Addressing bad advice - Thrawn TM swap to Vader 1st in 3s

"lladdir;c-2041928" wrote:

"Saada;c-2041918" wrote:

"RandomSithLord;c-2041883" wrote:
Even 1000% potency wouldn't change the fact that EP has 70% to stun and there's always 15% to resist.

If you have 85% more potency than the target's tenacity you'll have 59.5% to land a stun. That's the best case scenario. Vader starting the TM train is pretty much guaranteed unless you fight a team that gets tenacity up before you move.

That's not right. If you have a potency of 80%, that takes that 70% chance to apply a stun to a 150% chance then you take away the opponents tenacity let's say 50%, which leaves an 100% chance to stun then take away the 15% chance of resisting leaves an 85% chance of stunning not 59.5% which is pretty good odds.

But again it depends on your potency and the opposition's tenacity.

P.s. just for further knowledge when an ability says "inflict a stun/debuff etc" that is treated as an 100% chance of occurring but then follows the above process with potency and tenacity

That.... is completely and utterly wrong. Potency and tenacity have absolutely no effect on the debuff chance only on the resist chance.

So palp has a 70% chance of landing a stun on each individual opponent (and there is no way of changing this). If the stun ‘lands’ then it goes through the resist check (tenacity-potency with a base 15% resist chance) to make this easier I’ll assume that potency is higher than tenacity so only the base 15% remains.

So there’s 70% chance of the stun even happening then there is a 15% chance of it being resisted. This means that each individual has a 59.5% chance of being stunned. Language

"RandomSithLord;c-2041883" wrote:

If you have 85% more potency than the target's tenacity you'll have 59.5% to land a stun.

This is also wrong though, you only need a potency of tenacity-15% to get to the base resist chance. Anymore than that is being wasted (Resist chance=((tenacity-15%)-potency)+15%, where tenacity-potency can’t be less than 0)

See above your post.....

Didn't realise they were separate events

"Saada;c-2041925" wrote:
So that is the doors some guy mentioned a while ago. First door is chance of occurring, second door tenacity vs potency, third door the 15% of resisting. I skipped the first door....

Actually it's only 2 doors/gates:

1. Producing the effect.
2. Having the effect stick (not get resisted).

But I guess you get the picture already.

"lladdir;c-2041928" wrote:

This is also wrong though, you only need a potency of tenacity-15% to get to the base resist chance. Anymore than that is being wasted (Resist chance=((tenacity-15%)-potency)+15%, where tenacity-potency can’t be less than 0)

You are correct. The 59.5% is right, that's your chance with EP to land each stun in the best case scenario, the conditions I wrote up were wrong though.

Oh, lol forgot my EP lead gives 35% potency. So I am actually 135 to 138 potency

"Mephisto_style;c-2041933" wrote:
Oh, lol forgot my EP lead gives 35% potency. So I am actually 135 to 138 potency

Great, so your chance to stun is still the same whether you hit 0 or 150-153% tenacity.

"RandomSithLord;c-2041934" wrote:

"Mephisto_style;c-2041933" wrote:
Oh, lol forgot my EP lead gives 35% potency. So I am actually 135 to 138 potency

Great, so your chance to stun is still the same whether you hit 0 or 150-153% tenacity.

That's the goal.

"Waqui;c-2041931" wrote:

"Saada;c-2041925" wrote:
So that is the doors some guy mentioned a while ago. First door is chance of occurring, second door tenacity vs potency, third door the 15% of resisting. I skipped the first door....

Actually it's only 2 doors/gates:

1. Producing the effect.
2. Having the effect stick (not get resisted).

But I guess you get the picture already.

The third door (which is actually likely the first door) in that model is "does the attack hit or is it evaded/dodged".

"Mephisto_style;c-2041935" wrote:

"RandomSithLord;c-2041934" wrote:

"Mephisto_style;c-2041933" wrote:
Oh, lol forgot my EP lead gives 35% potency. So I am actually 135 to 138 potency

Great, so your chance to stun is still the same whether you hit 0 or 150-153% tenacity.

That's the goal.

I think you might have missed the point.

Stunning 3/3 will be a roughly 1/5 times occurence. TM swapping with Vader is not a bad advice. You don't use his AoE for the potential speed down in the first place, you use it to have a source of TM from the debuffs even if you end up stunning 0 enemies with EP.

If you TM swap with EP and land 0 stuns, then NS start landing stuns on you, it's not going to go your way.

"UdalCuain;c-2041938" wrote:

"Waqui;c-2041931" wrote:

"Saada;c-2041925" wrote:
So that is the doors some guy mentioned a while ago. First door is chance of occurring, second door tenacity vs potency, third door the 15% of resisting. I skipped the first door....

Actually it's only 2 doors/gates:

1. Producing the effect.
2. Having the effect stick (not get resisted).

But I guess you get the picture already.

The third door (which is actually likely the first door) in that model is "does the attack hit or is it evaded/dodged".

True.

"Turvantus;c-2042062" wrote:
Why even ask for advice or an opinion, if it’s so easily disregarded? @Mephisto_style

I wouldn't say I easily disregarded it. I mean, I did try the advice once and it failed me or I failed it. I wonder if I didn't cull blade and instead tried to ability block. When I am fighting those NS teams I do try and keep MT blocked so she doesn't AOE