Factual Information about Shield Ally -- Any pro raiders out there

[Somatic]

Ok i did a search and there is a LOT of posts about shield ally.  Problem is most have sooo many conflicting views.Lets try to clear up this issue.  If you have answers to my questions please post your view, but try to make it as simple and to the point as possible.Questions-----------------------Does Shield ally only work off of your shield?  I.E.  You don't have to wear all leather gear.How can you tell when Shield ally has gone off, maybe through ACT?  -- I messed around with chat settings but did not get far.<div></div>

[Uilamin]

you can only tell through parsing a fight with and without it.Now for raids, supposedly the only avoidance that works is due to shields.So that means in a raid situation shield ally would only work off your shield if it is equiped.  Could this help if it works properly?Yes it could and would probably give an hit avoidance increase to the MT by 0.5 to 2%.For non-raid situations, on a plate tank with plate armour on and the templar with shield and plate amour, the spell would give a 2-4% avoidance increase.<div></div>

[Somatic]

<div></div>I've seen another post where someone had pictures of Blocks ...he claimed those blocks where the Spell working?  Was this just BS i was reading?-- If only way to determain effectivness is via comparing raids...that's Horrible... I mean from raid to raid people will DPS different/ heal different / etc.<div></div><p>Message Edited by Somatic on <span class=date_text>12-03-2006</span> <span class=time_text>08:29 PM</span>

[Docimodo]

I've seen the skill pop up in my avoid logs so yes it does seem to work on raids. Although I'm not sure as to the actual percentage of avoid it can provide as my ACT didn't seem to differentiate it from my own avoids. As to how you can improve the avoid it provides well if it works like a fighters avoid transfer then the higher your avoid the better, regardless of the type of avoid, this would mean wearing cloth armor and pumping agi/defense on top of wearing a shield. if it's only from the shield then getting the one with the highest protection and buying the +block% adornments would be all you can do.

[Timaarit]

I have made parses on this. I placed 8 points on it and I am blocking roughly 2,5% of incoming hits on KoS raids. It really makes no difference how high my own avoidance is when fighting those epics, it is the same with 19% avoidance and 35% avoidance. <div></div>

[EQAditu]

<div></div>I tried making a post earlier, but somehow it made the EQ2 forums go down, so I'll try again <span>:smileytongue:</span><hr size="2" width="100%"><p>Due to plate tanks gaining huge avoidance by wearing a robe, the devs said they were going change it so that you avoidance is partially determined by your class' armor type, not your currently worn type.  So even if you wore leather etc to change you avoidance, it won't matter soon.  But, I'm of an opinion that you can only lend blocks to your Shield Ally target, not misses.  Mostly because that's all that shows up in logs.  Misses don't even allow the possibility that it can caused by someone else.</p><p></p><blockquote><hr size="2" width="100%">Although I'm not sure as to the actual percentage of avoid it can provide as my ACT didn't seem to differentiate it from my own avoids.<hr size="2" width="100%"></blockquote><p>Here's the difference between Shield Ally causing avoidance and not:<font size="1"><b>(1165115575)[Sat Dec 02 22:12:55 2006] a tireless fear-touched minion tries to slash Oonog, <u><span>but YOU block.</span></u>(1165115575)[Sat Dec 02 22:12:55 2006] a tireless fear-touched minion tries to slash Oonog, <u><span>but Oonog blocks.</span></u></b></font></p><p>You don't look at your own incoming attacks, you look at the person you're shielding.  ACT will display the first underlined string as "blocks", and the second as "YOU block".  It will only show the name of the person if it does not match the person who is being attacked.</p><p>Anyhow, yeah... I've seen similar results to Timaarit back before the expansion.  Luckily for us, only mob level will affect our numbers...  for a shield, a solo or epic x4 mob will be the same.  Or so the devs in beta explained.</p><div></div>

[Timaarit]

