-
frozenwilderness wrote on 2010-12-14 12:51
I apologize in advance if this is in the wrong section or is a topic that's been done before. I looked it up with search and didn't find anything quite along the lines I wanted to ask.
When you're creating a tanking set, do you usually go for enchants that give defense or enchants that give protection and what's your reason for choosing one over the other?
e.g., defensive oak tree armor vs. refined imp/otter armor
so 10 defense 8.8 damage vs. 5 protection 2 defense and 4 damage or alternatively, 5 protection, 8 damage
Which one would you prefer for tanking and why?
Personally, I'd always go with protection enchants over enchants that give purely defense because protection functions in 2 manners: it reduces critical chance + wounds, and it reduces damage by that specified percentage. In most difficult dungeons, I think it would be safe to assume that if you have to tank, the monsters there probably are doing over 200+ damage per hit, in which protection would be much more practical than pure defense. Same goes for higher-level pvp situations -- if your opponent has 200+ damage on average, I am just wondering why anyone would choose defense over protection?
-
gentrone wrote on 2010-12-14 12:57
I go for enchants that give def because I upgrade my armors for prot. You need both. High defense for absorbing hits and protection for reducing criticals.
-
frozenwilderness wrote on 2010-12-14 13:06
Quote from gentrone;247651:
I go for enchants that give def because I upgrade my armors for prot. You need both. High defense for absorbing hits and protection for reducing or criticals.
But see, this is just what I don't understand. Why worry about defense at all if you're looking at endgame dungeons/pvp? If the opponent hits say, 250 damage on average, 5% protection reduces that damage by 12.5 points while if you opt for the alternative 10 defense, that damage is only reduced by.. well 10. Additionally, by adding defense, you're in effect decreasing the damage absorbed by your protection. On the other hand, if you opt for protection, not only can you increase the amount of damage deflected but you also reduce your enemy's critical chance on you. Finally, if the enemy DOES critical hit on you, that protection % will decrease the damage on you by a much greater amount than defense will, since defense only takes it down by that set amount. In a dungeon where enemies do much lower damage, you probably wouldn't be using tanking gear in the first place and you'd switch it up for a damage set instead.
-
abc33kr wrote on 2010-12-14 13:13
Defense is more readily accessible than protection.
Thus, although you should go for protection, if there is a split path, one going for def and another going for prot, if the path with def gives a lot more def pts than prot, then you should go the def path.
For example, for armor suffix, you are better off with stone's 6def than otter's 2prot.
-
frozenwilderness wrote on 2010-12-14 13:18
Oh right, I suppose I forgot that there was also the option of refined oak tree, which nets 3 prot and 6 def. I suppose it's all really situational depending on the type of dungeon/sm you plan on tanking in, but anywhere where a monster's average damage including crit exceeds 300, then at that point it is still better to go with 2% prot over 6 def..
-
Shiko wrote on 2010-12-14 13:41
Quote from frozenwilderness;247660:
Oh right, I suppose I forgot that there was also the option of refined oak tree, which nets 3 prot and 6 def. I suppose it's all really situational depending on the type of dungeon/sm you plan on tanking in, but anywhere where a monster's average damage including crit exceeds 300, then at that point it is still better to go with 2% prot over 6 def..
Very few monsters hit more then 150, let alone 300, including Peaca and HM Shadow missions, unless you are getting hit with a skill. I'm a squishy elf with 0 protect and like 6 def and HM shadow mission monsters do less then 80 to me unless they crit...
-
Roy Mustang wrote on 2010-12-14 13:43
Personally I would go for more protection when possible. Personally though I value offensive power over defense, which is why when I melee I dual wield rather than single wield with a shield. Although as people have already said, Defense is more readily available than protection so if you can, beef up your defense as much as possible, it really makes a difference. Although, I would favor protection more as getting critted is not fun :/ So in a way I would go both ways.
