Accuracy from passives and agility removed - what replaces it?

[CFury]

After playing for a while I must say I do not notice some amazingly increased miss chance on my champion. Granted she has quite high Agi compared to some (high 700ies if I remember correctly) but that is hardly half what average hunter has now.

As far as crying a rivers of tears about nerfed hunters and wardens... I ran half PuG GB run just today. The tank was a warden who kept dying so much we never got even past Thadur. After several wipes we asked a kin tank to come and replace him. A warden again. From that point on the run was a breeze.
It is about player most of the time, not the game.

[Alad.]

This goes back to a discussion I had several times at the gaming table, back when we used real dice to figure this all out.

I had players ask why he had to roll to hit a 7-foot-tall, 500-pound ogre that's standing right in front of him. The answer is, not every strike counts. Armor, or thick hide, or even a poorly-executed strike (you didn't get your full momentum behind it, you got caught up in your own arms, you accidentally hit with the flat of the blade, etc) sometimes renders a strike entirely ineffectual. It's not a total whiff, where you only connect with air, it's a hit that simply does zero damage. It's not a dodge or a parry or a block, it's an actual physical strike that has no measurable effect on the target, for whatever reason.

It's the same sort of abstraction used for games that use health (not this one, since the morale solution is pretty elegant, IMO); a 5th-level fighter isn't 5 times as physically thick or beefy as a 1st-level fighter, he's simply trained well enough that he's able to fight through (turning his body such that a wound is less vital, better discipline, etc) the 8 points of damage that would mortally wound a lesser man.

That abstraction made a little more sense in D&D, where armor provided avoidance, not mitigation. It starts to break down when you apply it to a system where armor does provide mitigation; it's difficult to manage a system where armour sometimes provides 42% mitigation, then sometimes provides 100% mitigation

I don't know what your conclusion is, finally. You seem to both agree and disagree, or like and dislike. I do understand your arguments, though.

If it's a question of realism, then miss chance should be skipped. Because nothing in this game or even story is realistic. A FPS game is more realistic than lotro. At least you have to aim, and there's no magic. A game in which the damage occurs in the beginning of the action animation or where you have "immediate" skills which instantly complete a previous skill is hardly trying to be strictly realistic. A game in which there is no weapon "reach" (dagger and halberd both have a reach of 2.5m), where a mob can hit you from 10m after you've run past them, where a horse runs uphill at the same speed as downhill, where terrain or water has no effect on combat, is not one in which I'd expect to see a miss due to some hyper-realistic reasons. I'm not complaining, mind you. There's enough realism for my suspension of disbelief and enjoyment. But one shouldn't try to push realism too far, because there are huge gaps in realism already. So, this one-sided miss chance which attempts to explain a hypothetical distraction or banana peel is really not necessary. There's the stun, disarm and other effects we as players can suffer to explain a "miss", on top of mob avoidances, and that's plenty realism as far as I'm concerned. I don't like randomness, and rolling against the air to figure out if my character's eyes are closed and his brain is murky at the instant he swings doesn't add anything to my game except frustration over a lacking combat system. Let them implement events to roll against when determining the hit or miss. I wouldn't mind that if they're ready to invest to save this archaic mechanic.

[Aerundael]

After playing for a while I must say I do not notice some amazingly increased miss chance on my champion. Granted she has quite high Agi compared to some (high 700ies if I remember correctly) but that is hardly half what average hunter has now.

Imagine how bad it is for classes who don't even have any agility on their current endgame gear : ie guardians.

[CFury]

Imagine how bad it is for classes who don't even have any agility on their current endgame gear : ie guardians.

I have 2 amazing raiding guardians mains in kin and several pretty good alt ones. I didnt hear anyone complaining about their miss chance yet. So either its not that bad or they found the way to counter it successfully.
Mostly I see hunters complaining here on the forum and since they have incomparably higher agility than any other class, the stat obviously does not make such a big difference.

[Ailedra]

I don't know what your conclusion is, finally. You seem to both agree and disagree, or like and dislike. I do understand your arguments, though.

I didn't agree or disagree, as there's really nothing to agree with....the mechanic simply is what it is....definition, not opinion

So far as like or dislike....meh, I can't summon a strong opinion. It's a somewhat inelegant abstraction in this system. It's not so inelegant that it annoys me. If the mechanic were changed to eliminate misses entirely, compensating with dodge events and/or random complete mitigation (hitting for zero damage), I'd neither mourn nor celebrate the change...I'd just adjust.