<div></div><blockquote><hr>EQAditu wrote:<p>Anyhow, yeah... I've seen similar results to Timaarit back before the expansion.  Luckily for us, only mob level will affect our numbers...  for a shield, a solo or epic x4 mob will be the same.  Or so the devs in beta explained.</p><div></div><hr></blockquote>Yes, that was how it was explained before LU29. But they lied. As it is, the mobs have even more hit bonuses than they used to. Lvl 74 x4 epics autoattack will completely ignore any avoidance exept for the uncontested one. And their CA's will ignore even that. Castle Mistmore's orange con epics miss roughly 5% of all their attacks. Any even con non-epic named will miss roughly 10% on a monk with 68% avoidance. So mob level and 'quality' still affects our number. You will see lot more blocks when grouping than when fighting epics even though you will propably have higher avoidance when fighting those epics.<div></div><p>Message Edited by Timaarit on <span class=date_text>12-04-2006</span> <span class=time_text>04:19 PM</span>

[EQAditu]

<div></div>Lied huh?  Most people on the forums still seem to believe it, that I've read at least.  I'd link what the Dev said, but its in a locked beta forum that I don't even have access to anymore, so I'll just quote for reference and apologize for going slightly off topic.Wish I could remember the author's name, might have been Lead Designer Dymus.<blockquote><hr size="2" width="100%"><font size="1"><i>The reason shield block percentage is capped at 19% (for a high level fabled shield) is that block is the only un-contested roll in the avoidance chain.  It is a true 19% block no matter the skill or the solo / heroic / epic quality of the mob.  Only level on a mob modifies the shield block chance.  So, it is the most powerful and reliable form of avoidance you can get.  Thus, it is capped lower.</i>The order of the avoidance checks is as follows:<b>Parry Check:</b>  (Base 5%, Chance increases with additional parry skill.)  Parry chance is modified by level and offense skill of the mob you're fighting.  It can drop to 0 if the mob has enough skill or levels above you.  Note:  Base 20% of parries turn into ripostes.  (Modified by certain achievements)<b>Block Check:</b>  (Shield Required).  The quality of the shield determines its block chance.  Block is only modified by mob level.<b>Deflection Check:</b>  (Brawler only) Base 25%, Chance increases with additional Deflection skill.  Deflection chance is modified by level and offense skill of the mob you're fighting.  It can drop to 0 if the mob has enough skill or levels above you.<b>Dodge Check:</b>  (Everyone) Base is determined by type of armor worn.  Chance increases with additional Defense Skill and Agility.  Dodge chance is modified by level and offense skill of the mob you're fighting.  It can drop to 0 if the mob has enough skill or levels above you.</font><hr size="2" width="100%"></blockquote><p>The first paragraph in italic seems to be invalid to some people in the way that they can find shields that bring them to over 19% block.  I think I have even read one dev say something about 20% or more.  Anyhow, the point of the quote is just to give what they said at the point of late EoF beta.  Most brawler verses warrior avoidance threads seem to mention this ideology of block being uncontested by mob quality.</p><div></div>

[Somatic]

What shield gives 19 percent block for plate healers?My shield only does like 8.6 percent ;-(.<div></div>

[EQAditu]

<div></div>lol, I'm sure no priest usable shield can reach the supposed blocking cap...  however the +blocking adornments will add directly to your avoidance percentage...  not +1% of your number, but in beta it seemed to actually make my block percentage listed in persona go from 8ish to 10ish with 2 adornments.<div></div>

[Timaarit]

<blockquote><hr>EQAditu wrote:<div></div>Lied huh?  Most people on the forums still seem to believe it, that I've read at least.  I'd link what the Dev said, but its in a locked beta forum that I don't even have access to anymore, so I'll just quote for reference and apologize for going slightly off topic.<hr></blockquote>Yes, they lied. On the very first explanation where they were saying why the changes were needed, they said that it was also to fix avoidance tanking by getting rid of those hitting bonuses. But since avoidance tanking is still broken because of those bonuses, they lied.<div></div>

[EQAditu]

<div></div>You're saying they lied about something unrelated to this discussion though.  The post that I quoted from in fact had nothing to do with avoidance tanking.  All I care in regards to the quote is whether or not shield blocking is subject to the same modifications.  The rest of it is a non-issue to me and this discussion as far as I'm concerned.<div></div>

[Timaarit]

Block has an uncontested portion for fighters. But I really dont know if priests have that. Propably since Shield Ally is blocking something even when fighting those 74^^^ x4 nameds. And what I wrote really is part of the issue. Most people think that if they get their avoidance from 20% to 30%, they will block more. Which is incorrect since they wont be blocking more against epics in particular. So if a cleric has been collecting +defence gear and +agi gear in hopes for being better at blocking with Shield Ally, they have done it for nothing. <div></div>

