Paladin avoidance buff

[Wallzak]

<DIV>Hey all, I've started a discussion on the Paly board regarding a buff we, and all fighters have.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Paly's have a spell, the attempt to avoid is based on the paly's avoidance.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> <DIV><STRONG>Resolute Faith </STRONG>(60)<BR>-Adept3 (60.0): 82 power, Grants target 49% chance of making additional attempt to avoid, Increases defense of caster by 12.6<BR>-Master1 (60.0): 82 power, Grants target 56% chance of making additional attempt to avoid, Increases defense of caster by 14.6</DIV></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>In raid, my role is to support the MT/OT by offering my mitigation, healing, warding and intercepting.  This spell, if cast on the MT, does not stack with your version of the spell, thus cancelling your defense.  </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>If you read the post on the paly board (link is below) it seems that it is better for the paly to give you the 49-56% chance to avoid and give up the defense.  The argument I've had with my MT/OT is "no, it's not, don't cast that on me".  This is partly because because it's a chance to avoid, it does not show in your stats, where the increase defense does.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Which is better, your increase defense, or my chance to avoid?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Thoughts??</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>You can read it here</DIV> <DIV><A href="http://eqiiforums.station.sony.com/eq2/board/message?board.id=10&message.id=33506#M33506" target=_blank>http://eqiiforums.station.sony.com/eq2/board/message?board.id=10&message.id=33506#M33506</A></DIV>

[highlander]

<P>All tanks have a spell/CA like this.</P> <P>In my role as a Guardian I disband any tank that tries to put this on me or the healer/mage that I put this on as they don't have much of a clue -- especially after I've told them not to.</P> <P>Generally, as I see it.  You'd like for each tank (Assuming 2 tanks in a group for whatever reason) to put this on any/all of the squishy's in your group (e.g. priests and mages).  </P> <P>So, I'll place the guardian version of this on a mage (for example) and it gives me (the caster) an increase in agility stat and it gives the mage a percentage chance to then use my avoidance after thier avoidance check fails.</P> <P>With  your example paladin buff, it would work like this..</P> <P>Paladin buffs a mage and it gives the caster (Paladin) and increase of 14.6 DEFENSE and then gives the mage a 56% chance to avoid incoming damage using your avoidance check.  So, its a GOOD buff but placing it on a Guardian if your the paladin negatives the effectiveness of the spell as the Guardian is losing his AGI bonus and is only getting a percentage chance at using your avoidance (which may or may not be good -- depending on gear, etc).</P> <P>In certain situations it MAY be optimal, but personally I'd rather have an extra buff or DPS class vs. another tank in my group.  So, if your a zerker, paladin, or monk/bruiser and you try to get a dps slot in my groups, I'll tell you where you can stick your pointy stick.  <img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></P> <P>X</P>

[Wallzak]

<DIV>That is the standard response I get thus the reason why I find a squishy to put it on :smileyvery-happy:</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>The question is... is it the right response?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>My point is I want to give you, the guardian, the best chance to survive.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I think you make a great argument... the % to avoid depends on my chance to avoid.  If I max my avoidance out, which ironically gets better because Resolute increases my avoidance which gives you a better chance as the receiver of the spell.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Lets look at it this way, this is very rough, so correct my thinking if I'm wrong.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Your avoidance is at 50% lets say.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>My spell gives you a 56% chance to avoid.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>My avoidance is say 50%.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Does this mean that 56% of the time you get anotherr 50% chance to avoid an attack?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Thoughts?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV>

[EpokSilvermo]

<blockquote><hr />sammcduff wrote:<div><div>-Adept3 (60.0): 82 power, Grants target 49% chance of making additional attempt to avoid, Increases defense of caster by 12.6</div></div><div> </div> <div>Which is better, your increase defense, or my chance to avoid?</div> <hr /></blockquote>Chance to avoid is better <img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY<img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />" />Defense is a part of avoidance. At 70 your base defense is 350. The actual part defense plays in the formular that makes up your avoidance number is unknown.Making an additional avoidance check against 49% of the incoming hits with the avoidance of the Pally is a lot better than raising your defense from 350 to 362.6. To maximize this effect the Pally should be using a good shield and be in defensive stance and get his avoidance as high as possible.Test it yourself. Cast the chance to avoid buff on someone and see by how much your avoidance increases. The gain should be minimal. Now compare that to making  an additional avoidance check against about half of the incoming hits <img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY<img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />" />

