Parsing Agility?

[Ivory]

Has anyone parsed the effect agility has? According to the wiki

Armor Class as a whole is divided into two parts. The first determining how hard you get hit and the other when you will be hit.

The first part of the AC is "mitigation AC" which is calculated from the worn AC you gain from your gear, Defense skill, and it is assumed spells.

The other part of AC is the "avoidance AC" which is defined by your Defense skill and your AGI stat.

So, while high agility might not show the change in AC.... I'm curious how it parses out. Do you really avoid getting hit more with higher agility? Anyone tested it?

[Jimjam]

There was a leak regarding how agility worked.

Your agility would be cross referenced to a table, which is divided into bands.

With each improved band your avoidance would improve, although often not by much. The largest improvements were at ~ 49 and 75, with the next largest being at somewhere around 91-96. I don’t specifically remember. There are of course improvements all the way up to 255, but these were negligible and not mention worthy. This is why the advice is hit 75 agility then forget about it. The bonus to avoidance below 75 agility is much smaller than that at 75, so you’ll feel like your character is penalised. Any additional benefit at agility bands above 75 is incredibly marginal.

Something you may not be aware of is that monks, rogues and later beastlords receive a small boost to their mitigation ac at ‘high’ levels of agility. This works out to only a couple of ac, which is only really mentionable as a curiosity more than an actual benefit.

[ChooChoo Train]

Parse it you’ll be my hero.

[DMN]

The fact it has a a "small effect" isn't really relevant without comparing it to the effect of the other main form of damage reduction. I remember back in the day people testing it and finding that the more powerful enemies you faced, the more useful the avoidance part of the AC equation became, but I don't really remember many details. That said, due to limited itemization in the game it's usually not a relevant concern since the BIS stuff leaves very few options. If EQ had a diablo-like loot system it might be a different story.

[BlackBellamy]

I remember back in the day people testing it and finding that the more powerful enemies you faced, the more useful the avoidance part of the AC equation became, but I don't really remember many details.

I can back this up along with not remembering details :) The feeling was that due to the huge alpha some mobs put out mitigating it even barely was worth it.

[fadetree]

one thing about avoidance is that you avoid ALL the damage from the hit. If they had made it really noticeable it would be overpowered.

[Bigsham]

make a wood elf warrior and get 200 agility and watch how much better you are then a stupid fat ogre

[Baler]

It's kind of disappointing that AGI will never be as amazing as people hoped it would be on p99. I know of people putting extra point into AGI on their warrior thinking in the future it would be the meta strat.

For those who don't know, Agility affects the 'evasion' mechanic not to be confused with rogue evade. The evasion mechanics is part of the determination if you're hit by a melee attack. So in theory stacking agility will make it so you get hit less. This is why some tanks ask shaman for AGI buff because it does help, some.

Unfortunately there has yet to be hard evidence given of Agility being incredibly reliable during classic. And I'm certain it would take a mountain of evidence to convince nilbog to allow such an addition to be made.

---
AG's main tank was a wood elf warrior for a long stretch late kunark into early velious. He was a great tank. (wood elf warriors start with 100 agi)

[Balimon]

Even if capping your agi with buffs gave you .25% avoidance it would be worth it. It was pretty easy to do on my warrior. Warrior is all about the min/max anyways.

[fadetree]

It would probably be more than that, if it were really worth anything. I think a 5% max cap would be reasnable if it was intended to be a useful stat.

[Fammaden]

Halfling has 100 starting agi too and higher starting stats in everything else but wis/int/cha...for what its worth.

[Bigsham]

Smart tanks always max AGI at char creation, sta and str are easy caps on gear

[Nomadic Plainswalker]

Not a parse but here's some data. As a Ranger I get an AGI buff that adds 18 AGI. Doing that moves my AC from 628 to 632. So roughly 1 AC per 4 AGI.

[Skew]

AGI impacts AC and thats all.

[Cen]

I heard two filthy disgusting conjecture "facts" about agility. That after 75 theres another large AC hit at 101, and that its used as an extra calculation int he formula for Block that isnt used in Parry.

