Interrupt Build?

[Epsilon Rose]

Yes, it absolutely does for reasons I've been consistently providing for pages now. Happy?

 

Long enough timeline matters because...as you've clearly shown...you can (despite your claim) tie up an enemy until it is dead. It doesn't matter where or not it resets: indefinite delay is the same. damn. thing.

 

"This game doesn't do precisely the thing I'm showing it do in this screenshot". Really?!

 

EDIT: Oh, btw, I'm not sure what you're doing with the cheat codes to keep the bear from hitting you, but turn it off and post scenario number 2 again.

Uh? He wasn't interrupting the bear indefinitely in either of those scenarios. It was still getting in hits, it was just missing.

 

Designing Experiments for Dummies

 

Scroll down to the section on variables.

Read about dependent variables and independent variables.

Have a revelation about how your poorly designed "experiment" is a complete mess because you build 97 point stat swings into your test runs.

Stop posting in this thread.

Doesn't the 97-point swing favor the half of the experiment you support? Also, in this experiment the 97-point swing IS the independent variable (i.e. the variable you change for the experiment) and the only effect it would have in this encounter is changing the rate of interrupts.

Edited April 18, 2015 by Epsilon Rose

[KDubya]

The thing we want to see is how well can interrupt reduce the amount of incoming damage, or at least that is what I'd want to see.

 

With the tweaked character using fists, even crits should not drop the bear in ten hits.

 

We then run the test for the 100 perception guy. He will interrupt every attack. We count how many times the bear gets an attack off before the bear sustains X amount of hits.

 

Then we run the test for the 3 perception guy. He will not interrupt at all. We count how many times the bear gets an attack off before the bear sustains X amount of hits.

 

This test will show the absolute best case for the benefit of an interrupt build for mitigating the number of enemy attacks. Then you can see what you could gain by pursuing a heavy interrupt build and then decide the cost/benefit of doing so.

[Guest]

The thing we want to see is how well can interrupt reduce the amount of incoming damage, or at least that is what I'd want to see.

 

With the tweaked character using fists, even crits should not drop the bear in ten hits.

 

We then run the test for the 100 perception guy. He will interrupt every attack. We count how many times the bear gets an attack off before the bear sustains X amount of hits.

 

Then we run the test for the 3 perception guy. He will not interrupt at all. We count how many times the bear gets an attack off before the bear sustains X amount of hits.

 

This test will show the absolute best case for the benefit of an interrupt build for mitigating the number of enemy attacks. Then you can see what you could gain by pursuing a heavy interrupt build and then decide the cost/benefit of doing so.

It doesn't. It simply adds time to the opponents action timer. The function of interrupt isn't to reduce damage, it's to prevent it.

 

Your proposed experiment is exactly the same one I suggested a few posts back. He won't do it because he knows how it will turn out. He knew how it would turn out before he posted which is why he jacked non-related stats. 

[KDubya]

 

The thing we want to see is how well can interrupt reduce the amount of incoming damage, or at least that is what I'd want to see.

 

With the tweaked character using fists, even crits should not drop the bear in ten hits.

 

We then run the test for the 100 perception guy. He will interrupt every attack. We count how many times the bear gets an attack off before the bear sustains X amount of hits.

 

Then we run the test for the 3 perception guy. He will not interrupt at all. We count how many times the bear gets an attack off before the bear sustains X amount of hits.

 

This test will show the absolute best case for the benefit of an interrupt build for mitigating the number of enemy attacks. Then you can see what you could gain by pursuing a heavy interrupt build and then decide the cost/benefit of doing so.

It doesn't. It simply adds time to the opponents action timer. The function of interrupt isn't to reduce damage, it's to prevent it.

 

Your proposed experiment is exactly the same one I suggested a few posts back. He won't do it because he knows how it will turn out. He knew how it would turn out before he posted which is why he jacked non-related stats. 

 

 

It reduces the damage you take by reducing the number of attacks that the monster can get off before you kill it.

 

You don't want to test stat balanced builds or have to worry about random damage or getting killed by the bear during the test. You just want to see that if I interrupt every time the bear gets five hits before I hit it ten times, or the bear hits me seven times before I hit it ten times with no interrupts. This would show that a 100% interrupter could at best avoid two hits, real world numbers would probably be one hit difference. - These numbers are totally made up, just using them to illustrate my point.

