Nerf tank equipment and monster Base Attack Bonus

[AestorTheKnight]

Sounds like your saying that it is very diffiult to become essentially immune to physical damage. Seems like something that ought to be very difficult to do.

And this.

[Missing_Minds]

I've no idea how 4.0 works...

But in 3.0, 3.5, and DDO (no idea how 3.Pizao is, but probably the same) the best AC is gained by being naked veritably.

[redraider]

Westside build.

http://forums.ddo.com/showthread.php?t=174696

Highesxt possible AC

http://forums.ddo.com/showthread.php?t=173504



Enough said.

[AestorTheKnight]

That Screenshot is at least 1 year old. I would think that higher AC is possible now.

[Phidius]

Not for monks. They don't have a reasonable way to get Insight AC +4 aside from dragontouched. Thus, Icy is just the level 14-15 stepping stone to the far superior Dragontouched at 16.

Icy: +3 resistance, +4 protection, +4 dodge, +5 prot (min2 accessory) + 8 armor (bracers) + 4 insight (weapon) = +21 to AC
Dragontouched: +6 armor, +5 resistance, +5 protection, +4 insight, +2 dodge (bracers) = +17 to AC

Dragontouched wins for monks. By a large margin.

I can understand why a monk might not want to spend 24 larges putting Insight+4 onto a kama, but I still don't understand how removing the "instant switching" for robes would fix any problems with AC.

OK, for this discussion I'll concede that the DT is a better option for a monk. Now, what other outfit are you switching to that is somehow making AC broken?

[TheKaige]

The easiest way to make it so that AC makes a difference for everbody isn't to nerf classes with high AC, or to nerf monsters and their base attack bonus, but instead to make attack bonuses in this game regressive instead of progressive (basically, whereas in this game you have a +5 to attack with each attack in the attack chain i.e. +10 the first attack, +15 the second, and +20 the third, where by pnp and the way the game was originally designed, the attack chain should make your base attack go down, i.e. +15 to attack first attack, +10 the second, +5 the last attack). Since monster don't have attack chains you can just make their attack bonus a variable. i.e. if a monster has a 15 base attack, then his base attack on each attack is (1d3)x5. Basically what you get to balance out AC is something like this;

+20 first attack can only be avoided by pure AC builds
+15 can be avoided by classes with good AC who aren't pure AC builds i.e. clerics, some rogues, offensive fighters
+10 can be avoided by medium armor classes or decent dex classes i.e. barbarians, rangers, FvS, possibly bards
+5 can be avoided by classes such as wizards or sorcerers if they atleast invested in some protection gear

What this means is that at no point for any class is AC meaningless, because there's still some portion of damage you can avoid.

[Cyr]

There is no need to nerf AC builds. First off full plate builds who have good AC sacrifice a ton. Second off the really high AC builds are not full plate builds and they sacrifice alot to have that really high AC.

The only real issue here is the 100% uselessness of having an ac out of the d20 range. This results in dps builds ignoring AC and not the top end of only being hit on a 20.

Epic trash mobs have a mechanic which widens the gap of useful AC's. Game wide a delinking from the d20 system for mobs or some other method of drastically increasing the range of useful AC's should be considered.

Of course anything that is done has to be done with careful statistical analysis and should not be a proxy nerf for certain builds as this is unwelcome and unneeded to address this issue.

[Pugsley]

The issue is not that high AC builds can get high AC. It's that no one else can get enough to even matter. AC should matter for everybody.

[Chai]

I disagree with this for the reasons below.

1. A tank in full plate has to sacrifice alot of dps to get that high ac while a cloth wearer has to sacrifice less dps. cloth wearers can still do good damage while having the high AC. A plate tank has to choose to be in DPS mode or full on tank mode. In the end game you can hate tank with TWF and still have decent AC, but its not exploiter build AC.

2. There were way too many overpowered things in NWN that allowed cloth wearers to get higher AC. An example is for every 5 ranks in tumble you get a +1 to dodge that stacks with everything else. Pale master and RDD offered alot of stacking natural armor as well. I built a bard PM RDD once that had AC into the 140s.