I wish someone did a large parse test though in general for AC

[Jimjam]

Smart tanks always max AGI at char creation, sta and str are easy caps on gear

Put all charisma makes it easier to swoon other players and get into groups.

[Jimjam]

http://web.archive.org/web/20040822100650/http://members.cox.net/sherrick/eqnumbers.htm#_Toc536608108

Contains a player derived table for the contribution of agility towards avoidance.

Avoidance = (T from table) + (Defense * 16/9), but never less than 0


Level -- 40+:20-39:7-19:1-6
---------------------------------
Agi 1 ---24 :-24 :-24 :-24
Agi 2-3 ---23 :-23 :-23 :-23
Agi 4 ---22 :-22 :-22 :-22
Agi 5-6 ---21 :-21 :-21 :-21
Agi 7-8 ---20 :-20 :-20 :-20
Agi 9 ---19 :-19 :-19 :-19
Agi 10-11 ---18 :-18 :-18 :-18
Agi 12 ---17 :-17 :-17 :-17
Agi 13-14 ---16 :-16 :-16 :-16
Agi 15-16 ---15 :-15 :-15 :-15
Agi 17 ---14 :-14 :-14 :-14
Agi 18-19 ---13 :-13 :-13 :-13
Agi 20 ---12 :-12 :-12 :-12
Agi 21-22 ---11 :-11 :-11 :-11
Agi 23-24 ---10 :-10 :-10 :-10
Agi 25 -- -9 : -9 : -9 : -9
Agi 26-27 -- -8 : -8 : -8 : -8
Agi 28 -- -7 : -7 : -7 : -7
Agi 29-30 -- -6 : -6 : -6 : -6
Agi 31-32 -- -5 : -5 : -5 : -5
Agi 33 -- -4 : -4 : -4 : -4
Agi 34-35 -- -3 : -3 : -3 : -3
Agi 36 -- -2 : -2 : -2 : -2
Agi 37-38 -- -1 : -1 : -1 : -1
Agi 39-65 -- 0 : 0 : 0 : 0
Agi 66-70 -- 1 : 1 : 1 : 1
Agi 71-74 -- 5 : 5 : 5 : 5
Agi 75 -- 39 : 33 : 23 : 9
Agi 76-79 -- 40 : 33 : 23 : 10
Agi 80 -- 41 : 34 : 24 : 11
Agi 81-85 -- 42 : 35 : 25 : 12
Agi 86-90 -- 42 : 36 : 26 : 12
Agi 91-95 -- 43 : 36 : 26 : 13
Agi 96-99 -- 44 : 37 : 27 : 14
Agi 100 -- 45 : 38 : 28 : 15
Agi 101-105 -- 45 : ?? : 29 :
Agi 106-110 -- 46 : ?? : 29 :
Agi 111-115 -- 47 : ?? : 30 :
Agi 116-119 -- 47 : ?? : 31 :
Agi 120 -- 48 : ?? : 32?:
Agi 121-125 -- 49 : ?? : 32?:
Agi 126-135 -- 50 :
Agi 136 -- 51 :



There was a more complete, daresay official, table elsewhere on the internet, but it seems to have disappeared with the sands of time.

[Jimjam]

level 1 dwarf warrior with 10 defence, 75 agi vs decaying dwarf skeleton

gets hit 91/253

ie 36% of attacks hit him.

level 1 elf warrior with 10 defence, 125 agi vs decaying dwarf skeleton

gets hit 59/143

ie 41% of attacks hit him.


Both characters maxed defence, no equipment on.

Small sample size, so poor signal : noise, but as a pilot it seems to throw the anomaly up that either the extra 50 agility the elf had actually made his avoidance worse or there is another factor (assuming not due to chance). Or perhaps something to do with how gamparse works out fights.

edit: I ran another parse for 125 agi 10 defence level 1 vs decaying dwarf skeleton, got 35/84 hits, again 41% hits. This time I counted the hits vs misses manually.

Gonna run a parse on the 75 agi dwarf again and see what I find. Little bit worried agi might be broken... it does seem the elf got hungry and thirsty whereas the dwarf did not...

This may warrant further, proper, investigation. With large sample sizes.

