simplest programing method and that using a table would require recalculating the table between every attack.

Hit roll -> Crit Roll -> Block Roll -> Parry Roll -> Damage Roll if a Physical Attack
Hit Roll -> Crit Roll -> Elemental Resist Roll -> Damage Roll if a Magical Attack

So there's absolutely no evidence whatsoever to prove that the FFXIV game resolves combat events in one way or the other?

The attack table method doesn't really need recalculations. For example my attack table may look like this:

• Parameters: miss=0.1499, crit=0.05, block=0.22, parry=0.1294
• Roll for attack, gets 0.3215.
• Subtract miss: 0.3215-0.1499=0.1716. Not negative hence not a miss.
• Subtract crit: 0.1716-0.05=0.1216. Not negative hence not a crit.
• Subtract block: 0.1216-0.22=-0.0985. Negative hence it is a block.

Any change to my attack table can be done by adjusting the parameters. For example Awareness will temporarily make my crit parameter zero, which effectively moves block and parry forward. The parameters will just be the exact numbers you're rolling against in the respective rolls in your example.

This is also very simple to program and actually makes the end result match actual probabilities of each of the events.

In single-roll resolution, suppose a miss rate of 15%, crit 5%, block 20% and Parry 10%, then 50% of all attacks should be regular hits. But with multiple rolls, it means that all regular hits are actually the event "not miss && not crit && not block && not parry", giving you the end probability of 0.85*0.95*0.8*0.9=0.5814, i.e. 58%.

If the game is using a multi-roll system, we would have to find the miss and crit rates before we can find the actual parry rate used in the calculation, because our data would only give us the rate at which the attack "wasn't a miss and wasn't a crit and was a parry" (assuming we remove the shield in our tests).

I hope I'm making sense and haven't made some glaring mistake...

[Ultimatecalibur]

So there's absolutely no evidence whatsoever to prove that the FFXIV game resolves combat events in one way or the other?

Firestarter/Thundercloud and Split/Slug shot Procs pretty much state that there are at least 2 rolls made, the fact that we can get multiple individual item drops from kills implies that they are not using tables over multi rolls for drops, and the method that Shelltron operates on in respect to Crits as mentioned would not happen the way it does if it was a table.

This is also very simple to program and actually makes the end result match actual probabilities of each of the events.

Enemies (of different levels at the least) have different accuracies (which can be proven by letting yourself be attack and tracking the amount of misses) and can be individually blinded. You would need to have individual table for each mob and each mob would need to have and maintain an individual table for each target it was attacking or catching in its AoEs. That is a lot of data and table management that would need to be programed in. A stat based multi roll If:Then:Else tree is much simpler to program and far less data intensive.

In single-roll resolution, suppose a miss rate of 15%, crit 5%, block 20% and Parry 10%, then 50% of all attacks should be regular hits. But with multiple rolls, it means that all regular hits are actually the event "not miss && not crit && not block && not parry", giving you the end probability of 0.85*0.95*0.8*0.9=0.5814, i.e. 58%.

I'm not quiet certain of what you are trying to say here. Yes, single-roll resolution makes for prettier statistics, but pretty statistics are not really that important to a computer. I would not be surprised if the RNG roll used a whole number between 0 and 255.

If the game is using a multi-roll system, we would have to find the miss and crit rates before we can find the actual parry rate used in the calculation, because our data would only give us the rate at which the attack "wasn't a miss and wasn't a crit and was a parry" (assuming we remove the shield in our tests).

No, at the most we need to find the number of crits in the hit total (as the misses will not be hits and will already be factored out of the attack total to create the hit total) and remove them to find out the number of attacks that can be blocked/parried.

[Zfz]

Firestarter/Thundercloud and Split/Slug shot Procs pretty much state that there are at least 2 rolls made, the fact that we can get multiple individual item drops from kills implies that they are not using tables over multi rolls for drops, and the method that Shelltron operates on in respect to Crits as mentioned would not happen the way it does if it was a table.

I'm not sure I understand why Firestarter necessitates a multi-role attack resolution for physical attacks. It is not unheard of (in fact WOW uses two-roll system for magic attacks and one-roll system for physical attacks) to have magic and physical attacks work differently. The rules for drops also doesn't necessarily mean anything for attack resolution.

EDIT: Even with Split/Slug shots, they are procs, not attack resolutions. Why do they necessitate a multi-roll model?

