Claw of Lightning is disappointing (ranger)

[Jimjam]

Originally Posted by Goregasmic [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

The cap seem to be the same across all classes …. Rangers getting trampled post 50 compared to knights/war seemed to be an avoidance problem more than a mitigation one.

Tick in the box for ranger - lower avoidance = more ds = more dps. Best tank!!

[TytosOfEight]

I’ve done my own testing at level 60 on Geonids and there was no difference in terms of damage mitigation between 100ac on my Ranger, whereas my Monk saw a fairly meaningful difference. So there does seem to be differences between classes.

[Snaggles]

When people ask me what they should do, I tend to say “get droppable haste and a shovel or Meljeldin”. If pushed, I say just upgrade the MH (whatever and whenever you can) and keep the Swiftwind. Even this route is a huge bump in a typical EC ranger’s DPS. I feel it is solid advice but is based on uncontrolled testing and a bit of dogma.

Many questions are still out there. I’ve got the time next month, the gear, and the curiosity. Hopefully with some help, a thread with answers will be possible.

[Goregasmic]

Originally Posted by TytosOfEight [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I’ve done my own testing at level 60 on Geonids and there was no difference in terms of damage mitigation between 100ac on my Ranger, whereas my Monk saw a fairly meaningful difference. So there does seem to be differences between classes.

Parses or it never happened.

We'd have to know your ranger AC before and after the 100ac increase and non-velious raid geared monks probably have much lower than 200ac worn so yes, an AC increase would benefit them more. But monks also have better mitigation so without detailed data we don't know where the difference would come from but so far it doesn't seem to be AC for the level ranges tested.

My only "claim" is there seems to be a 160ac hard cap on level 40 mobs and a 200ac hard cap on level 45 mobs, regardless of classes tested. The parses showed it so this is pretty much undisputable. No one can claim AC is useless on a ranger. Without further parses on higher level mobs it is hard to pinpoint where and why the wheels fall off for rangers.

Geonids are 44-48 IIRC so I suspect the results wouldn't be wildly different compared to the lvl 45 mob but without detailed parses we'll never know.

This is a post about the claw of lightning though so if people feel strongly about ranger AC, lets go discuss it in the appropriate thread.

[bcbrown]

Originally Posted by TytosOfEight [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

The data doesn’t demonstrate this though, you’re just assuming this to be the case at higher levels, as no one has provided that data for higher levels. For example, the testing done so far at lower levels may not of hit the (upper) soft cap yet. Lots of other people who have done their own testing suggest that ranger AC is broken at higher levels. So this still remains to be seen.

Yes. The only data that I provided in that thread demonstrates that against a level 40 mob, a druid, cleric, and ranger all have similar response to adding AC; that there's no cap whether hard or soft up to 160 worn ac; that adding ac makes otherwise-max-hits into min hits; and that above a (mob-specific) "squelch point" of 160 ac for this mob there's no longer much if any value to ac. Sogundordor provided data against a level 45 mob with a ranger and sk that are in line with my conclusions. No one has yet provided similar data against higher mobs.

Originally Posted by TytosOfEight [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I’ve done my own testing at level 60 on Geonids and there was no difference in terms of damage mitigation between 100ac on my Ranger, whereas my Monk saw a fairly meaningful difference. So there does seem to be differences between classes.

I think you missed a couple words. Between 100 ac and what? I would be very appreciative if you read through that thread, especially the last 4-5 pages, and added some data from your testing. Ideally hit distribution charts similar to the ones I provided.

And I have an open offer to anyone who wants to do some ac parsing to heal them on either blue or green.

[TytosOfEight]

Originally Posted by Goregasmic [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Parses or it never happened.

We'd have to know your ranger AC before and after the 100ac increase and non-velious raid geared monks probably have much lower than 200ac worn so yes, an AC increase would benefit them more. But monks also have better mitigation so without detailed data we don't know where the difference would come from but so far it doesn't seem to be AC for the level ranges tested.

My only "claim" is there seems to be a 160ac hard cap on level 40 mobs and a 200ac hard cap on level 45 mobs, regardless of classes tested. The parses showed it so this is pretty much undisputable. No one can claim AC is useless on a ranger. Without further parses on higher level mobs it is hard to pinpoint where and why the wheels fall off for rangers.

Geonids are 44-48 IIRC so I suspect the results wouldn't be wildly different compared to the lvl 45 mob but without detailed parses we'll never know.

This is a post about the claw of lightning though so if people feel strongly about ranger AC, lets go discuss it in the appropriate thread.

I'm not linking parse because I'm not digging through my log files to find it, and I don't care much if you believe it or not. My point still stands about higher levels though.

Having said that, my ranger AC went from 1055 to 1160 (no difference on Geonids after 60 kills - 30 in each AC group). On my Monk, his AC was higher, and it was something like 1170 and 1260, and he saw a fairly meaningful difference in damage mitigation on the same mobs.

Feel free to test it yourself.

Regarding the main point of this thread: I find my Cek sword more frustrating than BoF/SW overall, because it just misses so many damn swings. My BoF/SW feels more consistent overall, albeit with fewer high parses.

[Ripqozko]

Originally Posted by TytosOfEight [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

My BoF/SW feels more consistent overall, albeit with fewer high parses.

thats the whole point, you will get fewer higher parses with 1h, minus like 3 raid targets.

sure it may "feel better" but its not, generally speaking. RNG will RNG.

[TytosOfEight]

Originally Posted by Ripqozko [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

thats the whole point, you will get fewer higher parses with 1h, minus like 3 raid targets.

sure it may "feel better" but its not, generally speaking. RNG will RNG.

So to be clear: on Vindi, for example, my Cek will range from 65 to 85dps, whereas my BoF/SW will fairly consistently sit in 75ish dps region. I also find my Cek to parse worse on many ToV named vs. BoF/SW.

[Ripqozko]

Originally Posted by TytosOfEight [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

So to be clear: on Vindi, for example, my Cek will range from 65 to 85dps, whereas my BoF/SW will fairly consistently sit in 75ish dps region. I also find my Cek to parse worse on many ToV named vs. BoF/SW.

Right and we seen parses as high as mid 90s with cek on vindi with really good rng, something bof can never do. If ya comfy with 75 across board cool, if ya want a higher ceiling then cek. From my rng I'm not sure I've gotten a 65 on vindi with cek, at worst been around 70 with bad rng. I'll take my chances with having the ability to go higher .

[TytosOfEight]

Originally Posted by Ripqozko [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Right and we seen parses as high as mid 90s with cek on vindi with really good rng, something bof can never do. If ya comfy with 75 across board cool, if ya want a higher ceiling then cek. From my rng I'm not sure I've gotten a 65 on vindi with cek, at worst been around 70 with bad rng. I'll take my chances with having the ability to go higher .

That's a fair point. The highest I've had with Cek is 94, but I've had a fair few where I've struggled to hit the high 60s. It's the inconsistency that I find frustrating.