3. Its rediculous that some dude in his PJs can out AC someone encased in hardened smithed steel with a shield the size of a bobsled.

4. Your solution is to nerf plate wearers, and then nerf mob to hit? Monster attack bonus where it matters (epics) did get nerfed. Minions now take a 1d20 penalty on each swing to allow for tanking to be at least somewhat effective. Anywhere else, you can get an AC that matters.

I will agree that Turbine dug their own hole on this issue, because having such a large number of AC attainable means that when someone gets to the number that really matters, characters that have that number minus 20 AC might as well have 10 AC. If 90 AC matters, toons that have 70 might as well have 10 (before the epic minion 1d20 to hit penalty of course). Everyone that builds for DPS just dumps AC because its not worth it unless you are really focusing on attaining every point possible. I dont think the solution is another nerf however.....

[Pugsley]

Fine, then nerf Monk splashing. I didn't realize it was as effective as it is.

But I think pretty much everyone in this thread is missing the point.

Stupid me, going ahead and posting before I have all the minutia worked out. It always distracts everyone.

[Quikster]

I disagree with this for the reasons below.

1. A tank in full plate has to sacrifice alot of dps to get that high ac while a cloth wearer has to sacrifice less dps. cloth wearers can still do good damage while having the high AC. A plate tank has to choose to be in DPS mode or full on tank mode. In the end game you can hate tank with TWF and still have decent AC, but its not exploiter build AC. really? what are exploiters getting up to self buffed now?

2. There were way too many overpowered things in NWN that allowed cloth wearers to get higher AC. An example is for every 5 ranks in tumble you get a +1 to dodge that stacks with everything else. Pale master and RDD offered alot of stacking natural armor as well. I built a bard PM RDD once that had AC into the 140s.

3. Its rediculous that some dude in his PJs can out AC someone encased in hardened smithed steel with a shield the size of a bobsled.I dont agree 100% that armor tanks are as far behind as you say, but shield should give a larger ac bonus

4. Your solution is to nerf plate wearers, and then nerf mob to hit? Monster attack bonus where it matters (epics) did get nerfed. Minions now take a 1d20 penalty on each swing to allow for tanking to be at least somewhat effective. Anywhere else, you can get an AC that matters.

I will agree that Turbine dug their own hole on this issue, because having such a large number of AC attainable means that when someone gets to the number that really matters, characters that have that number minus 20 AC might as well have 10 AC. If 90 AC matters, toons that have 70 might as well have 10 (before the epic minion 1d20 to hit penalty of course). Everyone that builds for DPS just dumps AC because its not worth it unless you are really focusing on attaining every point possible. I dont think the solution is another nerf however.....

to your last point, there arent many quests in the game where you need a 90 ac to be effective, and the few that are, still get completed on a daily basis. Im not against an attack chain style bab for mobs, but I dont think its as bad as some make it out to be in this thread (though ive posted that in many threads so i suspect you already know this )

[Aesop]

Is it odd that I agree and disagree with everyone?

Defense is a bit on the Borked side in DDO

AC is only a part of the problem

FP and PJ wearers can both get top tier AC ... but theose are very sepcific builds and are only useful in limited content

Melee defense comes in 2 flavors though.

Avoidance and Mitigation

AC is part of Avoidance so too are things like Concealment

Mitigation is the realm of Damage Reduction and Blocking

Perhaps its time those other aspects are examined


Of course one thing that I always wished went away was the Dodge items... I just don't like them and always felt they broke a cardinal rule


Maybe Avoidance, Damage Reduction and Blocking should be expanded. I've made lots of suggestions about adding a passive blocking mechanic... especially for Shield Users.

There have been requests and suggestions for Armor DR ... or maybe a straight mitigation percentage.

Maybe avoidance is something else to consider. maybe lighter armors allow a higher Avoidance while heavier have a higher mitigation


It would all take a lot of balancing and care to not completely overwhelm the core of the game...

then again maybe it need to inorder to find the good balance

I like DnD and d20... but it does have issues in this type of medium

Aesop