Tranquil Vision & Other fighters Line...

[Colossaltitan]

<DIV>Okay, I'ma Bruiser (Shake off Line for us), Unyielding Vigilance for Guardians, etc etc etc.<BR><BR>Was groupped with a Monk friend of mine last night 2 levels above me and we were messing around in PoF killing harpies, she was MT, one b/c I like OT better and 2 she has 3 levels on me, either way... She put Transcendent Vision on me, I canceled it out with Shrug off feeling that mine is more beneficial for her if she was tanking.<BR><BR>I'm curious of the real mathematics of these skills.<BR><BR>Shrug off's Description is (along with almost every other fighters is)...<BR>Grants target a 33% chance of making an additional attempt to avoid being hit by a melee attack using the caster's avoidance. (Shrug off Adept 1).<BR><BR>So, my understanding of this was....<BR>If I have 51.4% Avoidance, 33% of 51.4 = 16.96%.  So, Does this mean I add 16.96% extra avoidance to the target?<BR><BR>My friends view on it was its a 33% chance to use your avoidance.<BR><BR><BR>Is it more beneficial to have whoever is tanking to put the skill up on someone, or have the "Off-Tank" put it on the "Main-Tank."<BR>Her TV Gives her about 1% Avoidance with the 8.3 Deflection Bonus (Maybe a tad more).  However if my math is correct, or my theory is correct then, it would be more beneficial for me to have Shrug Off on her.<BR><BR>Thanks for helping us work this out :p.</DIV><p>Message Edited by Colossaltitan on <span class=date_text>11-03-2005</span> <span class=time_text>10:36 PM</span>

[MadBarman]

Her view was correct it gives her a 33% chance to use your avoidance should she fail to avoid a melee attack. I find it is usually best for teh mt to have theres cast one someone else (like the main healer incase they get agro) and any secondary tanks cast it on another (depending on how many group members you have) <div></div>

[Agathorn]

They give the person you cast it on a 33% chance to use your avoidance as a second check.

[Colossaltitan]

<DIV>It would seem you two are at a dissagreement.</DIV>

[Agathorn]

The caster (the person who uses or casts the combat art) gives the target (the person they cast it on) a % chance to use the casters avoidance as a secondary opportunity to avoid damage.I think were saying the same thing but there miught be some confusiono as to who gets what so I didin't mean to be insulting with the above clarification.

[Colossaltitan]

Okay, heres how it works.<BR><BR>The secondary component on these skills that in some way increases your avoidance in some way. (+Deflection, +Parry, +Agility, ETC).<BR> <DIV>Does add a "First Chance" Bonus in avoidance.<BR>So, most would think whoever is the MT should put this on someone else and get the aditional minor ammount of avoidance it gives (Probably 5% at the most on a master skill or something).<BR><BR>However, Its a tad more situational then that.<BR><BR>Shake Off: Adept 3 is a 49% Chance of making an additional attempt to avoid the the attackers melee damage on your target.<BR><BR>This means, If your target does not block, parry, avoid, or in some way prevent the damage from happening to them, you have a 49% CHANCE to  Check your avoidance and Possibly avoid, block, parry, deflect for them.<BR><BR>If the targets avoidance (MT from my Point of View) is 80% they have a 20% chance to fail avoiding and a 49% Chance to check mine (Shake Off Adept 3; 33% for Shrug Off Adept 1), if my Avoidance is 70%, its a 33% or 49% Chance that it will use my 70% Avoidance.<BR><BR>In some cases it is more beneficial for you to use your buff on someone else in group (if your main tanking).<BR>And in some cases its more beneficial for the off tank to use his or her buff on the main tank.<BR><BR>A lot of things factor into this, your level, the targets level, the mobs your fighting level.<BR><BR>If you are equal level it depends on who has the higher avoidance.  If your a monk with a guardian then the monk should put it on the guardian no matter who is tanking because if the guardian is tanking you will give him/her a % chance to use your high avoidance, and if you are tanking he has very little avoidance to offer so you would use your buff which gives you +? Deflection.<BR><BR>However, if you are a higher level, remember your avoidance reduces to yellow con + mobs so subtract 1-2% per 1 level above you..  2-3 Levels above you maybe 4-5%, 4 Levels like 6%, and 5 Levels like 20%.<BR><BR>Its really hard to put things in mathematical terms... I don't even think I want to try <img src="/smilies/69934afc394145350659cd7add244ca9.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></DIV> <DIV>But....<BR>If the target (From off tank PoV), has 80% Avoidance.  That means a 20% that they will get hit.  However, if the skill is up, It is a 49% chance that your avoidance will be checked if they would regularly be hit.  Then if your avoidance is 80%, well it will act the same way his or hers did only acting as a second check and not the first, so if your 80% avoidance didn't work then you failed to block/parry/deflect for your target and they will be hit anyways.<BR><BR>I hope I worded that properly and.. though it wasn't mathematically it seemed to make a bit more sense.. atleast to me.. LoL!<BR><BR>Anyways..................... /headache off.<BR></DIV><p>Message Edited by Colossaltitan on <span class=date_text>11-04-2005</span> <span class=time_text>12:49 AM</span>