 

Once you see what the absolute best one can do with interrupt is, you can then determine its relative worth compared to other design choices.

[Guest]

KDubya, these all-or-nothing interrupt build discussions aren't very pragmatic. At the end of the day it comes down to putting on a +2 Perception amulet instead of a +2 Might amulet and taking Interrupting Blows instead of some throw-away talent. And only if the character in question is predisposed for interrupts anyway.

 

My only purpose here is to counter the people who say interrupt is worthless. They are wrong and demonstrably so. However it is probably more than a little foolish to take a character that isn't going to do a lot or interrupting (or a fair amount of worthless interrupting) and try to tweak them for interrupts.

[Ruminate]

The thing we want to see is how well can interrupt reduce the amount of incoming damage, or at least that is what I'd want to see.

 

With the tweaked character using fists, even crits should not drop the bear in ten hits.

 

We then run the test for the 100 perception guy. He will interrupt every attack. We count how many times the bear gets an attack off before the bear sustains X amount of hits.

 

Then we run the test for the 3 perception guy. He will not interrupt at all. We count how many times the bear gets an attack off before the bear sustains X amount of hits.

 

This test will show the absolute best case for the benefit of an interrupt build for mitigating the number of enemy attacks. Then you can see what you could gain by pursuing a heavy interrupt build and then decide the cost/benefit of doing so.

 

Trying to find a way to achieve 100% crits with non-monk fists was pretty time consuming. Anyways, here are the logs:

 

 

 

^ There are 6 critical interrupts with fists inbetween each bear hit.

 

 

^ There are 5-6 non-interrupted hits with fists inbetween each bear hit.

 

Since fists seem to have worse action delay than other fast weapons, its difficult to say whether or not crits increase the action delay by 50%.

...but atleast we know fists are horrible for interrupts.

[Kaigen42]

So, in the interests of establishing a theoretical baseline for theorycrafting weapon loadouts for interrupt-focused characters, I ran some tests. I used an Orlan Barbarian with 21 Dex and the Two Weapon Style talent (no armor) attacking my tank for thirty-second periods and counted the number of attacks made. I then multiplied that by the interrupt rating of the weapons and compared the results to the 30 seconds total time. Note that this is purely theoretical; I'm assuming every attack hits and every attack interrupts in order to determine how effect weapons are in perfect conditions. In a practical situation, you're going to miss, you're going to fail some interrupts, some interrupts might land during a period in which your opponent is not doing anything that can be interrupted, and you'll probably be wearing some kind of armor if you're that close to the enemy.

 

Average speed one-handed weapons have ~40% uptime for interrupts. Fast speed one-handed weapons are virtually the same, averaging out to 39% uptime. Normal two-handed weapons have a 37.5% uptime. So those are all very close. If you want to use a reach weapon for a bit of safety, you'll lose a little bit of interrupt potential, but not much. Morning stars, on the other hand, have a 50% uptime. So there's a noticeable benefit from using morning stars over other weapon choices, but I'm not convinced it's worth the sacrifices you make compared to having other weapon properties. It might be a useful thing to have in your back pocket for certain enemies like Ogres, especially if you use Swords or Battle Axes as your primary weapons.

 

In the process of doing my testing, I also discovered that there is a second one-handed weapon with a 1.0 second listed interrupt rating: the unique spear The Vile Loner's Lance. If one were to dual wield that or Shatterstar with another average speed weapon, you're looking at 60% uptime. If you were crazy enough to use both together you'd theoretically have an 80% uptime. Over every 30 seconds you'd delay the opponent 24. I don't think that's a particularly practical strategy, though, given that neither of those weapons have the draining special and you're melee attacking while practically naked. I am curious as to whether the retaliate effect uses the interrupt rating of whatever weapon is equipped, or whether it has its own. It's probably the latter, but if it were the former, then you could get some serious mileage out of giving Shatterstar and The Vile Loner's Lance to a pair of shield-using tanks with retaliate gear. All this assumes that the weapon descriptions are accurate and not some mistake left behind in a previous revamp of the interrupt mechanic, as I haven't tested to see if these weapons actually delay as much as they report.

