Um... what? Disgaea has a Speed stat. And if I'm not mistaken, it directly affects evasion (go Ninja, go Ninja go!).
NINJAS OF THE NIGHT. Yeah, Disgaea has a speed stat (and VH has an agility stat or whatever), but I was referring to the part of AB that checks the RFX of the enemy, i.e. the stat that determines how often you get turns, which Disgaea doesn't have.
That's exactly why I'm saying "minimum streamlining". What you are applying there is the -other- logical extreme of scaling stats uniformly regardless of their effect in-game. Stats function differently and they deserve to be treated differently if the case calls for it, and exceptional instances get treated in a case-by-case basis. THIS is what I'm talking about. For functional purposes on a typical example, casts without an evasion stat all dodge the same amount, just as all FFT characters take the same amount of damage from an attack. But, in cases like Assault Buster, that doesn't make sense. Why should I inflate the punishment or reward of a cast for not getting a stat? That's the guideline I set, not simply trying to streamline everything into an uniform, thoroughly unnatural rescaling that completely ignores how a stat functions in normal environments. The averages streamlining is supposed to -ease- headaches instead of bringing up more, and to bring distinction.
You abandon your method of saying those with an evade stat (below or above average) are just naturally better than those without, and instead use averaged evasion here because it makes more sense? Thanks for the support! I'm not changing how stats work in the slightest Snow. The crux of
all of this is that I'm saying the people FEers face in the DL aren't as incompetent at hitting things as FE enemies. Even this supposedly accurate Limstella isn't really up to par if her accuracy is only 73% against average. Or a boss who does 20% PCHP damage isn't up to par just because randoms deal even less.
That's the guideline I set, not simply trying to streamline everything into an uniform, thoroughly unnatural rescaling that completely ignores how a stat functions in normal environments. The averages streamlining is supposed to -ease- headaches instead of bringing up more, and to bring distinction. It's not simply spread - ACF Jane isn't as physically frail as Arnaud, even though she has less HP and her defense in the spread is quite possibly relatively worse than his, but because her defense stat is -far less important- than Arnaud's.
I'm not sure what you're getting at here. How effective a stat in terms of damage reduction/whatever matters for determining
relative durabilities, yes. Following this logic (and assuming relative evade) Ayla, who has about 20 above average CT evade, is less evasive than someone who has 15 above average FE evade, because FE's evade stat does more point-for-point to help you dodge enemy attacks.
I'm offering a normal, perfectly reasonable and fair way to represent evasion in the DL: treat it in the same manner we do defense. It serves the exact same function in a slightly different manner, and scaling it gives us consistency (same way its handled for defense/mdef) and fairness (casts don't get boosts just because the enemies suck).
The best argument I've seen against this is that it unbalances the relative evade in casts like FE. For example in FE8, if Tana had 66% evade against enemies (which hit average 73% of the time), and Joshua had 44% against that same enemy, Tana effectively evades 1.65x as much as him relatively. Scaling it to average accuracy, this becomes 39% evade for Tana and 17 for Joshua. Now Tana evades only 1.36x as much as him relatively. So the former must be more accurate and its cool to assume that as a fair representation of how much they dodge in the DL? No, not really.
Its the exact same thing we encounter for say Amelia and Franz for defense. Against a 30 might attack, Amelia takes 10.4 damage while Franz takes 13.7 (Amelia takes 76% of what Franz does). Against a 40 Might attack, this becomes 20.4 and 23.7 (Amelia takes 86% what he does). For DL purposes we generally assume attacks to be 40% against an average PC, and so we consider what they do to a ~35 Might attack. If in game the average was a 20 Might attack we sure as hell wouldn't assume that an average damage opponent in the DL did that much to them just to preserve in-game durability! That would be obnoxious.
But thats exactly what taking evade against an enemy who doesn't hit average 100% of the time is doing. You're basically assigning the (poor) offensive attributes of FE enemies to whatever they face in the DL. We could do this for defense or speed to. Assume that whatever enemy an FEer faces has average enemy AS. Same thing... deciding how good whatever dueler goes up against an FEer is based on how good/bad the enemies that FEer faced in game were. We don't do this for anything else but evasion.
The only other argument to take evasion literally is that its an ability like elemental resistance... but where does that leave you? An interpretation that treats one particular damage reduction type very differently from every other, and bases a
whole cast's durability based on how many hits they could take in-game, which is going to vary terribly from game to game. Isn't smoothing that the reason we have scaling in the first place? The offensive attributes of enemies really shouldn't have such a say in one cast being better than another.
Now correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't Dhyer just say that Bright's accuracy wasn't much better than 73% anyway and so Nino has decent evade against him anyway? It'd be funny if all of this had no relevance whatsoever for this week's match.