[Wallzak]

<P>I think you misread this.</P> <P>I cast this on you.  You get a 49% chance to avoid, based on my avoidance.</P> <P>You lose the defense you get from your buff because mine cancels yours.</P> <P>Would you rather have 12.5 defense from your buff (if that's what it is), <STRONG><EM><U>or </U></EM></STRONG>a 49% chance to avoid from my buff? </P>

[EpokSilvermo]

<div><blockquote><hr>sammcduff wrote:<div></div> <p>I think you misread this.</p> <p>I cast this on you.  You get a 49% chance to avoid, based on my avoidance.</p> <p>You lose the defense you get from your buff because mine cancels yours.</p> <p>Would you rather have 12.5 defense from your buff (if that's what it is), <strong><em><u>or </u></em></strong>a 49% chance to avoid from my buff? </p><hr></blockquote>The tank wants the additional chance to avoid, not the increase in defense.But I am seeing this from a raiding perspective where the tank needs to maximize his chance to survive and every little improvement can make the difference. In everyday single group situations, when the tank only dies cause the healer felt asleep or by silly mistakes, I, as tank, put that buff on a squishy as well.</div>

[JimmyMa]

I rarely let another tank cast this on me.In one-group instances, if there is another fighter in the group, I don't want him buffing up in defensive because in the tougher instances, that is what I am doing. Two defensive buff tanks in a group is a waste. And if the avoidance check is coming from someone offensively buffed, I would be much better off taking my own defense from a healer.In raid, unless I have a monk in my group (which isn't very often) I use my own buff again.  I don't have fighters around me, just 3 healers and two agro buffers (I'm not raid decked out yet). A dirge with their parry buff outstrips the avoidance check by far.<div></div>

[Bantel]

<P>For a Guardian, this would be the Unyielding Vigilance spell.</P> <P>This spell grants an avoidance check to the character the Guardian casts this on, and increases the Guardians Parry.</P> <P>If I'm reading this correctly, you are saying that the Paladin places Resolute Faith on the Guardian, which then cancels the Guardian's Unyielding Vigilance? Or at least cance;s the +Parry portion of Unyielding Vigilance?</P> <P>I'll have to test this, as i don't believe this is the case, as long as the Guardian casts Unyielding Vigilance on someone other than the Paladin.</P>

[JimmyMa]

Every fighter's avoidance check buff cancels each other's out.If another fighter casts theirs on you, or the character you have yours cast on, it boots your spell off both.<div></div>

[highlander]

<DIV> <DIV>That is the standard response I get thus the reason why I find a squishy to put it on <IMG height=16 src="http://eqiiforums.station.sony.com/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif" width=16 border=0></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>The question is... is it the right response?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>My point is I want to give you, the guardian, the best chance to survive.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I think you make a great argument... the % to avoid depends on my chance to avoid.  If I max my avoidance out, which ironically gets better because Resolute increases my avoidance which gives you a better chance as the receiver of the spell.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Lets look at it this way, this is very rough, so correct my thinking if I'm wrong.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Your avoidance is at 50% lets say.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>My spell gives you a 56% chance to avoid.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>My avoidance is say 50%.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Does this mean that 56% of the time you get anotherr 50% chance to avoid an attack?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Thoughts?</DIV> <DIV> <HR> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I don't remember off hand the numerics for defense, agi, etc off hand..  but, roughly each +1 of defense and/or parry gives you a +0.1 avoidance.  Now, to me I'd rather have the constant improvement of +14 parry or something akin to that than the % chance to use a percentage chance of someone's avoidance check.  Your last comment is correct.  If you were to buff me I'd get a 56% chance to be able to use your avoidance (50%) to avoid an attack.  So, I could get lucky and 'roll' a 56 or higher and get the chance to do another roll to avoid damage.  Assuming I rolled great both times, I'd avoid the attack.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Too sketchy for me.  I'd rather have a constant number (like an increase either to block%, parry% or avoidance%) that I can depend on and let the Paly, SK, etc concentrate on controlling the warlock's (or any other massive dps toons) hate and if for whatever reason the dps out aggro's the Paly, the Paly buff on the warlock would give the warlock a chance to use the paladin's avoidance to stay alive.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>G'luck!</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>X</DIV></DIV>