[Boli32]

<div></div>As far as I know now block is no longer capped... or at least capped a lot higher - otherwise the entire end ability for Paladin's would be made a bit redundant.As for shields I've only come across 2 round shields for Priests<span class="itemTitle">Disc of Protection & Bulwark of the Brave. Both are treasured.BotB gives +8.5% blockDoP gives + 8.4% blockDoP gves +18 Wis and + power which the other does not however nd its the shield I use in soloing. It dropped for me in Vaults.</span><div></div><p>Message Edited by boli on <span class=date_text>12-05-2006</span> <span class=time_text>11:00 AM</span>

[EQAditu]

<div></div><div><blockquote><hr>Timaarit wrote:Block has an uncontested portion for fighters. But I really dont know if priests have that. Propably since Shield Ally is blocking something even when fighting those 74^^^ x4 nameds.And what I wrote really is part of the issue. Most people think that if they get their avoidance from 20% to 30%, they will block more. Which is incorrect since they wont be blocking more against epics in particular. So if a cleric has been collecting +defence gear and +agi gear in hopes for being better at blocking with Shield Ally, they have done it for nothing.<div></div><hr></blockquote>The way they explained it, it sounded like it had to do with a shield, not the class holding the shield.  It would be rather strange for a shield to act differently for each class.  And yet, of course SoE is making base avoidance(IE defense/missing) have to do with your class LU30, so I guess strange things have already happened.Anyhow, if those most people think that anything but a shield will affect their chance to block, then they haven't read very far into this thread, and that's why I thought it didn't directly have to do with this topic.  More specifically, my opinion that <u><i><b>nothing</b></i></u> a priest has will affect Shield Ally except for your shield/blocking percentage.  So with everything like AGI and defense etc thrown out the window, it doesn't matter if an epic can negate it or not, because it doesn't matter to Shield Ally.</div>

[Timaarit]

<blockquote><hr>EQAditu wrote:<div></div><div> More specifically, my opinion that <u><i><b>nothing</b></i></u> a priest has will affect Shield Ally except for your shield/blocking percentage.  So with everything like AGI and defense etc thrown out the window, it doesn't matter if an epic can negate it or not, because it doesn't matter to Shield Ally.</div><hr></blockquote>Well, what does the skill say again? Gives an additional chance to use the casters avoidance. Not block but avoidance. This means defence and all agi modifiers. But you are right, all those have been thrown out of the window since avoidance is broken.<div></div>

[EQAditu]

<div></div>I beleive what it means to say is that it can allow block, parry(& riposte) and deflect to protect your buffed ally.  After all this buff originally belonged to fighter classes.  Look at avoidance messages in logs... as I mentioned you can cause blocks for another target, but missing doesn't even allow for the possibility.  English, Chinese, German and Russian logs are all the same in this respect(been a while since I looked at French logs).  Misses never mention anyone else causing them.  You'd think if it was possible one of these localizations might allude to it.  Missing is a function of defense, and AGI?<div></div>

[Timaarit]

It is totally possible. But all you have for it is your belief. On the other hand, I really dont trust the devs and thus whatever they type in to the descriptions is very likely to be incorrect. Since avoidance means everything from block to defence, not just block, parry and riposte. <div></div>

[MoonSorceror]

<div></div>Ok since I was the person to post the numbers on Shield Ally the first time, here some parses after the great nerv - Lab run on Dec 12th...MT blocks|parries|avoids  - 440 timesTemplar blocks - 90 timesI was actually blocking a CA from a named, so yes it does work on Epics and Epic Nameds and also CA's...And with a bit over 1.4k HP per Hit on the average my Shield Ally avoided around 130k damage - I have doubts that I could get this as a bonus from crit heal increase...<div></div><p>Message Edited by MoonSorceror on <span class=date_text>12-10-2006</span> <span class=time_text>03:50 PM</span>

[Omega]

The aa description says "your avoidance" which is all your avoidance checks together. No where does it say "only your shield". I find myself unsure where the assumption came from that only a shield will contribute to this ability. While assumming SOE wrote the description wrong is plausable, i think it should at least be tested. It seems to me the simple way to see if its only a shield that works is to not wear a shield and see if the ability still works.In any case helping your MT avoid any number of hits in a raid seems beneficial to me. I think it comes down to how good your avoidance is and if you want to invest the points to get to and put into this.