[stfields]

<P>Transcendent/Tranquil Vision or Shake/Shrug Off is best on the MT.  It will also remove any similar spell that the MT has used.  In your case, you have monk MT and bruiser OT.  The monk can't use TV on another and then receive the bruiser's Shake Off.  </P> <P>The effective avoidance increase that the OT can offer the MT is better than any increase to agi/deflectoin that the MT's TV can possibly offer.  I think TV at AdeptIII increases the caster's avoidance by roughly 1.5%.  </P> <P>So, 1.5% on the MT... or a 49% chance to use the bruiser's avoidance (presumably over 50%).  I think you know what the answer is <img src="/smilies/69934afc394145350659cd7add244ca9.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></P> <P>When a fellow monk uses TV on me, my battle logs show a ton of blocks <STRONG>if they are in range</STRONG>.</P>

[Colossaltitan]

<DIV>Exactly, but we both are hardheaded :p, I thought it went my way, she thought it went her way....... totally the love hate BF GF fight :p (/awaits inc slap)</DIV>

[Bladewind]

<P>Mathematically:</P> <P>MTA = main tank avoidance (this is the person you are putting the art upon)</P> <P>OTA = off tank avoidance (the avoidance of the person casting the art)</P> <P>CHA = chance for art to work ( i think 33% was used in the above discussion for adept 1 version of the bruiser art)</P> <P>With the art active, new overall avoidance for the MT = MTA + {[(100%-MTA)*CHA]*OTA}</P> <DIV>A worked example:  the monk has 60% (MTA) avoidance, and the bruiser suing the art has 50% avoidance (OTA).  The chance that the art activates upon the monk failing their initial avoid roll is 33% (CHA).</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Overall chance of avoiding = 60% + {[(100%-60%)*33%]*50% = 60% + [(40%)*33%]*50% = 60% + (13.2%*50%) = <STRONG>67.6%</STRONG></DIV> <DIV><STRONG></STRONG> </DIV> <DIV>A pretty nice increase <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></DIV>

[Colossaltitan]

: (.<BR><BR>I said /headache off. That math equation truly gave me a headache <img src="/smilies/69934afc394145350659cd7add244ca9.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />

[Quijonsith]

The basic disparity I'm seeing between explanations is this: Assuming that another fighter has cast their version of the spell on you:     1.  You then have a chance to use the caster's avoidance to check again <b>should you not avoid with your own avoidance</b>.     2.  You'd have a chance that the caster's avoidance would be used <b>in place of your own avoidance</b> as the check without any second check.   I'm not ingame to read the spell description so I can't be sure which it is, but here's my thought process.  If the first explanation (two checks possibility) is correct then I'd say that the MT should almost always have the spell cast on him/her unless fighting mobs who just plain can't hit (low con, slow swingers, whatever).  If the second explanation (replacing avoidance, one check possibilty) is correct then I'd say the same thing except if the person casting on you has lower avoidance than tell him to cast it on someone else because his lower avoidance would overall get you hit more. Hope this helps. <div></div>

[Colossaltitan]

#1 is right.

[Bewts]

<DIV>Read the text of the skill (TV in a monk's case):</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>"Grants the Monk a chance to shield an ally from melee attacks, by allowing the target a chance to <U>use the monk's avoidance</U> check <STRONG>after their own avoidance check</STRONG>.  This also increases the deflection skill."</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Pretty much you have three scenarios:</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Monk has the buff on a Target who is taking damage.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>A: The target avoids the attempted hit - TV is nullified, hit attempt was a miss.</DIV> <DIV>B: The target takes the hit, TV is checked.  Positive check verus the % chance to shield results in a check versus the monk's own avoidance. Success of attempted hit is then determined by the monk's avoidance</DIV> <DIV>C: The target takes the hit.  TV is checked.  Negative check versus the % chance to shield results in a positive attempted hit on the target of TV.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>So essentially, you get an attempted hit checked versus the targets avoidance.  That fails, TV's % chance to shield is checked.  Positive check applies the monk's avoidance to the attempted hit which will determine if the target of TV takes a hit.  Negative check on TV's % chance to shield results in the target of TV taking damage.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Bottom line, you get a SECOND CHANCE to avoid a hit if you allow someone else to put their shield skill on you.  Even with my +deflection bonus on TV I'd take a second chance from ANY tank's avoidance over me putting TV on someone else.  A 40% chance of blocking an attack is greater than the few extra % avodiance I'd get from using TV in a duo situation.  In a group situation, if I can put TV on a caster, and someone can put their shield line on me -- sure go for it. (does that work?  Rarely group myself)</DIV>