[Bladewind]

<P>Whether it is advantageous or not depends on both players' avoidance beforehand and the quality of the art (which determines the %chance for the art to work).  Here's how it works:</P> <P>If the target's avodiance roll fails, there is a % chance that they get to make a second avoid roll using the caster's avoidance.  </P> <P>Let's take two players and call them Caster (person who casts the buff) and Target (person who receives the buff).</P> <P>They both have their base avoidance (BAc for caster and BAt for target).  The caster's art has an x% chance to fire if the target fails their own avoidance check.</P> <P>So, knowing all of these things, what is the efffective avoid bonus the target receives?</P> <P>avoidance increase = (1-BAt) * (x) * (BAc), or (chance target's base avoid fails) * (% chance the buff fires) * (caster's avoid %)</P> <P>Let's take the OP's proposed situation to see how much a paladin offtank placing this buff on a guardian main tank will help.</P> <P>Let BAc = 30% (reasonable for a raid geared paladin in offensive stance with a shield equipped), BAt = 50% (Guardian MT in defensive stance), and x = 56% to fire</P> <P>How much of an improvement does the guardian see?  (0.5)*(0.56)*(0.3)=0.084, or <STRONG>8.4% avoid increase</STRONG> - nearly triple the 2-3% the guard would get from placing their own defensive buff on another player.</P> <P>Let's now look at what happens when a brawler puts this buff on a guardian.  Let BAc = 55% (raid equipped brawler in offensive stance), BAt = 50%, and x = 40% (chance to fire on brawler version of this art from memory).</P> <P>Avoid bonus = (0.5)*(0.4)*(0.55)= 0.11, or an <STRONG>11% increase</STRONG> to the target's avoidance, about 4x what the guard would get from putting their own buff on another player.</P> <P> </P> <P>In other words, this buff placed by an offtank onto the MT gives way more of a benefit to the MT's avoidance than if the MT places their own buff on another group member.  In situations where the OT is a plate wearer and not using a shield or the MT is a brawler, the effects are not as advantageous.  But, in the generic general raid setting, if you have a second fighter in the MT group, their version of this buff should be on the MT.</P>

[Wallzak]

<P>Let's beat a dead horse... I want to make sure I'm understanding this.</P> <P>How does avoidance work?</P> <P>Mitigation works like this:  I'm mitigating say 60%.  I take a 10000 hps hit, with my mitigation I really only take 4000.</P> <P>I'm assuming avoidance works like this: If I'm avoiding 50%, does this mean on a 10000 hps I will completely avoid it half the time.  If it hits, I then mitigate 60%.</P> <P>If that is true, lets take a look at the numbers based on 1000x1000 hps hits.</P> <P>No avoidance, no mitigation, you take 1,000,000 hps</P> <P>Lets assume the following for ease sake, the guardian has 50% mitigation, 50% avoidance before casting the buffs in question.</P> <P>With the guardian spell, +14 to parry which equates to 1.4% more avoidance raises your avoidance to 51.4%.</P> <P>This means you avoid 514 attacks, taking 486000 damage, mitigated by 50% means 243000 damage taken.</P> <P>With the paly spell, lets argue my avoidance is 45% and I have the 49% avoidance chance.</P> <P>Your base 50% avoidance means you take 500 hits for 500,000 damage, but I now add a 49% chance to further avoid.</P> <P>Of the 500 attacks you don't avoid, I allow you a chance to avoid 245 of them with a further chance to avoid it 45% of the time which means you avoid 110 of them, which means you are really taking 390 hits, this equates to 390,000, mitigated by 50% means you're only taking 195,000.</P> <P>This means, if my numbers are correct, if you use the paly buff over your buff, you're taking 48,000 less damage.  If I have the master spell, this is increased to 56000 hps saved.</P>