Edit: From a purely mechanical point-of-view, keeping miss as a mechanic makes less sense in a world with Finesse. Prior to Finesse, you had no way to improve your chance to effectively hit mobs...their b/p/e was what it was, and there was nothing you could do to improve your chances. Assigning values to the bad guys that players can't do anything about isn't great design. Hit, which could be improved, existed as the knob a player could tweak to get a higher number of effective thwacks.

Now that Finesse exists, players have a different knob to tweak, making hit/miss a less important mechanic from a design perspective.

[aoe4evr]

Is this D&D?

[ararax2]

I would like a Dev to come over and explain why he decided to annoy people with this stupid nerf.

At least bring back the miss passives, those are the important ones, and symbolizes Your character becoming more proficient with fighting.

[Ubrot]

I think ether the "primary Stat" should increase the chance to hit (so that might + will classes have the same base as agi-classes) or finesse should also reduce the miss chance.

[Ailedra]

Is this D&D?

No. Is that relevant?

[anwar]

This is simply another example of programming with hardcore kins as the main focus.

They introduced the new raid stat called finesse, and they wanted to make the stat (and the resistance to mobs with the stat) a necessity since it's the star stat of the newest raid armor sets.

[Mad_Bombardier]

This is simply another example of programming with hardcore kins as the main focus.

They introduced the new raid stat called finesse, and they wanted to make the stat (and the resistance to mobs with the stat) a necessity since it's the star stat of the newest raid armor sets.

I think you may have responded to the wrong thread.

1) Finesse has nothing to do with Miss Chance.

2) Finesse is available on quest gear and crafted gear. It is not raid exclusive.

[LadyDena]

I said this in another thread but will repeat it.

The very day that ROI launched, as soon as I got on the server I took my character through a bunch of repeatable quests and skirmishes that I had done gazillion of times before. It became immediately clear that Finesse being a 'raid only' stat is a myth and a fairy tale. In all the times I had run those quests and skirmishes I had never seen my character missed that much. Yep, exact same gears, exact same mobs, exact same fights, only that suddenly I was missing a lot. So to answer the OP's question, the devs took away the passives we had earned and gave absolutely nothing back. Oh, we -can- COMPENSATE for this nerf of course, we just have to sacrifice morale, icpr, icmr, power, stats etc for it.

A lot of people still will not acknowledge Finesse for what it is. It is an ACROSS THE BOARD nerf for stats. What does Finesse have to do with stats? Well, I invite everyone to look at the crafted gears, the raid gears and even the random mob drop gears. Here is a typical example of a piece of gear, one version with, and one version without, finesse :

Gear 1 : X points to Stat A, X points to Stat B, X points to Stat C. No Finesse.
Gear 2 : X points to Stat A, X (or less) points to Stat B. X points to Finesse.

You see this pattern in gears over and over. Finesse was added to DILUTE THE STAT POOLS. Before, we had 5 stats. Now we have 6. You think Finesse isn't a stat simply because it isn't listed WITH the stats? If that is so, then WHY??? do Finesse repeatedly replaces one of the stats in the gears like the example I showed.

Instead of just giving us better gears, Turbine artificially shoe-horned a new stat into the game, forcing people to make sacrifices in other places to compensate for it. To add insult to injury they perpetuate the fairy tale that you don't really need finesse fighting surface mobs. Try unequipping your finesse gears and fight some level 75 mobs in Nan Curinir and tell us how it compares to with said gears.

So OF COURSE there is nothing to replace what the devs took away. Otherwise it wouldn't be a nerf. They forced a new stat into the game, and at the same time deleted all the passives we had earned so we end up needing this new stat or else fighting becomes beyond annoying.

The thing is, if there is a good reason for a nerf I can ACCEPT it. But they don't even show us the courtesy to call a nerf for what it is. A level 75 naturally should have about 800 to 1k hit points more than a level 65 character. It is just pathetic to see level 75 hunters with agility stacked to the roof, but running around with 5k (or less) morale dying to the DoTs of the level 60 Turtle raid. The devs had deliberately designed in weaknesses to all our gears making all classes ONE DIMENSIONAL with obvious weaknesses and problems that the next mobs or instances are just waiting to exploit.