[drackgon]

Yeah me and one of my fellow guildie monks found a weird thing.

the Exe hood which is 5ac +4 str +9 dex. gave us 5 ac. vs Black headband ac2 +2str, +3 dex +4 stm +4 cha + 1 int, +3agi + 4 hp.
When we'd take off hood and put on black headband we lost 5 ac.

Which makes no sense to me, as headband has 2 ac + agi. So shouldn't we only lost like 3ac or even less sense there is Agi on headband.

[Seetherrr]

Yeah me and one of my fellow guildie monks found a weird thing.

the Exe hood which is 5ac +4 str +9 dex. gave us 5 ac. vs Black headband ac2 +2str, +3 dex +4 stm +4 cha + 1 int, +3agi + 4 hp.
When we'd take off hood and put on black headband we lost 5 ac.

Which makes no sense to me, as headband has 2 ac + agi. So shouldn't we only lost like 3ac or even less sense there is Agi on headband.

You aren't making a proper comparison. You have to compare the AC of NO headband NO hood to headband/hood. If you are below the AC soft cap you get additional AC than that which is listed on an item. I believe you get a little over 50% of the listed AC with a 10 ac item often giving 16ac.

Agility is (nearly) useless but it has always been this way. The 45 agi shaman buff gives roughly 9 ac if someone is already over 75agi.

[slowpoke68]

People say to put points into stamina which only results in a relatively few hit points at max level. I always wondered if higher agility were to increase your dodge rate or defense rate it might offset or be more valuable by hit point savings from getting hit less as opposed to the hit points added by stamina.

I remember when I made my first toon way back when, a monk, I put all my points into Agi because that is what everyone said you should do. :)

I'm guessing someone has parsed this out or it would be common knowledge that agi is more valuable, but interesting nonetheless.

[Baler]

AC shown on the titanium client is not equal to your AC on p99. :)

[ChooChoo Train]

Bard with lute and regen playing with and without AGI jewelry against same low lvl rogue mob just let that shit parse overnight.

[magnetaress]

AGI > Worn AC > HP if not tank

if warrior warn AC is able to be pushed to crazy levels

everyone is right what u see in the client is not to be believed its fake

the AC u get from AGI, while less in number than from worn AC behaves entirely different than the AC u get from worn AC u cant compare apples and oranges

buffed and agi ac is > all, that is why a spell with +14 AC is like adding literally 2x levels of mitigation to your character

feel free not believing me and do the parses

same with secondary slot ac it is more special than pants ac also iksars meagure innate scalie 15 ac buff is not considered worn ac for the sake of ac calculatins its the cooler betterer AC

the min maxers who play here and 'swear by classic' really have no idea what they are doing they just like seeing 'higher numbers'

[jolanar]

level 1 dwarf warrior with 10 defence, 75 agi vs decaying dwarf skeleton

gets hit 91/253

ie 36% of attacks hit him.

level 1 elf warrior with 10 defence, 125 agi vs decaying dwarf skeleton

gets hit 59/143

ie 41% of attacks hit him.


Both characters maxed defence, no equipment on.

Small sample size, so poor signal : noise, but as a pilot it seems to throw the anomaly up that either the extra 50 agility the elf had actually made his avoidance worse or there is another factor (assuming not due to chance). Or perhaps something to do with how gamparse works out fights.

edit: I ran another parse for 125 agi 10 defence level 1 vs decaying dwarf skeleton, got 35/84 hits, again 41% hits. This time I counted the hits vs misses manually.

Gonna run a parse on the 75 agi dwarf again and see what I find. Little bit worried agi might be broken... it does seem the elf got hungry and thirsty whereas the dwarf did not...

This may warrant further, proper, investigation. With large sample sizes.

None of this addresses the potential increase to parry/block though. I'm far too lazy to test but I feel like I do block more with a higher agi value on my monk.

Yeah me and one of my fellow guildie monks found a weird thing.

the Exe hood which is 5ac +4 str +9 dex. gave us 5 ac. vs Black headband ac2 +2str, +3 dex +4 stm +4 cha + 1 int, +3agi + 4 hp.
When we'd take off hood and put on black headband we lost 5 ac.