[Bladewind]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> <HR> <DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I don't remember off hand the numerics for defense, agi, etc off hand..  but, roughly each +1 of defense and/or parry gives you a +0.1 avoidance.  Now, to me I'd rather have the constant improvement of +14 parry or something akin to that than the % chance to use a percentage chance of someone's avoidance check.  Your last comment is correct.  If you were to buff me I'd get a 56% chance to be able to use your avoidance (50%) to avoid an attack.  So, I could get lucky and 'roll' a 56 or higher and get the chance to do another roll to avoid damage.  Assuming I rolled great both times, I'd avoid the attack.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Too sketchy for me.  I'd rather have a constant number (like an increase either to block%, parry% or avoidance%) that I can depend on and let the Paly, SK, etc concentrate on controlling the warlock's (or any other massive dps toons) hate and if for whatever reason the dps out aggro's the Paly, the Paly buff on the warlock would give the warlock a chance to use the paladin's avoidance to stay alive.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>G'luck!</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>X</DIV></DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>You roll 3 times for your own avoid (parry then block then defense) then, if all of those fail, you roll to see if you get a second chance (56% in this case) to use the caster's avoid, which gives you 3 more chances to be successful (their parry, then their block/deflect, then their defense).  You only need to suceed on one roll to avoid all damage from the attack.</P> <P>So, in the case where you use your buff, you get a moderate bonus to your third defense roll from the agi buff (about 3%).  Your avoid roll still only gives you 3 chances for success.  If another fighter places the buff on you, you still have your 3 chances, and get a 56% chance to get 3 more chances - that works out to effectively giving you 1.5 more rolls per avoid. So, you basically are choosing between 3 attempts with low chances (10% parry, 20% block, 33% dodge) and 3 attempts with low chances (10%p, 20%b, 30%d) with a coin flip determining if you get 3 more attempts (8%p, 24%b, 15%d).  Given that the self-boost when placing the buff on someone else is so low, I'd rather go with having the buff on me from another tank.</P> <P>Now, which is preferable all depends on the hard numbers.  I hope my post above is clear enough to illustrate that the offtank buffing the MT is usually preferable so long as they both really understand how the skill works and equip/stance themselves accordingly.</P><p>Message Edited by Bladewind on <span class=date_text>01-25-2007</span> <span class=time_text>02:48 PM</span>

[Wallzak]

<P>There you go, Blade, thanks for the hard math :smileywink:</P><p>Message Edited by sammcduff on <span class=date_text>01-25-2007</span> <span class=time_text>02:13 PM</span>

[Bladewind]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> sammcduff wrote:<BR> <P>Let's beat a dead horse... I want to make sure I'm understanding this.</P> <P>How does avoidance work?</P> <P>Mitigation works like this:  I'm mitigating say 60%.  I take a 10000 hps hit, with my mitigation I really only take 4000.</P> <P>I'm assuming avoidance works like this: If I'm avoiding 50%, does this mean on a 10000 hps I will completely avoid it half the time.  If it hits, I then mitigate 60%.</P> <P>If that is true, lets take a look at the numbers based on 1000x1000 hps hits.</P> <P>No avoidance, no mitigation, you take 1,000,000 hps</P> <P>Lets assume the following for ease sake, the guardian has 50% mitigation, 50% avoidance before casting the buffs in question.</P> <P>With the guardian spell, +14 to parry which equates to 1.4% more avoidance raises your avoidance to 51.4%.</P> <P>This means you avoid 514 attacks, taking 486000 damage, mitigated by 50% means 243000 damage taken.</P> <P>With the paly spell, lets argue my avoidance is 45% and I have the 49% avoidance chance.</P> <P>Your base 50% avoidance means you take 500 hits for 500,000 damage, but I now add a 49% chance to further avoid.</P> <P>Of the 500 attacks you don't avoid, I allow you a chance to avoid 245 of them with a further chance to avoid it 45% of the time which means you avoid 110 of them, which means you are really taking 390 hits, this equates to 390,000, mitigated by 50% means you're only taking 195,000.</P> <P>This means, if my numbers are correct, if you use the paly buff over your buff, you're taking 48,000 less damage.  If I have the master spell, this is increased to 56000 hps saved.</P><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>That's about the size of it.  However, I don't think the pally will be in defensive stance while offtanking.  That's why I used 30% as the paladin avoidance in my example.  Even in that case, it still is an appreciable advantage.  The only way it would not be would be if the paladin unequiped their shield in favor of a 2 hander. Then, the advantage would be pretty slim - probably 1-2% more than the guard using their own buff on another target.. <P>Message Edited by Bladewind on <SPAN class=date_text>01-25-2007</SPAN> <SPAN class=time_text>02:13 PM</SPAN></P><p>Message Edited by Bladewind on <span class=date_text>01-25-2007</span> <span class=time_text>02:51 PM</span>