[MRNot]

..I would understand that if one were trying to cut a flying pea or hair or bullet in half with a sword. 99% miss chance I'd say, even. But "missing" a hit in face to face combat with a mob your size or twice your size, after confirmed training in the use of your skills? What are we, morons? ..

BAAAAAHAHAHAHAAH!!! (You must spread some rep around before yada yada)

[MRNot]

For what it's worth, I am grossly underqualified to participate in any substantive way in this debate. I offer only these:

First, this game is currently my primary source of entertainment. I don't play it as a job. I am an altoholic, and won't likely make the time/effort to quickly maximize each of my 'toons. I don't really think that's necessary at this time..

Playing my classes as I have, I have hit some rough patches in Dunland that have been quite frustrating. I have been reminded, though, that I do need to reevaluate my virtues & things. That's all fine and good, but I've just found it difficult to rebuild my characters within the constraints built in with much success. I come to understand that I need to be patient until I get to level cap to see how it's -supposed- to work/be, but that doesn't feel valid to me. I have to relearn a bunch of things I have put behind me for months on 8 level-capped 'toons and start over. I have/had read a few things on the update, and have conferred with kin (and admittedly not gone hog-wild doing everything everyone else was focused on, in part due to my altoholism). At 71 (on a few alts, 70 on others), I have done what I can and on some (Minstrel, RK) it's been cake, while on others (LM, Warden & Hunter) it's been a shocking and frustrating exercise in futility. I am hopeful it irons out soon, but either way, I'm enjoying the story, so I'll be here for the time.. I'd just liked to have seen a little more concrete info from Turbine about how I might be expected to re-fit the classes, and/or that the gear provided in-game at release would allow for it to be done smoothly.. Call me a n00b. It's been tough on those latter three..

Thanks for your input on all sides of this debate. It's been enlightening..

[Hrodberht]

Weird thing is, did a blue name *ever* explain why they removed the passives in the first place?

[Kongas]

I have 2 amazing raiding guardians mains in kin and several pretty good alt ones. I didnt hear anyone complaining about their miss chance yet. So either its not that bad or they found the way to counter it successfully.
Mostly I see hunters complaining here on the forum and since they have incomparably higher agility than any other class, the stat obviously does not make such a big difference.

It does. What hunters are unhappy about is being turned into a focused starved glass cannon if they want the high agility they need for their dps to compete with the Super-Classes like Champs, RK's and Captains.

[Ailedra]

Quoted from the morale conversation that's going on....credit to Gareth for the original input:

Well my Champ has around 6.3k. I know I can get it up to about 6,600 or so without sacrificing might, but anymore than that and my might has to go away.

It comes down to what matters more in a group. My chance to critical hit or 500-600 morale.

The thing is, and this is the thing I hate the most because I like seeing 1,400-1,500 might...I'd have to drop it down to about 1,100-1,200 to get over 7k morale..and in reality that 300 point decrease really doesn't change my damage that much. I wish it did, I like having that much might, but you need like 800+ might to make a noticeable difference in damage.

Per the bolded, that would seem to indicate that dropping Might for Agility to increase hit (if you place a high value on hit) is at least DPS-neutral, not entirely and obviously non-viable as claimed.

The idea should be that you have multiple viable methods to gear, depending on your personal preferences (great big hits with more misses, more steady damage but smaller numbers, etc). If you can drop Might for Morale, or Hit, or a little of both, and still be capable of sufficient damage, then they've successfully achieved their goal.

[Alad.]

Per the bolded, that would seem to indicate that dropping Might for Agility to increase hit (if you place a high value on hit) is at least DPS-neutral, not entirely and obviously non-viable as claimed.

As you can see here, the new offence rating-to-% conversion is practically a straight line, with no diminishing returns on the long run. This means decreasing Might will have a direct impact on damage, no matter what your current Might is. An approximate formula for offence is:

%Offence = 0.002667*R/L + 0.0074

where R is the offence rating, and L is the opponent's level.
This is only approximate in that the real curve is an assembly of several bumps, as I show in that thread, and using this straight line approximation will give small errors all along the curve, but the errors will remain small no matter the rating.

It should be interesting to note that the high points on that offence rating graph were contributed by a champion (a post in that same thread), and the highest point represents an offence rating of more than 24000. If it were obtained by Might alone, it would represent over 2400 Might. But there's certainly a lot of direct Offence Rating bonuses in there as well.

