Requesting Data for Parry RATE (not amount mitigated)

[Zfz]

Its more about when the buff is applied and triggers.

Which does not have to be tied into combat event resolution.

Let me just ask you one question on the pseudo-code you presented. In these three statements:

If RNG < Crit THEN
If RNG < Block and Position = Front THEN
If RNG < Parry and Position = Front THEN

are all three "RNG" the one and the same random number? Or do they represent drawing 3 different random numbers?

If you draw one random number, then you have been talking about the one-roll attack table model all the time. And if you re-draw a new random number when you check for each of Crit/Block/Parry, then you are talking about a multi-roll model.

The point I'm trying to make, is that having multiple procs and drops from the same combat action do not necessarily dictate that the different outcomes of the same combat action must be multi-roll.

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.

A multi-roll system will mean that every 1% rate increase of stats for a higher-priority outcome will diminish the value of 1% rate increase of stats for a lower-priority outcome.

For example, suppose 15% miss > 5% crit > 20% block > 10% parry > remainder being regular hit. Suppose that is the probabilities you end up with your gear. We don't know these probabilities, but we know the amount of stats we have. Taking in-game data, we will see:

• in a multi-roll system, 0.85*0.95*0.8*0.1=0.0646=6.46% of the swings end up being parry;
• in a single-roll system, 10% of the swings end up being parry.

Now increase block from 20% to 30%, and again taking in-game data, we will see:

• in a multi-roll system, 0.85*0.95*0.7*0.1=0.056525=5.65% of the swings end up being parry;
• in a single-roll system, still 10% of the swings end up being parry.

Hence in a multi-roll system, you want to maximize stats that contribute to a higher priority mitigation outcome (in this case, Block is more valuable than Parry), unless the mitigation from a lower priority outcome is extremely strong (for example if parry was 50% mitigation, then you would want to exchange as much of your block rate as possible for as much parry as possible). In a single-roll system, all mitigation outcomes grow independent of each other until you have enough of the high-priority outcomes to push the low-priority ones off the attack table.

(As an aside, that's what tanks in World of Warcraft once was able to do: to push regular hits off the attack table so that 100% of all hits are mitigated.)

This is why it is important to investigate the combat resolution system. It will change the relative values of the defensive stats and how you gear your tank.

[Rbstr]

We known forever block is checked before parry. It's clear from parsing that it rolls X% chance to block and if it's unblocked it rolls Y% chance to parry: Higher block rates with similar parry rates clearly diminish the absolute parry rate while the parry rate of unblocked hits remains constant. Furthermore changing parry rate has no effect on the absolute block rate.

Now that Raw Intuition and Shelltron exist we can more clearly see that crits exist at a higher priority yet than blocking or parrying.

[Zfz]

Now that Raw Intuition and Shelltron exist we can more clearly see that crits exist at a higher priority yet than blocking or parrying.

What about the miss rates?

We now know that it checks Crit > Block > Parry, does miss go right at the front, or does it go after parry? Any conclusions on that yet?

[spelley]

Miss would only make sense to go BEFORE everything else, as all the other calculations can be skipped (and thus be more efficient) in the case of a miss. So the order should be:

Miss% -> Crit (since it is never effected by Block or Parry) -> Block (evidence to prove Block > Parry) -> Parry

You do it this way so you can ignore/skip the rest of the chain, and thus be more efficient, the moment one of the flags is thrown. IE: If it's a miss, there is no need to calculate whether it could have been a crit/parry/block etc.

As a programmer, I'd definitely have each as their own separate roll. If you have it in a table, you have to calculate the whole table at the start each time, instead of having a couple of smaller operations that only conditionally need to be made IF they are applicable.

[Zfz]

As a programmer, I'd definitely have each as their own separate roll. If you have it in a table, you have to calculate the whole table at the start each time, instead of having a couple of smaller operations that only conditionally need to be made IF they are applicable.

Just want to say this again, there is no actual table lookup. The actual code could be like this:

r = random(1);
r = r - missrate;
if (r<0) then { //miss }
else {
  r = r - critrate;
  if (r<0) then { //crit }
  else {
    r = r - blockrate;
    if (r<0) then { //block }
    else {
      r = r - parryrate;
      if (r<0) then { //parry }
      else { //regular hit }
    }
  }
}

j

There is no table to calculate. While the concept is a table, we don't go mindlessly implement a table lookup. The effect of this implementation is the attack table. When you activate Awareness, the buff management code sets that critrate at 0 and the above code runs happily with no additional checks and magically results in 0 crits. When Awareness wears off, the buff management code puts that critrate back to what it should be, and viola you will eat crits again. Since the buff management code is outside of the combat resolution loop, it is more efficient than checking on every attack whether you have Awareness up or not.