 

I wanted to test speed weapons to see what kind of impact they'd have, but the answer is zero, because I couldn't find a speed weapon that actually had a noticeable effect. I had read posts on this forum about the quality not functioning on ranged weapons, but didn't realize that it didn't work on melee either. Or at least, it doesn't work on Strike Hard, Unforgiven, Sword of Daenysis, or Llawran's Stick, regardless of whether you have Two Weapon Style, or are wielding them by themselves, or wearing armor (it won't cancel out the recovery penalty from Padded Armor, for example).

[Guest]

Last part of a party vs ogre fight. Ogre gets off one hit and then is interrupted 6 times (by 5 different party members) before it dies. Aloth's spell book is still full for the upcoming boss fight. No one has any enchanted items that boost interrupt and even if anyone had Interrupting Blows it wouldn't have done any good.

 

The only "helper" present is Kana's chant which is dropping the ogre's concentration by 16.

 

 

EDIT: Maybe this is more persuasive

 

Edited April 18, 2015 by Achilles

[Epsilon Rose]

Last part of a party vs ogre fight. Ogre gets off one hit and then is interrupted 6 times (by 5 different party members) before it dies. Aloth's spell book is still full for the upcoming boss fight. No one has any enchanted items that boost interrupt and even if anyone had Interrupting Blows it wouldn't have done any good.

 

The only "helper" present is Kana's chant which is dropping the ogre's concentration by 16.

 

2015-04-18_00007.jpg

 

EDIT: Maybe this is more persuasive

 

2015-04-18_00010.jpg

Ok? That doesn't really tell us anything though, because we can't see what would have happened if you didn't interrupt him. All you've shown is that you can somewhat reliably interrupt an ogre. If interrupts represented a full reset or cancellation of actions (where you would have stopped 6 attacks), that would be pretty impressive, but that's not how interrupts work in this game, so it's not at all persuasive.

Edited April 19, 2015 by Epsilon Rose

[Guest]

lol

 

"Interrupt isn't lockdown"

 

*Posts screen shots of interrupt acting as lockdown*

 

"Doesn't count because I don't know what would have happened had interrupt not been acting as lockdown*

 

le sigh

Edited April 19, 2015 by Achilles

[Epsilon Rose]

lol

 

"Interrupt isn't lockdown"

 

*Posts screen shots of interrupt acting as lockdown*

 

"Doesn't count because I don't know what would have happened had interrupt not been acting as lockdown*

 

le sigh

Interrupt isn't lock down. That's not how it works in this game. It just adds a very small delay to attacks. That is what it is, a delay and you posted screenshots of it acting as a delay. They key detail is how much of a delay it is. It could be that you only prevented one attack from the ogre, you'd have seen just as many interrupt messages either way, but a single extra attack probably wouldn't have been a terrible drain on your resources. For someone who was railing on about the scientific method and controlled variables, you are doing a terrible job of constructing your proofs. A single set of screenshots has no persuasive power and cannot prove anything, because any combination, even a single interrupt, could support your case equally well, regardless of if a single interrupt actually does anything of merit.

 

Get off your high horse and conduct a proper experiment or stop debating in bad faith and bow out. Right now, you are arguing, very poorly, in the face of much more persuasive evidence without doing anything to counter that evidence beyond loudly exclaiming how little you like it.

[Kaigen42]

Look, this is a case where you're either going to need to record a video, or Epsilon Rose is going to need to test it personally to satisfy. Achilles has shown that you can use interrupts to keep an enemy from getting an attack off before you kill it. Epsilon Rose seems to want to quantify that in terms of how many attacks you prevented with interrupts in the time it took to kill the enemy. Since the combat log doesn't have time stamps, the only way to demonstrate that is to record video showing how many times the ogre can attack over a certain period of time if you stand there and do nothing, then quickloading and showing how many attacks it gets over the same period of time while under a barrage of interrupts.

[Epsilon Rose]

Look, this is a case where you're either going to need to record a video, or Epsilon Rose is going to need to test it personally to satisfy. Achilles has shown that you can use interrupts to keep an enemy from getting an attack off before you kill it. Epsilon Rose seems to want to quantify that in terms of how many attacks you prevented with interrupts in the time it took to kill the enemy. Since the combat log doesn't have time stamps, the only way to demonstrate that is to record video showing how many times the ogre can attack over a certain period of time if you stand there and do nothing, then quickloading and showing how many attacks it gets over the same period of time while under a barrage of interrupts.