One could conceivably reduce their might, thereby reducing their offence rating, but compensate with some direct offence rating bonuses instead, and Agility to decrease miss chance, which also happens to slightly increase critical chance, and end up with better net dps. Is that possible? Let's see.

As an example, a miss chance of 10% will reduce your dps by 10%. How much reduction in might will reduce your dps by 10% at level 75? (assuming you'll be able to trade the lost might for new agility).

To reduce your dps by 10% using a reduction in offence% (O1), the new offence% (O2) will have to become (0.9*O1 - 0.1). [I.e. the offence multiplier which is (1+O1) should become 0.9*(1+O1) for the dps to drop by 10%]

Based on the above linear approximation formula for offence, this turns out to be as follows:
R2 = 0.9*R1 - 37.8*L
where R is the offence rating.

Against level 75 mobs, the offence rating which reduced dps by 10% is:
R2 = 0.9*R1 - 2835

Important Note: I'm neglecting the Critical hit chance in these calculations. Its effect (by increasing agility) will be such that less dps will be lost as you move more might into agility. In other words, you could move more might than indicated into agility. Perhaps I'll do the full calculation some day But here's something to get you started.


3 examples:

1) For someone who has 1000 Might, and say 5000 direct offence rating bonus, bringing his total rating to 15000, reducing his dps by 10% would mean reducing his rating to 0.9*15000 - 2835 = 10665, i.e. a reduction of 4335 rating. If this reduction in offence rating is all coming from a reduction in Might (you want to trade might for agility), it would mean reducing might by 434 and increasing agility by 434 (if this is at all possible).
Now, if 434 agility is sufficient to reduce the miss chance from 10% to almost zero, this character would be at break-even (lost 10% dps from might, gained 10% dps from reduced miss chance). If less egility is sufficient, he'd be winning in this exchange. If more is required, he'd be losing.

2) Now take someone with 1500 Might and 5000 direct offence rating bonus (total rating 20000). 10% dps reduction means a new rating of: 0.9*20000 - 2835 = 15165 rating. This is a reduction in rating of 4835. If all of this reduction come out of Might, it would mean a reduction of 484 Might, and an increase of 484 Agility.
There is no reason why the miss chance reduction formula should work differently for these 2 cases. So, this second char has 50 more might to sacrifice to reduce his miss chance. If less Agility is enough, he'll turn out winning in the exchange (increasing his dps).

3) Lastly, take someone with 1500 Might and 9000 direct offence rating bonus (total rating 24000). 10% decrease in dps means a new rating of: 0.9*24000 - 2835 = 18765 rating. A reduction of 5235 rating. Meaning he can sacrifice 524 Might into Agility to attempt and eliminate the miss chance. The same conclusions apply, of course. But this shows that the more direct offence rating bonus you have, the more Might you can turn into Agility (again, if this is even possible at all) to eliminate your miss chance.


Conclusion:
The more Might you have, the more Might you can sacrifice by turning it into Agility (if possible) to eliminate the miss chance. The more Direct Offence Rating bonuses you have, the more Might you can sacrifice. If you're in these situations, you have a good chance of being able to come out winning in dps by sacrificing offence and reducing miss chance. Unfortunately, the less Might and direct offence rating bonuses you have, the less likely you'll be able to come out winning in the end if you go that route, and you may be better off accepting your misses (she's surely a very nice lady... I didn't mean her! ) Although there may be a better sweet spot partially down that road.


The above are all just examples which assume your miss chance is 10%, hence it reduces your dps by 10%, and hence you could attempt to turn might into agility to try and eliminate the miss chance without losing as much dps, if that is possible. Unfortunately, we don't know the formula for how miss chance is calculated, and so experiments will have to be made to test how agility affects miss chance.


What is certain from all of the above, is that as long as Turbine decides to hand us bonuses in packages of their own choosing, many build attempts will be impossible. Hence my suggestion for a point system and the elimination of stat bonuses on all gear.

The idea should be that you have multiple viable methods to gear, depending on your personal preferences (great big hits with more misses, more steady damage but smaller numbers, etc). If you can drop Might for Morale, or Hit, or a little of both, and still be capable of sufficient damage, then they've successfully achieved their goal.