Which makes no sense to me, as headband has 2 ac + agi. So shouldn't we only lost like 3ac or even less sense there is Agi on headband.

May also be weight related? Generally speaking the AC value on the paperdoll doesn't tell you much useful info.

[magnetaress]

All you are doing is testing avoidance agi does fuck all for avoidance. Every one has basically the same avoidance.

Now test mitigation or total damage taken.

[Jimjam]

All you are doing is testing avoidance agi does fuck all for avoidance. Every one has basically the same avoidance.

Now test mitigation or total damage taken.

It would be nice to find how negligible the effect on agi is for avoidance. Seems I'd need a way larger sample to get meaningful results.

As to mitigation, the below is meaningless due to small sample size, but here is how that decaying skeleton smacked down the empty inventory un armed unarmoured max defence level 1 warriors (dwarf and woodelf). The table shows the different damage values, how often they occurred, and what % of the hits were this damage.


75 Agi:

dmg | f | %
4 | 8 | 5.0
3 | 38 | 23.9
2 | 38 | 23.9
1 | 75 | 47.7


125 Agi:

dmg | f | %
4 | 4 | 8.5
3 | 11 | 23.4
2 | 11 | 23.4
1 | 21 | 44.7

Entertainingly as well as having better avoidance the dwarf also had better mitigation.

A statistician may disagree, I think at this point I have conclusively proved elves are pansies, and having 50 more agi than a dwarf does nothing to stop this.

[Kich867]

It would be nice to find how negligible the effect on agi is for avoidance. Seems I'd need a way larger sample to get meaningful results.

As to mitigation, the below is meaningless due to small sample size, but here is how that decaying skeleton smacked down the empty inventory un armed unarmoured max defence level 1 warriors (dwarf and woodelf). The table shows the different damage values, how often they occurred, and what % of the hits were this damage.


75 Agi:

dmg | f | %
4 | 8 | 5.0
3 | 38 | 23.9
2 | 38 | 23.9
1 | 75 | 47.7


125 Agi:

dmg | f | %
4 | 4 | 8.5
3 | 11 | 23.4
2 | 11 | 23.4
1 | 21 | 44.7

Entertainingly as well as having better avoidance the dwarf also had better mitigation.

A statistician may disagree, I think at this point I have conclusively proved elves are pansies, and having 50 more agi than a dwarf does nothing to stop this.

Might be a lot easier to get this data with a cleric and a shaman friend, pull like 15-20 level 1 mobs, let them swing for like half an hour, get the occasional heal.

Unfortunately I only have my warrior on green else I would assist =/.

[fadetree]

AC is composed of two values : mitigation and avoidance. It shows as one number but internally it is handled separately. AGI affects only the avoidance component, so increasing AGI will make your displayed number go up, but the question is how the game actually handles avoidance internally. There's some real questions here - the overall effect, or lack of it, (or the possibility that it's actually negative on P99) might be hard to directly notice so there's no way to tell without some rigorous old school parsing.
Getting in the wayback machine and looking at old material from Ranger's Glade, Steel Warriors, and The Safehouse might provide some context, but of course we'd need to parse P99.

[DMN]

Anyone considering testing it should keep in mind a few quirks in other parts of EQ: When enemies green out/low blue it seems they are way more likely to not resist spells. It could be that agility too has similar functionality and that your avoidance is already at a maximum when fighting mobs on that lower end of the spectrum.

Try to use the exact same mob for all tests... a DWing enchanter/necro/mage pet would probably be ideal for saving on time/healing. They will simply give you more hits for less overall damage so it's less healing needed for the tester.

Try to get the pet and the tester to be the exact same level to eliminate as much level differential noise there might be the equation.

Strip tester naked for first test, and the second test only add agility buffs and any item that gives only agility or other stats but not AC. Shaman agility buff would obviously be great here. It would be ideal(but not necessary) if the tester had close to base 75 agility as possible, so you can create a greater relative agility discrepancy in the higher agility test.

I'd be curious of the results, but as I said before it's not really going to change much due to the limited itemization found in the game.