That would be a good test. You'd need to be able to ensure that you don't die in the first test or kill it in the second and both trials would need to go on for a substantial amount of time. Edited April 19, 2015 by Epsilon Rose

[knownastherat]

They can act like vs they are not mechanic equal to stunlock?

 

I guess it depends on who is getting interrupted. Fast attacking creature without debuff will not get stunlocked by interrupt while paralyze is independent of attack speed and recovery. Sometime like that?

[Guest]

@Epsilon Rose, you keep repeating the obvious while somehow missing it at the same time.

 

Yes, it's a delay. It has always been a delay. The screenshot shows that you can...DELAY...enemy attacks until they are dead. It can't move until it's action timer has run down. It can't attack until it's action timer has run down. Interrupts keep adding time to that action timer. I call that lock down. You call that whatever you want.

 

@Kaigen42, 1) I don't have video recording software 2) even if I did, a video wouldn't satisfy what he's looking for: a view of an alternate reality where the interrupts didn't happen. I can't show how many attacks didn't happen because they never happened. You can't prove a negative. Lastly, you can't force interrupts. You can only create an environment is which they are more likely to happen.

Edited April 19, 2015 by Achilles

[Infares]

Combine Interrupt builds with Resolve/Concentration debuffs and a Slow debuff. At that point interrupts really are equivalent to a stunlock.

[Epsilon Rose]

@Epsilon Rose, you keep repeating the obvious while somehow missing it at the same time.

 

Yes, it's a delay. It has always been a delay. The screenshot shows that you can...DELAY...enemy attacks until they are dead. It can't move until it's action timer has run down. It can't attack until it's action timer has run down. Interrupts keep adding time to that action timer. I call that lock down. You call that whatever you want.

 

@Kaigen42, 1) I don't have video recording software 2) even if I did, a video wouldn't satisfy what he's looking for: a view of an alternate reality where the interrupts didn't happen. I can't show how many attacks didn't happen because they never happened. You can't prove a negative. Lastly, you can't force interrupts. You can only create an environment is which they are more likely to happen.

A) Showing that you can interrupt something and kill it before it gets an attack is not useful because it doesn't give us information on how many attacks it would get without that interrupt. This is incredibly important information that you don't seem capable of comprehending. Allow me to illustrate: Lets say, without you interrupting, an enemy can normally get in 1 attack for every 5 of yours. With constant interrupts it gets 1 attack for every 6 of yours. That's an improvement, but over the course of a long fight it's only ~17% less incoming damage. However, if you can kill your test monster in only 6 hits then what you'll see is 1 incoming attack in the first case and 0 in the second. Now your test reads a whopping 100% reduction, far more than that piddling 17% a longer fight would yield.

 

Now, if you could guarantee every fight would be over in 6 hits or less, this would be accurate enough and your hypothesis that interrupts==lock-down would be a good approximation. Unfortunately, stronger enemies and bad rolls exist, so you won't always be able to guarantee a kill between 5 and 6 hits (at <=4 hits or 7 hits interrupting and non-interrupting will look exactly the same), which means your results won't accurately describe many situations and interrupts won't act as lock-down.

 

B) Seeing as this is a video game, it's actually very easy to generate a "Parallel" world where something different happened. A quick save/load before your test would be more than sufficient, particularly if you ran more than two trials.

 

C) Similarly, it is also trivial to force interrupts/non!interrupts. Interrupts can be forced by using the cheat console to massively increase your per, as it has no other effects on your attacks. Non!interrupts can be forced by either using the console to drop your per to zero or simply standing there and doing nothing (if you're measuring enemy attacks in a time frame, rather than enemy attacks per your attacks).

[Guest]

A) I'm not comprehending it because it isn't important. Like, at all. You are fixated on a number that doesn't matter. 

 

B) Everything is random. d100, baby. You cannot reproduce results between runs. You have attacks, and all the messy ancillary things that go along with it (i.e. miss/graze/hit/crit, additional effects, saves, etc) going on for 7 different different actors. Economist have a saying, "yeah, it works in practice, but does it work in theory". That's you in this conversation. I've shown that it does happen. You're debating it as though it's up for discussion.