Nice idea (I mean it), but where did you hear/read it? What are those multiple viable methods to gear? And what is "their goal"?

[Ailedra]

One could conceivably reduce their might, thereby reducing their offence rating, but compensate with some direct offence rating bonuses instead, and Agility to decrease miss chance, which also happens to slightly increase critical chance, and end up with better net dps. Is that possible? Let's see.

Interesting math (and I'm not being cynical or sarcastic....you have a lot of relevant and accurate figuring in your post), but that's not the contention. You're correct, in that Might could be compensated by direct offense, but the point under debate is a theoretical 1-for-1 Might-for-Agility swap that consciously sacrifices damage per hit for chance to hit, and the net effect on DPS from making that conscious decision.

Put another way, assume missing irritates the hell out of you. You'd prefer to be the DPS that hits more consistently, but for smaller hits, for a net par approximate DPS. Is that a viable choice?

Important Note: I'm neglecting the Critical hit chance in these calculations. Its effect (by increasing agility) will be such that less dps will be lost as you move more might into agility.

I understand why you neglected it, but it's not a trivial point. We're not only talking about crit chance increase, we're also talking about Devastate chance increase.

Conclusion:
The more Might you have, the more Might you can sacrifice by turning it into Agility (if possible) to eliminate the miss chance.

And, we have a plethora of posts that talk about the glass cannon nature of gear in RoI....gear with huge amounts of Might/Agility/Will/Fate, and not much in the way of Vitality. One can assume based only on that feedback that a pattern has been set where most Might DPSers will be in the "Might to burn" category (which would, in turn, indicate that most melee DPS will be in a position to burn Might for Agility to increase hit for a net DPS gain).

Although there may be a better sweet spot partially down that road.

This really is the crux of the matter. The outcry we've heard so far has been monodimensional....hit is decreased, therefore DPS must be decreased. The DPS decrease has not yet been proven, empirically or theoretically.

It's clear at this point that there has been a paradigm shift; stat optimization doesn't look like it did before RoI. I doubt anybody would argue that sub-point.

The above are all just examples which assume your miss chance is 10%, hence it reduces your dps by 10%

This is tangential to both our points, but so far as we know, LOTRO does not use a single-roll resolution syste, and we DO know that it uses two different magnitudes of crit. Therefore, a 10% decrease in hit does not equate to a 10% decrease in DPS in a 1/1 ratio.

Unfortunately, we don't know the formula for how miss chance is calculated, and so experiments will have to be made to test how agility affects miss chance.

I'll go a step further....parses will need to be run showing the DPS delta for swapping Might for Agility. Until those parses are run, and making that swap has been empirically shown to be sub-optimal, we're all just handwaving.

That's been my point all along. Current parses show a decrease in hit. This, by itself, is meaningless. No parses (in reasonably-obtainable gear, vs. current opponents) show a decrease in DPS relative to the increase in mob health intrinsic to a 10-level increase. As soon as somebody shows one, we'll have something to talk about.

[Alad.]

This really is the crux of the matter. The outcry we've heard so far has been monodimensional....hit is decreased, therefore DPS must be decreased. The DPS decrease has not yet been proven, empirically or theoretically.

I don't see why you're saying that. People aren't comparing their dps pre-RoI at level 65 with their dps at 75 (more about that toward the end). The relationship is simple, and cannot be other than this:
Dps = Hits/sec * Damage/Hit
If you miss 10% of the time, you can represent this like so:
Dps = 0.9 * Hits/sec * Damage/Hit
or Dps = (1-miss%) * Hits/sec * Damage/Hit
The higher your miss%, the lower your expected dps.

It doesn't matter how many rolls are used to determine the hit or the damage, the fact that you're missing a certain % of your hit attempts means you're reducing your possible dps in direct proportion. This is theoretical proof. Factoring in the crit chance will not affect the fact that the result will have to be multiplied by (1-miss%). I can't see any other way of representing it. Do you know of one?

Further, if someone comes and says that they missed 2% of the time right before the Isengard patch and 10% right after the patch, with the same character, traits, and gear, and against the same mobs, then for all practical purposes, the increased miss chance has caused his dps to decrease by roughly 8%. It cannot be otherwise. What happens 1 or 10 levels later is irrelevant. How some other factors may have increased or decreased his dps due to this same patch, is equally irrelevant. This, on the other hand, would be empirical evidence.