[Hopefulne]

<DIV><FONT size=1>The order of the avoidance checks is as follows:<BR><B>Parry Check:</B>  (Base 5%, Chance increases with additional parry skill.)  Parry chance is modified by level and offense skill of the mob you're fighting.  It can drop to 0 if the mob has enough skill or levels above you. <FONT color=#66ff00>-Templars don't have parry and epic would probably reduce this to next to nothing if we did</FONT></FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT size=1><B>Block Check:</B>  (Shield Required).  The quality of the shield determines its block chance.  Block is only modified by mob level.<FONT color=#66ff00>-capped at 19% overall with temp managing 8.5%</FONT><BR><B>Deflection Check:</B>  (Brawler only) Base 25%, Chance increases with additional Deflection skill.  Deflection chance is modified by level and offense skill of the mob you're fighting.  It can drop to 0 if the mob has enough skill or levels above you. <FONT color=#66ff00>-we aren't brawlers</FONT></FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT size=1><B>Dodge Check:</B>  (Everyone) Base is determined by type of armor worn.  Chance increases with additional Defense Skill and Agility.  Dodge chance is modified by level and offense skill of the mob you're fighting.  <U>It can drop to 0 if the mob has enough skill or levels above you</U></FONT></DIV> <DIV><U><FONT size=1></FONT></U><FONT color=#66ff00 size=1></FONT> </DIV> <DIV>So against an epic shield ally would only tick on a successful block check (60% chance for 8.5% bulwark of the brave modified by mob level) It's possible that it would tick more often against solo/heroic mobs because of the dodge check - but then combat text wouldn't say ''templar dodges''</DIV>

[EQAditu]

<div></div><div></div><blockquote><hr>Omega03 wrote:The aa description says "your avoidance" which is all your avoidance checks together. No where does it say "only your shield". I find myself unsure where the assumption came from that only a shield will contribute to this ability. While assumming SOE wrote the description wrong is plausable, i think it should at least be tested. It seems to me the simple way to see if its only a shield that works is to not wear a shield and see if the ability still works.In any case helping your MT avoid any number of hits in a raid seems beneficial to me. I think it comes down to how good your avoidance is and if you want to invest the points to get to and put into this.<hr></blockquote>My dev quote above states that you cannot block without a shield.  And it <i>has</i> been tested.  <a href="http://eqiiforums.station.sony.com/eq2/board/message?board.id=13&message.id=27288#M27288" target="_blank">I did such tests back in August.</a> I have to this day <i>never</i> seen a block message without a shield.  Even with a shield with minimal protection stats, I have not caused a block message.  I honestly don't know why I have to answer this point every few months... this is the third time so far that I have to convince people that the description is not correct.  I provide parses, I provide dev posts, I provide logging logic... still I always have to further persuade people that it's not a simple "assumption", but something I have tried very hard to show.<div></div><hr size="2" width="100%">I'm just going to add one more point because I'm rather fed up with doing it by myself.  Create parsing results that show Shield Ally causing more misses on a subject.  A controlled lengthy test too.  I always have to show my parses, and rarely anyone else counterpoints with any... they just give me their "beliefs" then call what I show nothing more than a "belief".  It's insulting.  (No, I'm not trying to single you out Timaarit)  Maybe if someone even <i>attempts </i>to show an effort to counterpoint me with data, I'll do more conclusive testing.<p>Message Edited by EQAditu on <span class=date_text>12-11-2006</span> <span class=time_text>10:14 AM</span>

[Timaarit]

<blockquote><hr>EQAditu wrote: they just give me their "beliefs" then call what I show nothing more than a "belief".  It's insulting.  (No, I'm not trying to single you out Timaarit)  Maybe if someone even <i>attempts </i>to show an effort to counterpoint me with data, I'll do more conclusive testing. <hr></blockquote>Well, if you reread my posts, you will see that my data also supports what you are saying. But the fact is that I have seen higher parses for Shield Ally when fighting heroics.  So either our block is not totally uncontested, or other parts of avoidance affect Shield Ally. In any case, from raiders perspective, there is nothing the cleric can really do to improve the rate, it will stay at 2,5 to 3,5% regardless of the clerics avoidance. Let it be due to incorrect description or broken avoidance.<div></div>