 

C) Yes, you can use cheat code to juice one stat, but that still isn't going to change that each encounter is going to be random (see B). Side note: this was the flaw with what's-his-name's thing: he wasn't changing one stat to see how it would effect outcomes, he was changing all the stats. No controls. Too many changes in variable to determine causality.

 

Hey, if you don't think that being able to lock down an enemy without wasting spells is a big deal, that's fine. I don't think you gain much by trying to argue that it doesn't happen when it clearly does. 

 

EDIT: BTW, here's another one. Man, I sure do miss all that damage I'm not taking. Good thing interrupts are worthless

 

Edited April 19, 2015 by Achilles

[Epsilon Rose]

A) I'm not comprehending it because it isn't important. Like, at all. You are fixated on a number that doesn't matter.

How does going from 100% to 17% not matter? 

 

B) Everything is random. d100, baby. You cannot reproduce results between runs. You have attacks, and all the messy ancillary things that go along with it (i.e. miss/graze/hit/crit, additional effects, saves, etc) going on for 7 different different actors. Economist have a saying, "yeah, it works in practice, but does it work in theory". That's you in this conversation. I've shown that it does happen. You're debating it as though it's up for discussion.

First, none of those effect attack speed, which is not d100 based, and that's all we care about. Second, if you run enough tests random variables smooth out. That's basic statistics. Third, the quote is cute, but not terribly relevant seeing that you have yet to prove it works in practice.

C) Yes, you can use cheat code to juice one stat, but that still isn't going to change that each encounter is going to be random (see B). Side note: this was the flaw with what's-his-name's thing: he wasn't changing one stat to see how it would effect outcomes, he was changing all the stats. No controls. Too many changes in variable to determine causality.

A large enough stat change will easily override the d100. If any result, from 1 to 100, results in an interrupt than the d100 doesn't matter. Also, I'm not sure where you got that he was changing all of his stats, but it's patently false. He listed the stats he used on the previous page and the only one he changed was per. At this point, either you aren't reading what's been written or you're purposely lying. Regardless, even if he was changing all of the stats, that wouldn't force you to change all of the stats in your tests.

 

Hey, if you don't think that being able to lock down an enemy without wasting spells is a big deal, that's fine. I don't think you gain much by trying to argue that it doesn't happen when it clearly does.

You have yet to show this in an even moderately convincing fashion and you have consitently dismissed all evidence to the contrary without even addressing it properly, except for the instance where you addressed it in a blatantly incorrect and possibly dishonest manner. Edited April 19, 2015 by Epsilon Rose

[Guest]

Because they are both number that you pulled out of thin air. 100% of 6 possible hit or 100% of 600 possible hit = my squad taking 0 damage because interrupts. I have no idea how many swings that ogre could have *theoretically* taken. I have no idea how many of those *theoretical* swings could have been *theoretical* hits. I probably have some idea of how much damage those hit would have *theoretically* done, but none of that matters because none of those swings...ever happened. 

 

No, that's all you care about and I can't figure out why. Like, I've said, it doesn't matter. And I've posted 3 screen shots tonight showing that it does work in practice. Are you not seeing them?

 

Because *he said* he was changing all the stats. He named the stats changed and provided values. Did you not read the post? Might want to know what you're talking about before you accuse people of lying.

 

LOL. Err, I have screenshots. Are you accusing me of fabricating them?

[Infares]

All the solo tests are showing is that an interrupt build isn't suitable for Triple Crown Solo attempts.

[Epsilon Rose]

Because they are both number that you pulled out of thin air. 100% of 6 possible hit or 100% of 600 possible hit = my squad taking 0 damage because interrupts. I have no idea how many swings that ogre could have *theoretically* taken. I have no idea how many of those *theoretical* swings could have been *theoretical* hits. I probably have some idea of how much damage those hit would have *theoretically* done, but none of that matters because none of those swings...ever happened.

We already know from ruminate's testing and general experience that the 100% won't hold up. Your incredibly brief "test" does nothing to show otherwise.

 

No, that's all you care about and I can't figure out why. Like, I've said, it doesn't matter. And I've posted 3 screen shots tonight showing that it does work in practice. Are you not seeing them?