And yes, people have been stating their observations, not their measurements. You can't help but notice a higher frequency of the word Missed floating above the mob's head. That's not a reason to totally discount their reports. Especially since it makes sense, with the loss of the Accuracy passives. It would be a rare find if someone came up with miss statistics they happened to measure just before RoI launch, and the same stats just after, with everything else remaining unchanged. Is that what you're expecting to see? I don't think we have much chance of seeing such data, TBH, because people can't go back now to test in pre-RoI conditions. I bet even you couldn't provide evidence that what they claim is wrong!

And sorry for not including the crit chance effect. It will make a difference indeed, but it requires further assumptions about crit rates and multipliers, and I wanted to make it simple.

It's clear at this point that there has been a paradigm shift; stat optimization doesn't look like it did before RoI. I doubt anybody would argue that sub-point.

I even wonder if it isn't the devs' private joke, this time at the expense of the top tier gear grinders. "Here's the shiny teal set you want, but you may find it's not everything you were expecting, and may have to actually end up not using some of it."

This is tangential to both our points, but so far as we know, LOTRO does not use a single-roll resolution syste, and we DO know that it uses two different magnitudes of crit. Therefore, a 10% decrease in hit does not equate to a 10% decrease in DPS in a 1/1 ratio.

That's unfortunately exactly what it does.

[...] the point under debate is a theoretical 1-for-1 Might-for-Agility swap that consciously sacrifices damage per hit for chance to hit, and the net effect on DPS from making that conscious decision.

Put another way, assume missing irritates the hell out of you. You'd prefer to be the DPS that hits more consistently, but for smaller hits, for a net par approximate DPS. Is that a viable choice?

I'll go a step further....parses will need to be run showing the DPS delta for swapping Might for Agility. Until those parses are run, and making that swap has been empirically shown to be sub-optimal, we're all just handwaving.

OK, here goes: The formula for offence is linear: 3.75 offence per level = 1%, roughly. At level 75, that's 281.25 offence rating per 1% damage, i.e. 28.1 Might per 1% damage. If you can swap Might for Agility, and the Miss chance versus Agility curve is also linear, and it costs less than 28.1 Agility per 1% miss chance, then it can be done. You can go ahead and swap Might for Agility until you wipe out the miss chance, and you'll end up with higher dps overall. And this is irrespective of how much Might you originally had. You'll gain 10% dps from reducing the miss chance (for example), but lose less than that same % from reducing the offence.

If, on the other hand, the miss chance curve (again assuming it's linear), costs more than 28.1 Agility per 1% miss chance, then you will never gain in that Might versus Agility exchange.

If the Agility versus Miss chance curve is non-linear (diminishing returns), and it starts off with a slope that is higher than 28.1, then you can slide down that curve until you reach the slope of 28.1, where you should stop. If the slope is never bigger than 28.1, then you shouldn't attempt to go down that path at all.

All of the above neglects the effects of crits.

That's been my point all along. Current parses show a decrease in hit. This, by itself, is meaningless. No parses (in reasonably-obtainable gear, vs. current opponents) show a decrease in DPS relative to the increase in mob health intrinsic to a 10-level increase. As soon as somebody shows one, we'll have something to talk about.

You're talking about a totally different thing, it seems. You seem to only be interested in the overall net result in dps at level 75 versus level 75 mobs, compared to level 65 versus level 65 mobs.

What these people are doing, I believe, is the same as I would do, which is to look at all the factors that affect dps, one by one, and attempt to improve them in such a way as to maximize dps. One of these factors is miss chance. It has to be analysed by itself, while keeping everything else constant, so as to understand how it works and to be able to minimize it. Given the set of constraints at hand, one would have to swap some stat for agility. Might is the best candidate because: 1) It's plentiful 2) Decreasing it while increasing Agility may allow you to actually increase your dps without adversly affecting your defence, for example (lose offence bonus dps, block and some parry with might; but gain miss, evade, some parry and even dps from crits, with agility.) It could be possible!

The only questions that remain are:
1) Can it be done at all? Can you just swap might for agility and not lose anything else? (morale, power, regeneration). Are there items that allow you to do that?
2) How much agility is required and can you improve your dps by performing that swap? Or would you be better off not trying at all?