[magnetaress]

so in true EQ fashion gear and stats makes less difference then levels and the standard devation requires a very large parse...

if agi saves u 1 dmg it will take 300,000 hits at lvl 1

need a /tesbuff server, and I wouldn't really have a super ton of faith in the combat code on p99 tho it 'feels' OK ish

maybe you just have statistically really bad luck or your quantum feels towards dwarves make your /rolls biased, it is quite possible

also parry, block, dodge, and riposte per the wiki don't use agi for anything they are flat skill checks, that is why monks have straight up better avoidance than any other classic class, with rogues coming in next on avoidance.

warriors and knights have the highest mitigation

warriors and knights get the most benifit from AC, monks, rogues, and rangers get OK benifit from AC and AGI helps them more then max AC because their AC is capped in the system

basically how it works, always worked, and I am pretty sure how Nilbog made it if you can bother parsing a 60 monk vs war vs rogue

even cons always ploued thru peoples ac/mitigation, u should test a mob that is dark blue, 4 lvls below u and see what the difference is when u add and subtract ac or agi as they will not bound out of the lower ranges of your mitigation then, essentially making combat code meaningless, because the nuance is not calculated when the mob just max hits regularly

[fadetree]

Anyone considering testing it should keep in mind a few quirks in other parts of EQ: When enemies green out/low blue it seems they are way more likely to not resist spells. It could be that agility too has similar functionality and that your avoidance is already at a maximum when fighting mobs on that lower end of the spectrum.

Try to use the exact same mob for all tests... a DWing enchanter/necro/mage pet would probably be ideal for saving on time/healing. They will simply give you more hits for less overall damage so it's less healing needed for the tester.

Try to get the pet and the tester to be the exact same level to eliminate as much level differential noise there might be the equation.

Strip tester naked for first test, and the second test only add agility buffs and any item that gives only agility or other stats but not AC. Shaman agility buff would obviously be great here. It would be ideal(but not necessary) if the tester had close to base 75 agility as possible, so you can create a greater relative agility discrepancy in the higher agility test.

I'd be curious of the results, but as I said before it's not really going to change much due to the limited itemization found in the game.



That's a good approach, as long as there isn't some kind of 'pet on PC' handling that's different. At least as a check, I would include some 'mob on PC' even though it's harder to control for. I also would suggest doing it in more than one level band, i.e L1 on L1, L10 on L1, L10 onL10, etc. Of course, that adds a lot of work, so it is just a suggestion.

[fadetree]

so in true EQ fashion gear and stats makes less difference then levels and the standard devation requires a very large parse...

if agi saves u 1 dmg it will take 300,000 hits at lvl 1

need a /tesbuff server, and I wouldn't really have a super ton of faith in the combat code on p99 tho it 'feels' OK ish

maybe you just have statistically really bad luck or your quantum feels towards dwarves make your /rolls biased, it is quite possible

also parry, block, dodge, and riposte per the wiki don't use agi for anything they are flat skill checks, that is why monks have straight up better avoidance than any other classic class, with rogues coming in next on avoidance.

warriors and knights have the highest mitigation

warriors and knights get the most benifit from AC, monks, rogues, and rangers get OK benifit from AC and AGI helps them more then max AC because their AC is capped in the system

basically how it works, always worked, and I am pretty sure how Nilbog made it if you can bother parsing a 60 monk vs war vs rogue

even cons always ploued thru peoples ac/mitigation, u should test a mob that is dark blue, 4 lvls below u and see what the difference is when u add and subtract ac or agi as they will not bound out of the lower ranges of your mitigation then, essentially making combat code meaningless, because the nuance is not calculated when the mob just max hits regularly

They wouldn't be generally testing how AC works, just how AGI affects avoidance. It's all good to keep in mind though. Testbuff servers and the like are not available. How the wiki and everything else says it works does not matter, we can just get data from the parse. I agree it might be handled differently for individual classes...but we are trying to answer the question - does AGI have any real effect on anything? It's a good point though, should probably test with melee rather than caster because that's the class type that is interested in AGI and also where you would expect it to have the most effect.