You have yet to produce a single screenshot that shows what you need to and that is a comparison of situations, not you simply killing a single enemy. I could kill a pair of wolves and show there's absolutely no difference between interrupts or no interrupts and that wouldn't be compelling either, but it would be the exact same as what you're doing.

 

Because *he said* he was changing all the stats. He named the stats changed and provided values. Did you not read the post? Might want to know what you're talking about before you accuse people of lying.

I have 3 might, 18 constitution, 100 perception, 100 resolve on one screenshot.

I have 3 might, 18 constitution, 3 perception, and 100 resolve in the other.

You do realize there is a 97 point stat difference between 3 might, 19 dex, 18 con, 100 perception, and 100 resolve vs. 3 might, 19 dex, 18 con, 3 perception, and 100 resolve, right?

You do realize that letting a fight run its course with those stats is meaningless, right?

Actually, not only did I read them, but I double checked them before posting last time. Don't worry, this time I've actually quoted the posts and helpfully color coded and emphasized the stats. He did change the stats between sets of trials, but he wasn't directly comparing results from different sets, so that's not actually a problem. So, are you being incompetent or purposely lying?

[Guest]

It wasn't a "test", it was actual gameplay.

 

I don't "need" to show comparison screenshots because I'm supporting my argument, not jumping through hoops for whatever yours is. The difference in your "wolves" example is that in one of them, someone from your party will be taking damage. Or someone in your party would have spent one of their limited spell allotments to produce the same result that interrupts will give you for free.

 

From the same post you quoted:

"This first screenshot shows a stat spread of 19 might, 19 dexterity, and 10s in everything else:"

"This next screenshot shows a stat spread of 19 dexterity, 19 perception, and 10s in everything else:"

 

In other words, Perception was not the only stat he was modifying. That's twice you've accused me of being a liar. You are now on my ignore list. Don't bother replying.

[Epsilon Rose]

It wasn't a "test", it was actual gameplay.

Which is why it can't be generalized to other parts of game play. All you have shown is that you can kill an ogre without being hit when using interrupts. You have not shown what happens without interrupts, though you have asserted it many times, nor have you shown what it likely to happen in other situations.

 

The difference in your "wolves" example is that in one of them, someone from your party will be taking damage. Or someone in your party would have spent one of their limited spell allotments to produce the same result that interrupts will give you for free.

No I/they wouldn't. We're talking about wolves here. They'd disintegrate on first contact and, even if they didn't, most of the classes have plenty of per encounter abilities I'd use long before spells.

From the same post you quoted:

"This first screenshot shows a stat spread of 19 might, 19 dexterity, and 10s in everything else:"

"This next screenshot shows a stat spread of 19 dexterity, 19 perception, and 10s in everything else:"

 

In other words, Perception was not the only stat he was modifying. That's twice you've accused me of being a liar. You are now on my ignore list. Don't bother replying.

That was the second set of tests from AFTER you complained about him using cheats to hold the other stats constant and demanded "normalized" stats. So, yeah, at this point you're a liar and a troll.

[cctobias]

 

It wasn't a "test", it was actual gameplay.

Which is why it can't be generalized to other parts of game play. All you have shown is that you can kill an ogre without being hit when using interrupts. You have not shown what happens without interrupts, though you have asserted it many times, nor have you shown what it likely to happen in other situations.

 

The difference in your "wolves" example is that in one of them, someone from your party will be taking damage. Or someone in your party would have spent one of their limited spell allotments to produce the same result that interrupts will give you for free.

No I/they wouldn't. We're talking about wolves here. They'd disintegrate on first contact and, even if they didn't, most of the classes have plenty of per encounter abilities I'd use long before spells.

From the same post you quoted:

"This first screenshot shows a stat spread of 19 might, 19 dexterity, and 10s in everything else:"

"This next screenshot shows a stat spread of 19 dexterity, 19 perception, and 10s in everything else:"

 

In other words, Perception was not the only stat he was modifying. That's twice you've accused me of being a liar. You are now on my ignore list. Don't bother replying.

That was the second set of tests from AFTER you complained about him using cheats to hold the other stats constant and demanded "normalized" stats. So, yeah, at this point you're a liar and a troll.

 

Man you are a lot more patient than I am.   I bowed out of this days ago.