[Ailedra]

I don't see why you're saying that. People aren't comparing their dps pre-RoI at level 65 with their dps at 75 (more about that toward the end).

Respectfully, they are in fact doing precisely that, both in this thread and in others. Players are noting the increased miss chance, noting that mob health has of course increased with the addition of 10 levels, and are coming to the erroneous (or at least unproven) conclusion that their effective DPS has decreased relative to the increase in mob health; essentially, they're less capable in end-game content now (due to the increased miss) than they were when the level cap was at 65.

Whether they are or not is what's not yet been demonstrated.

The relationship is simple, and cannot be other than this:
Dps = Hits/sec * Damage/Hit
If you miss 10% of the time, you can represent this like so:
Dps = 0.9 * Hits/sec * Damage/Hit
or Dps = (1-miss%) * Hits/sec * Damage/Hit
The higher your miss%, the lower your expected dps.

In other news, the sky is still, in fact, blue.

I think you misunderstood and simplified my statement. Yes, of course, all other things being equal, decreasing hit decreases DPS. However, the entire discussion has revolved around the reality that all other things are not equal:

From 65 to 75, damage/hit has increased at an accelerated rate compared to previously (as the new gear tends toward glass cannon stats). This means that it's entirely possible that (relative to mob health) DPS is more effective now than it was at 65, even with the increased miss chance.

Not all classes have the same hit/sec profile (meaning the attempt to use hunter miss numbers to extrapolate the effectiveness of champions dropping might for hit, as was attempted upthread, is intrinsically flawed).

It doesn't matter how many rolls are used to determine the hit or the damage, the fact that you're missing a certain % of your hit attempts means you're reducing your possible dps in direct proportion. This is theoretical proof.

True statement (and the sky is STILL blue...I just checked).

However, again, nobody's been debating that given equal levels of offense, decreasing hit decreases DPS. This much is painfully obvious.Good thing that wasn't the contention.

Further, if someone comes and says that they missed 2% of the time right before the Isengard patch and 10% right after the patch, with the same character, traits, and gear, and against the same mobs, then for all practical purposes, the increased miss chance has caused his dps to decrease by roughly 8%. It cannot be otherwise. What happens 1 or 10 levels later is irrelevant. How some other factors may have increased or decreased his dps due to this same patch, is equally irrelevant.

Excuse me, it's entirely relevant in light of the contention made in this thread and others; that the increased miss represents an uncompensated nerf.

And yes, people have been stating their observations, not their measurements. You can't help but notice a higher frequency of the word Missed floating above the mob's head. That's not a reason to totally discount their reports.

You seem like a smart enough guy to understand the dangers of confirmation bias.

However, it's moot, because there are parses existing that show a hit decrease. You're correct that this is both logical and expected, given the removal of the hit passives. So, why are we discussing it? Nobody's challenging the idea that people miss more. I've stated that plainly myself multiple times upthread.

I'll say it one more time, as plainly as I know how. Nobody is challenging that misses have increased. I am challenging the assumption that this represents a net reduction in effectiveness of DPS when both increases in damage per hit and the mob health increase are taken into account, particularly since this is being assumed as obvious, when it most certainly is not obvious given the data presented.

And sorry for not including the crit chance effect. It will make a difference indeed, but it requires further assumptions about crit rates and multipliers, and I wanted to make it simple.

Entirely understandable, but again, it's central to the question of what happens to net DPS when a Champion replaces might with Agility. Upthread, Darth_Carl stated that it was impossible for doing so to result in a net DPS increase, given the way Agility converts to hit. That can't be determined without adding crit and Devestate chance.

You're talking about a totally different thing, it seems. You seem to only be interested in the overall net result in dps at level 75 versus level 75 mobs, compared to level 65 versus level 65 mobs.

Yes, that's precisely what we'd been talking about for several pages now. In the end, you and I have not been having the same conversation.

[ThorrandWS]

I really don't think you're getting it. I don't see many people complaining about their dps, I see people complaining about a mechanic that has changed yet the itemization is not there to make up for it. With the passives gone how do might classes compensate for the ~4% loss in accuracy. Not about our dps, let the straw man go.

[Ailedra]

I really don't think you're getting it. I don't see many people complaining about their dps, I see people complaining about a mechanic that has changed yet the itemization is not there to make up for it. With the passives gone how do might classes compensate for the ~4% loss in accuracy. Not about our dps, let the straw man go.