[Ivory]

should probably test with melee rather than caster because that's the class type that is interested in AGI and also where you would expect it to have the most effect.

Actually I think it would be more useful for casters.... since AC is more difficult to get from armor (especially to stack high enough to mitigate enough damage), but you can get high agility items....which might also make casting while being attacked easier (since more likely to avoid the attacks and get it off).

My necromancer I play as a tank (since I can far outtank my pet and add a lot of melee damage). If agi is better for that, then it seems like a good option.

[magnetaress]

Actually I think it would be more useful for casters.... since AC is more difficult to get from armor (especially to stack high enough to mitigate enough damage), but you can get high agility items....which might also make casting while being attacked easier (since more likely to avoid the attacks and get it off).

My necromancer I play as a tank (since I can far outtank my pet and add a lot of melee damage). If agi is better for that, then it seems like a good option.

AGI does not increase avoidance


none of ur parses will ever show dat

[Jimjam]

even cons always ploued thru peoples ac/mitigation, u should test a mob that is dark blue, 4 lvls below u and see what the difference is when u add and subtract ac or agi as they will not bound out of the lower ranges of your mitigation then, essentially making combat code meaningless, because the nuance is not calculated when the mob just max hits regularly

I think it is important to parse things that are ‘realistic’. It doesn’t matter if agi adds a tonne of avoidance against a player’s pet as you won’t often be having that fight.

I did datamine my ranger’s logs in the past, back when he was levelling in KC. Back then i found a bunch of characters of various levels which were tanking the level ~51 mobs (knights, bodyguards, etc) and their mitigation was almost identical. I can’t remember if this was before the AC ‘fix’ or not. What I do remember is rangers had ATROCIOUS avoidance compared to to monks and knights. Their low avoidance and smaller hp pool is the real reason they were bad tanka; my parsed ranger mitigated fine.

Rangers have (during kunark and earlier velious) poor defence caps, especially above 50, compared to other melee, and as the formula posted earlier claims this is a large part of avoidance.

[magnetaress]

I think it is important to parse things that are ‘realistic’. It doesn’t matter if agi adds a tonne of avoidance against a player’s pet as you won’t often be having that fight.

I did datamine my ranger’s logs in the past, back when he was levelling in KC. Back then i found a bunch of characters of various levels which were tanking the level ~51 mobs (knights, bodyguards, etc) and their mitigation was almost identical. I can’t remember if this was before the AC ‘fix’ or not. What I do remember is rangers had ATROCIOUS avoidance compared to to monks and knights. Their low avoidance and smaller hp pool is the real reason they were bad tanka; my parsed ranger mitigated fine.

Rangers have (during kunark and earlier velious) poor defence caps, especially above 50, compared to other melee, and as the formula posted earlier claims this is a large part of avoidance.

low skill cap on dodge, riposte, parry, RIP

may as well not even bother training that 75 dodge on a caster, but lol it has saved me on rare occasion i have seen myself dodge during a gate or somethin

das EQ...

I too think they should have made it better, but tbh, the strength of this game comes from the group interplay not the gear we can farm, except maybe on live at high lvl, i am bout to test that out :D ;)

I would be curious to see what equiping a 2hander or a real beeeefy shield would prase in those situations on a ranger, bet it would be a lot better, i don't see why rangers cant hold agry while wielding either sword and board or 2h

--------

anyway thx for sharing your story, that is what i would expect! also

[DMN]

Sounding like a conspiracy theorist here. Like they are going to take the time to code an entirely different set of equations for pets attacking players ? Seems legit.

[fadetree]

AGI does not increase avoidance


none of ur parses will ever show dat

I think you are wrong. It specifically does affect avoidance only.

[fadetree]

Actually I think it would be more useful for casters.... since AC is more difficult to get from armor (especially to stack high enough to mitigate enough damage), but you can get high agility items....which might also make casting while being attacked easier (since more likely to avoid the attacks and get it off).

My necromancer I play as a tank (since I can far outtank my pet and add a lot of melee damage). If agi is better for that, then it seems like a good option.

You misunderstand my point. I was saying that it probably would have the most noticeable effect on a melee, and thus the signal in the parse would be greater.

