I've recently put lobot into my team because he lets ig88 go before poe with his leadership boost, thus i had HOPED when facing another droid team i could use the 55% ability block chance with his AOE to block their Poe's taunt and mine would then go first 75% of the time (50% when i block and then 50% of the other 50% by chance). Trying this for 5 attacks i was successful 0/5 times, so had a look at the stats. 88s potency (increases the chance to apply detrimental effects) is 0%. So he has a 55% chance of ability blocking, but that just means 55% chance of it procing and then it has to pass a resistance check which it can't if the opponent has any real level of tenacity?
I have seen him apply it so he must be able to somehow. I notice potency is "INCREASES the chance", but what is the base chance before that then?
I suppose what I'm asking is, how do you work out the chance of a toon applying a detrimental effect? Because i always thought it was just what it said in the description, (here 55%) which it clearly isn't. Ie. what is the chance of IG88 with 0% potency applying an effect on Poe with say 40% tenancity? Or are we expected to guess these based on experience as we are shard and gear drop rates? I am completely lost in the mechanics of this game, any insights speculation or fact would help thanks.
0
Replies
I'm so bloody lost its not even funny.
(Attack's % of effect) + character's Potency) - enemy tenacity = % chance of effect being inflicted.
1. You make your attack
2. Check 55% chance to apply debuff
3. If 55% passes, check potency vs tenacity to see if debuff is resisted
I know @Djbz 's post may be what other people have done, but numerous tests show too low of a proc rate to be effect + potency.
Still, we never have a clear answer so it could be either one. Devs have yet to comment
That is very frustrating, but Poe is also meant to dispel negative effects with his high tenacity. As far as 88 goes, he should have more than 0% listed potency.
My ig88 at gear level 7 definitely says 0% potency.
Mine does as well, but I meant more of a 'why doesn't he have more'. Sorry for the confusion.