[Bjerde]

I have respec'd to Shield Ally for the expansion. It certainly works on raids, I am using Bulwark of the Brave currently since it is the highest prtection shield I could find. I figured I would try it and I have been happy enough with it to keep it. I am still testing it really, haven't gone through logs a ton, but have a few times. Blocked a few shots off Chel'drak so it works on Epics fine.I would like to know how to set up ACT to parse it out though. I really would like to test this better than I have to see if I should keep it. Going through log files is tedious and I haven't done it as much as I should.The 30 sec AE avoid that comes after this is actually quite good. You can cast it on the main tank every 5 minutes. I use it all the time on pulls, along with Sanctuary. That alone is worth this line imo. With debuffs being very important I also went with all points in Skull Crack. Yeah I don't have the 2% heal crit, or spell haste anymore but honestly I don't miss them. (Spell haste was pretty good, but we have blessings and miracles to help out now too when things get bad)<div></div>

[Wastura]

<P>Maybe I'm missing something;</P> <P>I'm a raiding templar with a few server firsts and contested to my name, yet I've not ever been spec'ed to have this ability. How is it comparably to the normal raiding spec's? What's the pro's and at what %?</P>

[Bjerde]

Just did Deathtoll and had 73 Blocks, not too bad. That is using Bulwark of the Brave and I do not focus on agilty at all, I think my avoidance is 14%.

[highlander]

<DIV>I've been using this AA for the longest time because while others may disagree with me, I think our reactive casting times are fine as is and didn't need the additional AAs to speed up those spells.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Now, I've always noticed that single healing a tank thru almost any instance has been a cake walk, but now I'm more interested in the math of the choice I made.  When I used ACT on a raid recently, I couldn't find a damage/heal type for BLOCK under myself or the raid MT.  Where would I find that if I wanted to know how many hits I intercepted and blocked.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Thanks,</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>X</DIV>

[Bjerde]

<div></div>You have to look in the log files that are in your eq2 folder, it sits in the folder with your server name on it.SonyEverquest IIlogsservernameeq2log_NameMake sure you type /log in game to turn log file on.Thurs night I got over 100 blocks while raiding.Fri night, I used my Buckler with less Protection and got only 43 blocks, so I won't use that again <img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />. I did block a tail swipe twice in the Clockwork Factory, which hits for ave of 3-4k of crushing damage. I am doing fine healing, I think I will keep Shield Ally it is almost like having another stoneskin. The AE avoid in this line has helped many times, and we don't have to wait for the Bard's 15 min recast. I cast on tank every 5 min and he runs in avoiding first AE.<div></div><p>Message Edited by Bjerde on <span class=date_text>12-16-2006</span> <span class=time_text>06:23 AM</span>

[EQAditu]

<div></div>Hmm, I would be somewhat surprised if the AE avoidance buff worked on your MT much.  As far as I know AE avoidance spells do not protect the person the caster is targeting.  You can test this by mezzing a mob with Wondrous Buckling and then casting green(rays of faith) or blue(our deaggro) AEs around it.  If you pulled an encounter of mobs and target a non-mezzed mob, the mezzed mob will be unaffected by your AEs.  If you target the mezzed mob, even your blue AE deaggro spell that requires no target will affect the "AE protected" mob.  In this case it seems you can fully trust the description of the effect.  At least such was the case like six months ago when I last did the test.<hr size="2" width="100%">To find inside of ACT how many times you blocked for the tank, look at the tank's incoming damage, under a CA or autoattack type.  A sample path may be: Encounter->Tank->Incoming Damage->crush.  You will see a table of all incoming swings with things like damage scored or ripostes, Miss, parries.  What you are looking for is "YOU block".  The name of the person causing the avoidance is omitted unless it is not the person being attacked.ACT doesn't really make anything like an avoidance report, but one other useful trick is to have it list all the times you blocked for someone and even play a sound alert for it.  In the Triggers/Sounds tab, you can create a custom trigger for say, ".+YOU block." and set a results tab and notify sound.  If you wish to get very complicated, you can have ACT parse for every instance <i>anyone </i>avoids for someone other themselves.  The trigger regex for that is: ".+?tries to [^ ]+ ([A-z]+)(?: with .+?)?, but (?(?=1|miss)[*Nothing*]|.+)."  Don't try to understand what that means unless you're fluent in Regular Expressions. <span>:smileyhappy:</span>