And in my attack table method I already illustrated that it will give you the exact same results from your tests. When SheltronRaw Intuition is activated, in your multi-roll scenario it works like this: (let's ignore block for now because it's just a different form of parry for us)

Parameters: Hit=85%, Crit=5%, Parry=100%.
Hit roll 56 (56<85, a hit) -> crit roll 3 (3<5, a crit) = crit, resolution complete.
Attack ends up as a crit even though SheltronRaw Intuition is active

and in my attack table scenario it works like this:

Parameters: Miss=15%, Crit=5%, Parry=100%.
Roll 18.
Check miss 18-15=3, 3>0, not miss.
Check crit 3-5=-2, -2<0, a crit. Resolution complete
(It doesn't get to check parry, exactly the same as your model.)

You see, when we say "roll", it means physically "roll a new random number". A multi-roll system means rolling a new random number each time you check for the next possible result. A single-roll "attack table" system means that one number is used to determine where your result is.

Think of the attack table model like throwing a dart with the target circle divided into the different results.
Think of the multi-roll model like throwing a dart at several different target circles of varying sizes.

Enemies (of different levels at the least) have different accuracies...A stat based multi roll If:Then:Else tree is much simpler to program and far less data intensive.

I think you misunderstand what I meant by the attack table system. Perhaps you know it by some other name. Or maybe I should call it the attack table model. As illustrated with my example above, all that is required are the exact same data your multi-roll model require. Do your multi-roll model not need to specify the hit rate for each level difference? That same hit rate is used without any additional processing requirement in the attack table model.

The attack table model is called not because we actually go list every possible roll outcome and do a look-up as if from a table of results. Actual processing requires only knowing the thresholds, and the only difference between your model and the attack table model is that when you are rolling new random numbers, we are doing a subtraction. We still go through the same if-else structure.

But what is easier is irrelevant. What we want is actual evidence of the system, and none of what you mentioned disproves the attack table method.

I'm not quiet certain of what you are trying to say here.

I'm saying that in a multi-roll model, the individual probabilities do not equal to the actual in-game result.

In your specific multi-roll model, a parry rate of 10% (let's again ignore block) is actually the event of "hit && not crit && parry", and using the above example parameters of 85% hit rate, 5% crit rate, this event has the probability of 0.85*0.95*0.1=0.08075, i.e. only 8.075% of the swings taken at you will end up as parries. Meaning when we take our data, with a 10% parry rate on our character info, our data will show about 8% parry rate instead. That is why it was suggested that we remove the misses and the crits when calculating the parry rate from the data.

In a single-roll model, 10% parry rate on our character info will give us about 10% of the swings ending up as parry from our data. Removing misses and crits from the data will actually skew our result.

So it is important to know what system we're working with, if we want to find out exactly what parry rate we gain from every point of parry.

[Ultimatecalibur]

Its more about when the buff is applied and triggers.

An IF THEN ELSE chain would do the following when checking an attack*:

If Awareness = True THEN [Crit = 0] ELSE[
If RawIntuition = True AND Position = Flank or Rear THEN [Crit = 255] ELSE[
Crit = "Crit Formula"]

If RNG < Crit THEN [Critical Hit] ELSE [

If Shelltron = True THEN [Block = 255, Recover X MP, Remove Shelltron] ELSE[
IF Bullwark = True THEN [Block = "Block formula"+153]]

If RNG < Block and Position = Front THEN [Blocked Hit] ELSE [

If KeenFlurry = True THEN [Parry = "Parry formula" + 204] ELSE [If DarkDance = True THEN [Parry = "Parry formula" + 51]]

If RNG < Parry and Position = Front THEN [Parried Hit] ELSE [HIT]]]]

*It has been ages since I actually last programed as so this should not be taken as "it must be this way" its an illustration of a possible way to do it.

In your single roll model Shelltron would either need two steps (one before the roll to modify the table and one after to proc off the block) in order to trigger or would always trigger on the first physical attack after it was used.

I'm saying that in a multi-roll model, the individual probabilities do not equal to the actual in-game result.

In your specific multi-roll model, a parry rate of 10% (let's again ignore block) is actually the event of "hit && not crit && parry", and using the above example parameters of 85% hit rate, 5% crit rate, this event has the probability of 0.85*0.95*0.1=0.08075, i.e. only 8.075% of the swings taken at you will end up as parries. Meaning when we take our data, with a 10% parry rate on our character info, our data will show about 8% parry rate instead. That is why it was suggested that we remove the misses and the crits when calculating the parry rate from the data.

We are only seeing the final result (was an attack parried or not) and only can see one of the variables. There is nothing telling us X Parry value = 10% Parry. All we know and have been told is that a Program uses our Parry stat and character level and a Random number to determine if we have parried or not. The X% parry numbers are percentages based on parsed data. Nothing in game tells us our Percentage Block Rate or Percentage Parry Rate.