Definitive Solution for Evasion vs One-Shots - Keystone: Uncanny

You are right that Evasion becomes more effective compared to Armor the higher the incoming damage is.
Most likely, alot more damage is prevented by Evasion than by Armor.
Nevertheless, Armor doesn't have to deal with the constant threat of one-shot.

If the concept of getting one-shot (or nearly) is so rare for Evasion, then why is my suggestion such a bother to begin with?

If you are right, you'd have:
a) the pros who know Evasion doesn't need it and just build without it.
b) the idiots (like me) who think Evasion needs it and go out of their way to grab it.

What if my suggested Keystone has "10% less Health plus 10% less Energy Shield" or "10% less Evasion" penalty to compensate? Would it stop feeling OP?
---

On the situation of stunlock, I think if something is added, it should directly scale with Evasion.

What I mean is, ES users already have a benefit vs Stuns, and as such so do EV/ES users.
AR/EV users also have some benefit vs Stuns - the armor.

Thus only pure EV users really succumb to that issue - mostly melee ones anyways - and as such your stun threshold might be modified by a portion of your chance to Evade.
Those are my 2 cents on that matter.

"

dudiobugtron wrote:

But with really high end characters, it's possible to get more armour than evasion, and also, you can have a better than 50% chance to evade. Also, you have missed the secondary point where a high armour character gets to pick up str nodes, so has higher life than a high evasion character has to pick up dex nodes. I agree that you are correct that EV is better than armour if you are just straight comparing the values at 50% chance to hit. But that isn't a good example to work from.

The same principles apply even when dealing with a non-50% chance to evade; it's just that the results become less straigtforward and one has to be mathematically inclined to interpret them. Imagine me trying to explain how the next step above a 1.33-shot is a 2.66-shot, for example.

In terms of Strength and Dexterity, I'll admit readily that Strength is the stronger attribute, and there's a strong incentive to keep Dexterity at gear requirement level and not surpass that. However, that doesn't completely gimp Evasion characters; it's far more accurate to say that it simply gimps that areas in which Evasion characters are most likely to start, encouraging them to do cross-tree travel rather than staying in their starting location.

"

dudiobugtron wrote:

What are you comparing evasion to, if not armour?

If you can be 1-shotted with evasion, you can be 1-shotted without evasion. The fact that you can be 1-shotted isn't a flaw in evasion. It has nothing to do with evasion.

Evasion is not ever really in a straight one-shot situation; there is always a chance they can evade the lethal blow. Thus it's more accurately phrased as a 1.5-shot, or a 1.6-shot, or whatever, depending on the chance to evade. You need to figure out the chance of one-shot, the chance of two-shot, and then do a weighted average.

Scrotie, you're clinging to chances and averages.

If you have a 5% chance to be one-shot, you are still in a one-shot situation.
Because chance may decide you're going to get hit by that one-shot.

While your survival as Armor-user is decided on your gear, skill and strategy, Evasion-users - even with entropy - are always prone to that damn lucky one-shot.

If it's possible for a PHYSICAL attack to one-shot armor, that same physical attack can 1.5-shot Evasion.
Is it unlikely? Absolutely! But I'm not here to play Path of Casino.

I'm simply against chance determining that your entropy will cause the next hit to connect - which just so happens to be that one-shot you really wanted to avoid.

It's not acceptable design when the game mechanics determine that you have an 80% chance to survive a boss encounter as an Evasion user - regardless of your strategy - because if he happens to use that strong attack when your evasion/entropy fails, you die - that's just retarded.

"

Nurvus wrote:

If it's possible for a PHYSICAL attack to one-shot armor, that same physical attack can 1.5-shot Evasion.
Is it unlikely? Absolutely! But I'm not here to play Path of Casino.

Entropy ensures that the starting entropy value is the only luck involved. This is about as good as the system could possibly be at avoiding luck.

Despite entropy evening out the math significantly, at its core a chance to evade is exactly that: a chance. If you aren't down with RNGesus, then yeah, armour. But those of us who aren't scared of some dice rolls will play the laws of averages, because they are indeed on Evasion's side. It might not be that acceptable to you, but it's acceptable to me; if it wasn't, I'd play some MMO like WoW, where I don't need to count on random loot drops for progression.

More to the point, the one-shot scenario is a borderline myth. It simply does not happen very often; you can count the number of monsters capable of the feat on one hand, all of which are unique bosses. It is far more likely that you can sustain 2 hits, which would make it a 2.66-shot scenario with 33% evade, a 3.5-shot scenario with 50% evade, and a 4.2-shot with 60% evade.

The only definitive solution for one-shots is to convert instant damage into damage over time.

From my experience, if you want to survive with an evasion melee build, you have to put an excessive amount of skill points into life, evasion, block, and dodge nodes. Then on top of that, to basically ensure your odds, you must use blind or enfeeble. This is not a terrible thing. There are many awesome builds that do this well, and I'm glad GGG gave us so many mechanics to work around the fatal flaw inherent to Evasion.

That said, I believe that a passive like the one Nurvus suggests is NOT altogether a bad idea. As Scrotie says, it is usually the fast bursts of small hits that kill Evasion users, so this node wouldn't necessarily be overpowered. It would serve a niche purpose of being able to tank certain unique bosses such as Brutus, Kole, Vaal, Perpetus(beartrapEK), LS Hillock, and certain Rogue Exiles without worry.

There should definitely be a penalty for this node. I suggest the same penalty as Acrobatics, 50% less armor and energy shield. Because the penalty uses the word "less" instead of "decreased", this means it is multiplicative and would reduce your Armor and ES to 25% while using Acrobatics in tandem.

I have posted in threads like this before and I usually add in my own suggestion favoring evasion melee:

"

PolarisOrbit wrote:

The only definitive solution for one-shots is to convert instant damage into damage over time.

This is BRILLIANT! Instead of mitigating the attack completely, the notable passive could cause the damage to extend over a period of seconds.

"

Brigs wrote:

"

PolarisOrbit wrote:

The only definitive solution for one-shots is to convert instant damage into damage over time.

This is BRILLIANT! Instead of mitigating the attack completely, the notable passive could cause the damage to extend over a period of seconds.

Actually, it's OP as all hell, because it's also effectively immunity to stuns.

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

"

Brigs wrote:

"

PolarisOrbit wrote:

The only definitive solution for one-shots is to convert instant damage into damage over time.

This is BRILLIANT! Instead of mitigating the attack completely, the notable passive could cause the damage to extend over a period of seconds.

Actually, it's OP as all hell, because it's also effectively immunity to stuns.

I'm sure the clever dev team can make the stun still occur.

"

Brigs wrote:

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

Actually, it's OP as all hell, because it's also effectively immunity to stuns.

I'm sure the clever dev team can make the stun still occur.

I guess that's true, but this whole issue is overblown and unnecessary anyway. Evasion characters don't need fancy new mechanics to mitigate one-shots; they just need decent access to life nodes. Which they have.

What would be nice is a balanced keystone which mitigates the small-damage, swarm, stunlock issue. Nothing in the "big hits" department is necessary.