This thread is starting to get offtrack. If anyone tries the parsing, good luck and let me know if you need any help.

[magnetaress]

You misunderstand my point. I was saying that it probably would have the most noticeable effect on a melee, and thus the signal in the parse would be greater.

This thread is starting to get offtrack. If anyone tries the parsing, good luck and let me know if you need any help.

not sure but both servers are probably running custom code from the first pvp box which did have a ton of custom code lol

don't think p99 was ever stock emu

[fadetree]

not sure but both servers are probably running custom code from the first pvp box which did have a ton of custom code lol

don't think p99 was ever stock emu

I have no idea what you're talking about by saying 'from the first pvp box'.

If you are implying that the codebase in P99 is so different that you could possibly be right about some of the stuff you're saying, I don't think so. You can't make large structural changes to core algorithms and not expect it to affect everything else in the game. Did they tweak the AC code? Yeah, probably. Did they decide to fundamentally change the way the algorithm works? Nah. Of course, anything is possible, but it means you can't support your 'agi does not affect avoidance' statement either.

If I recall, they did start with stockemu but wound up doing some serious changes...but mostly around the client interaction and the data content. I'll let someone else chime in who knows more than I do.

In case anyone is interested, here's some good information about how EQ treats AC calculations. Sure, it's from way later than we are, but it shows the roots of where we probably are now. It's also one of many, many resources that explicitly state that AGI affects avoidance only.

https://everquest.fanra.info/wiki/Armor_Class

[magnetaress]

I have no idea what you're talking about by saying 'from the first pvp box'.

If you are implying that the codebase in P99 is so different that you could possibly be right about some of the stuff you're saying, I don't think so. You can't make large structural changes to core algorithms and not expect it to affect everything else in the game. Did they tweak the AC code? Yeah, probably. Did they decide to fundamentally change the way the algorithm works? Nah. Of course, anything is possible, but it means you can't support your 'agi does not affect avoidance' statement either.

If I recall, they did start with stockemu but wound up doing some serious changes...but mostly around the client interaction and the data content. I'll let someone else chime in who knows more than I do.

In case anyone is interested, here's some good information about how EQ treats AC calculations. Sure, it's from way later than we are, but it shows the roots of where we probably are now. It's also one of many, many resources that explicitly state that AGI affects avoidance only.

https://everquest.fanra.info/wiki/Armor_Class

its pretty clear u dont like nor respect me but i've been around here forever and u can disagree with me if u want... but like devnull or somebody made some servers back in they day and they are all friends with the project leeds and this project goes way back to 2020, so unless u are someones forum alt and u can come out and prove that its not some wonky custom code, go for it

my memory is awful but i'm usualy right :D

[Jimjam]

low skill cap on dodge, riposte, parry, RIP

may as well not even bother training that 75 dodge on a caster, but lol it has saved me on rare occasion i have seen myself dodge during a gate or somethin

das EQ...

I too think they should have made it better, but tbh, the strength of this game comes from the group interplay not the gear we can farm, except maybe on live at high lvl, i am bout to test that out :D ;)

I would be curious to see what equiping a 2hander or a real beeeefy shield would prase in those situations on a ranger, bet it would be a lot better, i don't see why rangers cant hold agry while wielding either sword and board or 2h

--------

anyway thx for sharing your story, that is what i would expect! also

Seeing as mitigation wasn’t the problem I doubt adding a shield would fix anything, unless you think that would improve dodge/parry/riposte chances or add to base avoidance?

Sounding like a conspiracy theorist here. Like they are going to take the time to code an entirely different set of equations for pets attacking players ? Seems legit.

Pets have different ac, avoidance, accuracy, attack, damage tables, damage base to xp mobs. What might be sufficient ac or avoidance for a pet might not be for an npc... and don’t forget NPCs aren’t all the same either.

[magnetaress]

Shields improve mitigation a lot more than anything else. That is all u can do rly. And pray to Brad.

*chomps imaginary #s*

[Vizax_Xaziv]

Speaking anecdotally, my Shaman Wolf seems to be noticably tankier when I buffs his AGI vs when I don't.

For what (very) little that info is worth!