[x0rtrun]

"In a group situation, if I can put TV on a caster, and someone can put their shield line on me -- sure go for it. (does that work?  Rarely group myself)" No. That doesn't work. If you try to put it on a tank who has their's up, their will drop and your's will take over. Same happens to you if someone casts it on you. <div></div>

[Balmore]

Very nice thread!<div></div>

[Talen_Ram]

<span><blockquote><hr>Bewts wrote:<div></div><div>Pretty much you have three scenarios:</div> <div> </div> <div>Monk has the buff on a Target who is taking damage.</div> <div> </div> <div>A: The target avoids the attempted hit - TV is nullified, hit attempt was a miss.</div> <div>B: The target takes the hit, TV is checked.  Positive check verus the % chance to shield results in a check versus the monk's own avoidance. Success of attempted hit is then determined by the monk's avoidance</div> <div>C: The target takes the hit.  TV is checked.  Negative check versus the % chance to shield results in a positive attempted hit on the target of TV.</div> <hr></blockquote> Some numbers for those that like them: Adept 3 TV is 39% of success. For random Joe plate tank with, say, 30% avoidance (pulling numbers out of thin air, no clue what a normal-type plate tank would have). My monk has had around 60%-65% avoidance for a while, so I like that number for the monk. 39% chance to check against 65% avoidance results in 25.35% increased advantage.  This number takes a bite out of the chance for the tank to not avoid, 70%.  This increases the tank's avoidance to 47.75%, an increase of 17.75%. For random Joe monk tank with 65% avoidance, the final avoidance number would be 73.87%, a change of 8.87%. Basically, if the increase in block, deflection, or parry that the tank gets from putting the buff on someone else is greater than the amount of increased chance to block/deflect/parry the tank would recieve from someone else casting the buff on them then go with that.  Almost always, however, it's going to be better for the tank to recieve the buff than to give the buff to a random teammate. Side note:  My numbers may be a bit off, since I'm running on fumes and about to fall over asleep, but I'm pretty sure I did them right.</span><div></div>

[Kota]

i don't put this ca on fighter classes anymore.  they always cancel it.  kinda funny, i get put in a mt group for the purpose of that buff, and the mt doesn't want it.  then again, i got invited to a group the other day for my hp buffs.  yes i know we don't have any hp buffs.

[Pari]

<P>Tanks always tell me they don't want it. </P> <P>I get invited into groups as healer very often... Guess I need a T4 GI if that even exists or is obtainable..</P>

[x0rtrun]

You must educate your MT in how this skill works and how if you aren't MT, your naturally high monk avoidance can help the MT more than his dinky little +3 to deflection will. <div></div>

[Colossaltitan]

I have played tag with this skill quite often lately, what I mean by this is; I'll come to a group, 55 Guardian, obviously I want him to MT, I prefer OT / DPS role in EXP groups.  I put it on him, he cancels it and puts all 3 of his buffs on the healer (Vigilance, Assauge, Sentry), Which was silly :p.<BR><BR>Should have been Shrug Off from me to MT, Assauge to me, Sentry to healer.<BR><BR>Atleast IMO anyways... but he just wouldn't take my damned Shrug Off, even after explaining to him what it does and how much extra avoidance it gives, *sigh*.  <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />  It went back and fourth for about 10recasts... then I gave up... I ended up tanking in Roost anyways when he went down...

[Bewts]

<DIV>Very important thread if you are a non brawler tank grouped with a brawler, I'd agree fully.  The increase by itself is rather huge if you use a monk with a main tank if you couple it with other buffs from some specific classes.  In theory you can raise a tank's avoidance rather high, albeit indirectly (IE they don't see 90% avoidance, but the mechanics are calculating it as such) if they allow us to keep our buff on them.</DIV>

[Shaialit]

This is very helpful indeed. But I do have two questions. By "in range" how close exactly does the off tank that casted the avoidance spell on the MT have to be? Melee range, range weapon range, healer range, etc? And the second question is what stance would be best to be in then? Defensive, Offensive or combo? In a raid that is... Regular xp/grind obviously offensive would be most beneficial. The reason I ask is, I was in a raid last nite with Guardian as the MT, and I was in the MT group. I have used the TV spell on the Guardian. I have TV master1 which gave him 44% additional chance of avoidance. Guardian avoidance was at around 58%. Now would it be more beneficial for me to be in my defensive stance? Which made my avoidance at 75%? Or would it be better for me to be in my Offensive stance which dropped my avoidance to around 67%? (Defensive spell is adept3 and offensive stance is master1.) Since if it works like the math equation above, it would be more beneficial if I was in my defensive stance since the Guardian would have 44% chance to use my 75% avoidance in case he got hit through his 58% avoidance.