[Bladewind]

Also, the caster gets a bit of an avoidance increase from putting the buff onto their target.  I never bother taking that into account, but it generally will shift the avoidance bonus up by about 1% more than what the equation gives.  If you want to figure it in, just look at your avoid when you cast the art on someone and use that in place of the caster's original avoid in the equation.<p>Message Edited by Bladewind on <span class=date_text>01-25-2007</span> <span class=time_text>02:50 PM</span>

[TuinalOfTheNexus]

<DIV>Er... yeah, you're always better off taking another tank's avoidance buff.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Why would anyone even think that 14.7 points of parry is as good as a whole 2nd avoidance check? I think in practice +parry is gonna be less than 1% avoidance. Even if the tank buffing you has an awful avoidance like 20% it's still gonna be 10% more for you (~50% chance of 20%). It's especially true if it's a brawler buffing you.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>But at the risk of contradicting myself, you really don't want a pally in the MT group (or any other tank) to start with as a Guardian. Mit buffs are useless, they can intercede from out of group, and a healer will do a better job warding - plus who in the MT group can benefit from amends?. This doesn't mean the paladin doesn't have anything to offer the raid, and they can make a perfectly capable MT or OT themselves, I've just never seen the logic of having one in the MT group when they don't really offer the two most vital things - heals and hate.</DIV>

[Ep]

If there's another tank in your group in raid(this should be rare) then yes take thier avoidance buff. Casters don't need anything from you other than moderate and in mt group that really is sham or templar which ever healer is most active.If you need more convincing evidence, log the fights, you see many times, someone blocks for you. But of course that same fighter will have to be in def stance w/ shield, to maximize the effect(and usually a monk).<div></div>

[Domiuk]

<DIV>The avoidance buff from a 2nd tank is MUCH MUCH better than the few extra points you get from casting your own buff.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>A 2nd Plate tank with a good quality Tower or Kite shield with plus block will Intercept a huge chunk of damage. (Monks and bruisers are less effective as for them to be anywhere near as good they nead to be in defensive stance)</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Parse it for yourself and if you have a MT telling you not to cast this on them in the same raid group then you have a MT who is an idiot.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>The very idea that +15 parry could be better than 10-25% of all incoming attacks being intercepted is just silly.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I know many raiding guilds do not like the 2nd tank in the MT group but that 2nd tank can drastically reduce your incoming damage.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV>

[Wallzak]

<P>"you really don't want a pally in the MT group"</P> <P>I would agree, my roll, as the paly, is in the OT group.  I'm buffing the OT, then ward, heal, intercept both the MT/OT, rez, dps, and generally look ridiculous in my seagull helm.</P> <P>Thanks for information Blade, I've struggled with this spell for a while and it's good to know now when and when not to use it... now if I can only convince the Ogre Guardian in my group that in some situations my spell is better than his.</P>

[Ep]

Ogre Guard? thats your problem right there, just tell them w/ your int of 23, i'll think for you, you just stand there and make sure the mob doesn't go pass us ok?<div></div>

[khufure]