These are just from this thread:

And how much agility will might classes have to gimp themselves for?

In my opinion I believe at least one of the issues lies with removing the passive accuracy skills and not compensating for those in any way.

If even 1K+ Agi hunters are seeing less than a 4% droppoff, (the amoutn of +hit we lost from passives), in miss rates from +4Xlevel AGI over where the cap would have been, it's pretty dammed obvious that the trade off of stacking agi over primary stats isn't worth it, unless AGi is your primary stat. Tanks certianlly have a better time as some extra AGi is nice for the Parry and Evade ratings, (making the loss less disadvantageous), but even there stacking enough Agi to get real hit chance reductions is A) going to be impossibble given gearing choices, and B) not really worth the tradeoff in offence rating.

Lets say your base might in a low Agi build is 1200. Lets say you sacrafice a third that for Agi. So you just gave up 4K offence. Hunters are reporting worse than Pre-ROI even at and above 1.2K Agi, (> 450Agi over where the cap would have been). That means their Agi is providing less than +4% hit chance for them, That means your 400Agi is prioviding less than +4% hit chance. Whats worth more, less than +4% Hit chance, or 4K offence. Im pretty dammed sure the anwser is offence.

If I miss more, but hit harder, but my DPS stays relatively the same, despite increasing my level by 10, that is a loss. That is a complete change in how combat works. Mobs increase in defense and DPS. If we do not also increase, that becomes a problem.

I was more responding to a comparison between a old 65 character and a new 75 and watching if DPS is increased or not and drawing conclusions based on that.

The whole roi change has been a collective nerf…. At L 75, with well upgraded gear T2 is a severe challenge while champ and captain kin breeze effortlessly through things.

Since they're reporting noticablly less than pre-RoI hit rates that means 400 agility si worth markedly less than +4% hit chance and as the individual i was previously arguing with has shown, even +4% hit chance would not be enough to componsate for the lost OR from dropping that much primary stat for that much agility.

As such i don't see any good reason to start stacking agility over other stats on non-Hunter/Burg characters as worth it, so the lack isn't so problamatic on it's own.

That said the hit chance can still be a major isue. You miss a high damage skill and it can really impact things, do that in say the middle of Oathbreaker or other temp damage buff, (self or otherwise), and it becomes absolutly horiffying in it's negetiv affects. It was allways bad of course, but the increased chances of it happening now make it especially bad.

Really we could do with the formulae IMHO.

Yes, people (you included) are most definitely talking about an uncompensated nerf, talking about the effects on their net DPS and overall effectiveness, and talking about the viability of dropping (or "gimping") might for Agility.

Calling that part of the discussion a straw man is....a bit disingenuous, at best. That, or you don't know what the term means.

[LadyDena]

Thank you Alad for the excellent data, graphs and lists. There is nothing quite like data and facts to show how RoI had changed the game for everyone, and whether it was a boon or a nerf. And I totally agree with you on the point about there being no more base stat increases beyond level 50. I'm guessing with about 60 points of stats (No I don't think this number is a coincidence either) over 25 levels, they alone could have done wonders to people's survival, the ability to hit, to inflict damage and to mitigate had they been there. Once again, thanks for the enlightening read. Don't worry too much arguing with the (as someone else put it) 'see no evil' crowd. Everyone can look at those numbers and draw their own conclusions. I for one learned a lot about the changes to medium/light armor mitigation, and how we are now utterly dependent on stat packages made by the devs in armor and jewelries, making us ever more one dimensional with various weaknesses built right into our characters just waiting for the next mobs or instances to exploit.

[ThorrandWS]

Yes, people (you included) are most definitely talking about an uncompensated nerf, talking about the effects on their net DPS and overall effectiveness, and talking about the viability of dropping (or "gimping") might for Agility.

Calling that part of the discussion a straw man is....a bit disingenuous, at best. That, or you don't know what the term means.

Mine didn't mention a thing about dps. Effectiveness maybe, because we lost that much from passive accuracy. The question imposed is what replaces the passive of accuracy, so far it's nothing. While you are asking for graphs on how it changes dps does nothing to avoid seeing (miss) (miss) (miss) while fighting even on level mobs. Yes I know what straw man means, it's the rhetoric you're using to obfuscate the question of where do we get that extra 4% back.