[EQAditu]

<div></div>Anyhow, I couldn't leave the previous discussion alone since it will likely be brought up later and sometimes I can't resist parsing things.The following is approx 140 minutes of parsing spread over 14 hours for the reasons of recast timers.  All tests were using the L70 version of Tunare's Behest verses L65(v) gazer mobs on the Isle of Aversion in Barren Sky.  These mobs only melee and cast a minor magic dot that reduces attack speed.  Which does nothing to affect the results of incoming damage tests... as opposed to defense debuffs.The following four cases are only semi-controlled as they allowed the pet to parry/riposte so the miss numbers were affected by preempting avoidance.  Therefore I won't focus much on them except a short description of each.<font face="Courier New"><u>Case                        Hits        Avoids     Swings     % hit    % miss/block</u>1218A 6.6% miss             395         202        661        59.76    30.561911A 13.2% miss            496         268        848        58.49    31.60No Shield Ally Buff         514         259        835        61.56    31.022163A 7.2%m 8.4%b           431         263/28     790        54.56    33.29/3.54</font>As mentioned, these are not very controlled settings as the recipient being attacked has a variable number of parry avoids.  The reason it is variable is due to the pet moving around/switching targets so that sometimes its back is facing the mob and unable to parry.The first test with low defense-only based avoidance gets a very similar number of misses as the double the amount of defense avoidance.  The third test which has the Shield Buff AA inactive has the nearly the same percentage of misses as with the buff active.  The tohit percentage slightly rises, but that's due to parry avoidance and not applicable to this test.  The fourth test shows that the buff allows 3-4% of blocking to be added to the target, though the misses do not raise by that amount in any of the previous tests.To reiterate, these tests are not very useful because parry happens before missing so can affect the numbers in the end.<font face="Courier New"><u>Case                        Hits        Avoids     Swings     % hit    % miss/block</u>No Shield Ally Buff         573         340        914        62.69    37.201911A 13.2% miss            590         321        914        64.55    35.122163A 7.2%m 8.4%b           567         302/48     917        61.83    32.93/5.23</font>The first test is without the buff active.  The second test is with a supposed +7.92% to missing oddly  had the missing ratio go down.  I guess a plus/minus variance is responsible for not having enough samples.  The third test with the blocking pre-empting the missing shows what the buff is capable of.  Recalculated, if the block was 13.2%, it could have been 8.21% instead of 5.23%.  Direct calculating and calculation through association both puts the 13.2% missing from the buff at an expected ~8%.  In most tests the buff cannot be said to have helped the missing amount, and in no test does the amount of misses even remotely approach the expected 8% even with +/- variance being added.These tests are better because for 95% of the tests, the pet is put into "backoff" mode and is repositioned to face away from its attackers.  This assures that the pet cannot parry, thus preempt miss stats.  This makes for a much more controlled setting than the previous tests.I'm sure it's not hard to guess what my interpretation of the results are.  Essentially the same as my theory before having done all of these tests.  Shield Ally does not lend "misses" to the target.<div></div>

[Spondulix]

<P>Based on all the information I got from this thread, I actually went ahead and respecced for Shield Ally again, thought I'd give it another try. I also added the entry in ACT to make it sound off every time I blocked incoming hits for the tank. I will say that, in my opinion, the buff is not worthless, since it does intercept a fair ammount of damage the tank would normally take. If you also consider the fact that you can run a little further into the AA line and get the 30 second AE imunity, it makes it worth that much more to take.</P> <P>That being said, I think I'll go back for the reduced cast timers and Divine Recovery. My main problem with Shield Ally wasn't that it didn't proc, but that it didn't proc enough in the fights that matter. I'm a raider, and the named / boss fights are always the ones I gauge by, and Shield Ally just didn't proc enough for me to warrant sticking with it. Yeah, it procs decently through raid zones, especially on trash encounters with a lot of mobs, but those are of no concern to me. Shield Ally proccing 3-4 times in a named fight just doesn't warrant me keeping it. I personally like a lot more having that increased delivery speed for my heals and Divine Recovery than the off chance of a hit being blocked at the right moment and an AE imunity that I can live without. </P> <P>That is my take on it, and a personal one at that. Figured I'd just chime in, get my post count up and drop my 2 cents in <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></P>