-
Jando wrote on 2010-12-14 13:57
Defense is wanted more then protection since most mobs only hit for 1-100 damage and and since protection only lowers attack received by a % defense wins out because its easier to get alot of it. Not much things hit over 100 without crits and even then they only have a 30% chance of doing said crits so people mainly go for the defense routes for most things.
I for one, whenever I create my defense set, will focus more on defense since SCC mobs don't really do that high amount of crit damage.
-
gentrone wrote on 2010-12-14 14:34
Mmmm can somebody post a 'protection build' and a 'def build', as well as an average build for both using enchants and upgrades? I would like to calculate some stuff but I don't know which enchants are considered the best for each category. Thanks.
-
Zid wrote on 2010-12-14 14:45
A shield will pretty much make anything hit less than 100, so...
Besides, anything that regularly hits over 100 usually can land you close to death or into deadly. Protection's percentage damage reduction is way more useful and noticeable when your HP is over 1000, like in 1500 HP range.
Ever wonder why Falcons and Savage Beasts have high Protection, as opposed to Paladins having less Protection but some Defense? Yeah.
Quote from gentrone;247676:
Mmmm can somebody post a 'protection build' and a 'def build', as well as an average build for both using enchants and upgrades? I would like to calculate some stuff but I don't know which enchants are considered the best for each category. Thanks.
There's one build that grants 100% Protection, but is only usable by Giants (because of Wind Guard).
-
gentrone wrote on 2010-12-14 14:49
Well Wind Guard is hax. I mean 'normal' builds haha.
-
Jovo wrote on 2010-12-14 15:20
When ghasts hit you for up to 5k, it doesn't matter how much defense and protection you have because you either
1)deadly
2)die
I think defense is more common because you can able to tank most lower tier monsters very easily (as they hit low), have some protection to not get critted, and then mana shield the rest of the difference.
-
frozenwilderness wrote on 2010-12-14 16:34
For some reason, I heard somewhere that you can get close to 10 to 1 mana shield efficiency later on, though wiki says base efficiency of MS is 2.5 at r1.. I am not sure of what's actually achievable in G13 though.
Also, hmm, I didn't really put this in the Questions and Help section because I wanted more of a discussion and/or Cost/Benefit analysis for both sides of the argument, since I don't believe there's really a "right" answer. I'll prob do some calculating later I guess..
Edit: Also, I'm just wondering, what dungeons/SMs really require so much tanking in the first place? The only ones that come to mind for me are dungeons like barri/rabbie adv hm/SMs with sulfur spiders and such; I think tanking mostly applies more to pvp, when you have people hitting in the range of 300s-500s regularly..
-
gentrone wrote on 2010-12-14 16:41
Quote from frozenwilderness;247715:
I wanted more of a discussion and/or Cost/Benefit analysis for both sides of the argument, since I don't believe there's really a "right" answer. I'll prob do some calculating later I guess..
That's what I'm trying to do. But I need to evaluate different builds in order to do that and get an 'efficient' point. Also, I could dump all the data into a big function but I don't know how to picture critical effect on both builds (meaning every prot would change the curve somehow, and this has more to do with statics). I need to consider critcal damage in a defense build, because no matter what monsters would land a critical hit (in case of low prot), defeating damage absorption every x% times.
-
frozenwilderness wrote on 2010-12-14 16:51
Quote from gentrone;247717:
That's what I'm trying to do. But I need to evaluate different builds in order to do that and get an 'efficient' point. Also, I could dump all the data into a big function but I don't know how to picture critical effect on both builds (meaning every prot would change the curve somehow, and this has more to do with statics). I need to consider critcal damage in a defense build, because no matter what monsters would land a critical hit (in case of low prot), defeating damage absorption every x% times.
hehe, have fun playing with excel D:
I tried that with character damage and mob protection/defense, but it turned out that I wasn't familiar enough with the mabi damage formula for calculating the frequency of damage hit based on balance, so when defense sent min damage range + higher to 0, I couldn't calculate the average damage done to the monsters (i.e. in case of ghasts). That's a whole other thing I'd like to test too..
B>5k data points