<div><blockquote><hr>Domiuk wrote:<div>The avoidance buff from a 2nd tank is MUCH MUCH better than the few extra points you get from casting your own buff.</div> <div> </div> <div>A 2nd Plate tank with a good quality Tower or Kite shield with plus block will Intercept a huge chunk of damage. (Monks and bruisers are less effective as for them to be anywhere near as good they nead to be in defensive stance)</div> <div> </div> <div>Parse it for yourself and if you have a MT telling you not to cast this on them in the same raid group then you have a MT who is an idiot.</div> <div> </div> <div>The very idea that +15 parry could be better than 10-25% of all incoming attacks being intercepted is just silly.</div> <div> </div> <div> </div> <div>I know many raiding guilds do not like the 2nd tank in the MT group but that 2nd tank can drastically reduce your incoming damage.</div> <hr></blockquote>Not to mention Paladin have the best BLOCK numbers by a ridiculous far amount due to AA.  BLOCK is the only avoidance that is unaffected by high yellow or orange epic +hit.  How can most raiders not understand this?  It's simple.  For the tough melee hitting fights you put a Paladin in the swing slot.What's better, .5% avoidance that drops to .1% or .2% against tough epics, or 54% (the real number for M1) chance at using an avoidance specd Paladin with 60% avoidance (> ~27% block w/ 3 adornments) ?!! Hint : option 2 ends up being > +10% real avoidance against orange !!</div>

[Wallzak]

What three adornments are you referring to, looking to buy a few over the next couple of days.

[Gungo]

parses show that avoidance buff placed on the tank works better.

[Ep]

could i get a bit more information on this pally aa that gives block please? thats pretty interesting is it .5block per aa, max of 8aa can be spent?i think i have 23.3 w/ 4 adornments(next patch will bring this down to 22.3) but yea 27 is pretty [I cannot control my vocabulary] nice. is it pally only or is it a crusader aa? and do monks/bruisers get deflection aa while we're on the subject?<div></div>

[Wallzak]

its the final ability in the paladin line so it's doesn't increase with each aa spent, rather its something you get, like the new cure, aoe or heal.  I don't have the specifics of it right now<div></div>

[guxx99]

<DIV>+24% blocking to your current blocking</DIV><p>Message Edited by guxx99 on <span class=date_text>01-26-2007</span> <span class=time_text>06:51 PM</span>

[Bladewind]

While maximizing your uncontested avoid is a good idea, you can still gain a large benefit from extra contested avoid so long as your group/raidmates are debuffing mob offensive skills.  With solid debuffing, I have seen my effective avoid be about 62% vs 73^^^x4 nameds.  This is when my character sheet reads 71%.  If the mob's defense was not constantly debuffed, my avoid would be more like 15%, since brawlers only have 12% uncontested.  But, so long as the debuffs stay active, I enjoy almost the same avoid as I do vs solo mobs.

[TheBu]

<p>yup</p><p><cite>Gungo@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote> </p><p>parses show that avoidance buff placed on the tank works better.</blockquote> </p><p>I second this...</p><p>It is very hard for a main tank so accept a lower visiable avoidance and gain a chance at a second chance to avoid. basical it freaks out the gardian.. the first responce to the op is the most common. </p><p>Pally/SK is one of the few tanks that can cast this spell on another tank. But looking at the parse i have seen a masssive impact. Yes the pally shuld be in def mode. and should have shield and everything. The main job for a pally in not to dps it to support class.</p><p>Resolute of Faith gratz a 54% chance of making and additional attemp to avoid. That and extra 30%= .54 x .56 That would overide the gardian Unyielding Vgilance thats give 14.4 parry </p><p>so clearly extra 30% avoidance is better than 14.4 parry[ 30% is based on mov ur same lvl, the real advantage is the shield factor that is noncontested]</p><p>You can lead a horse to water......</p>

[Wilin]

<cite>Bladewind wrote:</cite><blockquote> <p>While maximizing your uncontested avoid is a good idea, you can still gain a large benefit from extra contested avoid so long as your group/raidmates are debuffing mob offensive skills.  With solid debuffing, I have seen my effective avoid be about 62% vs 73^^^x4 nameds.  This is when my character sheet reads 71%.  If the mob's defense was not constantly debuffed, my avoid would be more like 15%, since brawlers only have 12% uncontested.  But, so long as the debuffs stay active, I enjoy almost the same avoid as I do vs solo mobs.</blockquote> </p><p>I see the same thing with my guardian. Albeit, I only avoid about 55% zone wide on 72+ epicx4. But I know that someone out there is going to point out that any debuffed mob is cake. So why bother with avoidance, just let it hit you with it's baby taps while you slaughter it with damage.</p>