The various rates are the exact same rates you would roll against in their own seperate roll. To change that code to a multi-roll model, you just replace all the subtractions with "r = random(1);", and replace all the if conditions with "if (r<___rate)":

r = random(1); // roll a number between 0 and 100%
if (r<missrate) then { //miss }
else {
  r = random(1);
  if (r<critrate) then { //crit }
  else {
    r = random(1);
    if (r<blockrate) then { //block }
    else {
      r = random(1);
      if (r<parryrate) then { //parry }
      else { //regular hit }
    }
  }
}

----

In any case, now that we have the priority list, we will need to find the miss/crit/block rates before we can actually calculate a constant "parry -> parry rate" conversion at level 60. Although we can just look at the real rates, that real rate will change depending on our miss/crit/block. For WAR/DRK it doesn't change because of zero block, but for the PLD, every time we upgrade a shield, our real parry rate per point of parry drops.

At 322 block and 530 parry, we're looking at real rates of about 18.5% block and 11% parry.

I'm starting to think data collection should be more complete with total swings, crits, blocks, parries all recorded. Otherwise we may not notice anomalies that may point to more intricacies of the system.

[Rbstr]

Misses appear to go in front. But they've never been relevant in BCoB, those bosses never missed while they were relevant (I dono if they do now if you go in undersized). You're welcome to go do the parsing, if you think the intricacies matter. Go hang out near a lvl60 mob and let it smack you for an hour or two or something.

From what we've seen so far parry is only worse than it was in 2.x, it blocks for substantially less than it did before and the parry rate builds even slower per point than before. And the big one is that War and PLD both got new physical-only CDs. DRK has a big parry rate CD too.
I'll continue to avoid it as much as practical unless encounter design starts to make it more useful. (Notably, the first boss in Fractal Continuum has a parry-friendly tank buster of many hits in a small fraction of time.)

[Yorumi]

snip...

Just wanted to add a little extra logic here. I have no idea how ff14 implements things but, it's worth mentioning that although small, rolling a random number does require cpu time. Again minor, but the single roll algorithm is more efficient than the multi-roll algorithm. Given that it's an MMO server, produces essentially the same outcome, and is more efficient, I have trouble seeing any real reason a programmer wouldn't do a single roll system.

[Phoenicia]

From what we've seen so far parry is only worse than it was in 2.x, it blocks for substantially less than it did before and the parry rate builds even slower per point than before.

Wanted to point out that it is NOT that parry was "nerfed" per se. In fact there is a level modifier applied to all secondary stats. This modifier seems to reduce the efficiency per point of all secondary stats as you level up (Even though you get more base stat of it).

For example at level 52 at 430 Skill speed I had a GCD of 2.45. I leveled up and suddenly my GCD is 2.46 even though my total skill speed went up due to the base going up. These numbers are off my memory so may not be 100% correct.

Also remember now that items are a higher level, we get more stats per piece. So in a sense we can assume that the current ilv180 gear is giving equivalent gains of ilv80 gear when we were level 50. (Just assumptions here). Dismissing secondary stats importance solely because they give less than what they did per point when we were capped at 50 is DEFINITELY the wrong way to look at them.

[MythToken]

I do believe most data collected so far shows all secondaries contributing about 1/3 of the stat weight they had pre heavensward. (assuming lvl 60)
So roughly 3x more of a sub-stat is required than before to achieve the same 1% increase.

This will probably be more relevant in a day when we have esoteric gear implemented alongside alex savage, so that there are actually gear choices.

I do fear though that sub stat relevancy is being lost with such minimal stat contributions.
Without gear having absurd amounts of sub stats, or having much higher ilvl scaling as we go forward in heavensward.

[Phoenicia]

I do believe most data collected so far shows all secondaries contributing about 1/3 of the stat weight they had pre heavensward. (assuming lvl 60)
So roughly 3x more of a sub-stat is required than before to achieve the same 1% increase.

This will probably be more relevant in a day when we have esoteric gear implemented alongside alex savage, so that there are actually gear choices.

I do fear though that sub stat relevancy is being lost with such minimal stat contributions.
Without gear having absurd amounts of sub stats, or having much higher ilvl scaling as we go forward in heavensward.

This difference is due to the "downgrade" of gear being "reset" due to being a new expansion. Meaning the current gear we have is basically "starter" gear where stats are low. I think we should make comparisons with how ilv70 was when BCoB first came out and not say the ilv130 gear which was the best available at level 50 cap.