[Bladewind]

<P>It does indeed work like the equation <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />  It is the mathy way to say if their own avoidance does not work, they get x% chance to use your avoidance.  If you look at the equation, it takes the chance for them to successfully avoid, and adds a 'bonus' number to it.  If you examine that 'bonus' number, you can see that it is their chance to fail an avoidance (since they have to fail in order for the art to activate), multiplied by the chance for the art to work, multiplied by the avoidance of the person using the art.  Thus, the 'bonus' avoidance is calculated.  The problem is that it is never shown on the character sheet, so many uniformed fighters will cancel it by casting their own version of this buff on the healer or highest dps since they get a tiny avoidance increase themselves.</P> <P> </P> <P>As far as being in defensive stance when offtanking with TV as asked above, it will indeed give a greater avoidance bonus to the person you use the art upon, but you will suffer a major drop in DPS since you will not be as hasted and will have penalties to your offensive skills (thus not being able to hit nearly as often).  This drop will mean that the mob stays up a good deal longer and might mean that the tank ends up taking more damage overall anyway.  I'd recommend offensive or at least spider/black widow if you are of the appropriate level for these reasons.  Even in offensive, the bonus provided by your 45-50% avoidance is substantial, considering a guardian with a tower shield tends to max out in 40-45% range alone.  That means you'll give them a bonus of 8-10%ish in offensive, 11-12%ish in spider, and 13-14%ish in defensive (usiing 33% as the chance for the art to fire).</P>

[Colossaltitan]

<DIV>In a raid situation, if you are in the main tank group to provide avoidance to the main tank or simply to put TV up, Yes, you should go defensive stance to maximize your avoidance given to the tank.  Some of the things I do often when doing this is...<BR>Hit Stone Deaf (Or the monks version of the magic ward), put intercede up, take damage for the tank, when I get damaged, pop self heal so a healer doesn't have to waste power on me.<BR>Also, I would use a Wis/Sta/Str/Int doll on the mob.  If your DPS is going to be nothing (In a x4 Raid Situation), Then its best to go for a pure utility roll in the raid as apposed to just spamming CA's and such.<BR><BR>To maximize the usage of TV & Other fighter lines though, defensive stance is the way to go.  Half & Half stance wouldn't work bad either I guess.<BR></DIV>

[Bladewind]

I agree in raid situations, but i think half n half or offense would be better in single circumstances.

[stfields]

<DIV>In a raid situation, if the mob is yellow con to you, you don't want to be in defensive stance if you are offering TV to the MT.  Yes, being in defensive stance gives you more avoidance, which gives a fraction more to the MT... but if you can't hit the mob (since your crushing skill will be around 285ish), you aren't contributing to DPS.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Just to throw some numbers up, easy ones to make it simple...  MT has 50% avoidance, TV adeptIII is 50% (I know its 49%, but easy numbers) and monk avoidance is as follows:</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>55% in offensive  -> 13.75% avoidance added to tank</DIV> <DIV>60% in middle      -> 15% added to tank</DIV> <DIV>70% in defensive ->  17.5% added to tank</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Is 2.5% or 4% really worth losing monk DPS? If you aren't the MT, make sure you can hit the mob <img src="/smilies/69934afc394145350659cd7add244ca9.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></DIV>

[Rrawl]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> stfields wrote:<BR> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Is 2.5% or 4% really worth losing monk DPS? If you aren't the MT, make sure you can hit the mob <img src="/smilies/69934afc394145350659cd7add244ca9.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>It could be, if that makes the difference between the healers keeping up or not. Honestly, it's the Mages and Scouts jobs to do the DPS. (= However, You make a good case for not using defensive stance unless you REALLY need it.</DIV>

[x0rtrun]

If 4 or 5% more avoidance is going to make the difference to your raid party, you have bigger problems in the raid party. heh, it would be awesome though if our TV line was that much of a factor on a raid. <span>:smileyvery-happy:</span> <div></div>