[Bjerde]

I agree with you, I don't think that Shield Ally would add misses. It seems to be "ok", I will set up the alert sound as well and see how often it goes off, but I need it for boss fights and if it is only happening a few times per fight then maybe I will go back to heal crits.The AE avoid may be for non-targetted characters (as most are), but I don't remember that in the description of the spell.  I will double check that tonight. Our MT isn't always the one pulling, and it would still help in many of the situations on pull when trying to stabilze the encounter.<div></div>

[EQAditu]

<div></div>If you're expecting it to go off more than a few times, you're expecting too much.  Shield Ally is a not a new stoneskin buff with a large percentage.  Adding up some named battles from my last night's raids, the tank was swung at 254 times by a named.  How can you possibly expect more than a few times from such a small sample?  The result was I blocked 8 attacks.  3.15%You spend what, 6(?) AA points(+ prereqs) for 2% added to stoneskin?  And that's an addition to a spell you already have.  To get another 3% of something similar to stoneskin you pay 8AA plus prereqs...  yes you pay, and for a completely new skill you pay a lot.  But if you're serious about defensive buffing, you might find it worth it.<div></div>

[Bjerde]

Here are some log entries from the past few nights. It is blocking a fair amount for me on the boss fights. No special agility, just that cheap  Bulwark of the Brave with the higher protection. Crab might have actually been with my Fluttering Wing buckler which only has 400+ protection....I forget, but I think switched it for cold resists.First named in FTH:[Tue Dec 19 19:59:46 2006] Zylphax the Shredder tries to slash Mordecai, but YOU block.[Tue Dec 19 19:59:51 2006] Zylphax the Shredder tries to slash Mordecai, but YOU block.[Tue Dec 19 19:59:57 2006] Zylphax the Shredder tries to slash Mordecai, but YOU block.[Tue Dec 19 20:00:25 2006] Zylphax the Shredder tries to slash Mordecai, but YOU block.[Tue Dec 19 20:00:46 2006] Zylphax the Shredder tries to slash Mordecai, but YOU block.[Tue Dec 19 20:00:51 2006] Zylphax the Shredder tries to slash Mordecai, but YOU block.[Tue Dec 19 20:01:19 2006] Zylphax the Shredder tries to slash Mordecai, but YOU block.[Tue Dec 19 20:01:28 2006] Zylphax the Shredder tries to slash Mordecai, but YOU block.[Tue Dec 19 20:02:39 2006] Zylphax the Shredder tries to slash Mordecai, but YOU block.Second Named in FTH:[Tue Dec 19 20:27:55 2006] Othysis Muravian tries to crush Mordecai, but YOU block.[Tue Dec 19 20:28:29 2006] Othysis Muravian tries to crush Mordecai, but YOU block.[Tue Dec 19 20:28:32 2006] Othysis Muravian tries to crush Mordecai, but YOU block.[Tue Dec 19 20:28:52 2006] Othysis Muravian tries to crush Mordecai, but YOU block.Crab in Villiage of Shin:[Wed Dec 20 22:33:08 2006] Bonesnapper tries to slash Strahad, but YOU block.[Wed Dec 20 22:33:14 2006] Bonesnapper tries to slash Strahad, but YOU block.[Wed Dec 20 22:34:17 2006] Bonesnapper tries to slash Strahad, but YOU block.[Wed Dec 20 22:35:08 2006] Bonesnapper tries to slash Strahad with Scissoring Claws, but YOU block.[Wed Dec 20 22:36:49 2006] Bonesnapper tries to slash Strahad, but YOU block.[Wed Dec 20 22:37:17 2006] Bonesnapper tries to slash Strahad, but YOU block.[Wed Dec 20 22:38:49 2006] Bonesnapper tries to slash Strahad, but YOU block.[Wed Dec 20 22:39:39 2006] Bonesnapper tries to slash Strahad, but YOU block.[Wed Dec 20 22:39:54 2006] Bonesnapper tries to slash Strahad, but YOU block.[Wed Dec 20 22:39:57 2006] Bonesnapper tries to slash Strahad, but YOU block.<div></div>

[SomanSeltak]

<DIV>does the proc increase in templars blessing line affects the shield ally proc chance? in this case, with dirge spell proc increase in mt group the maxed shield ally chance could be 90%.</DIV>