As far as I know, Halo is a pretty straightforward TM vs Evasion (and Reflex) contest. Shield has never appeared to be a viable defense against it. Presumably any stancing toward shield will be counter-productive (aside from the dynamic stance or however you want to term it that Kodius added).

Well, it's a Magic vs Reflex contest to determine if it hits, the only time TM comes into the mix is when it hits an undead/cursed target. As with all SvS contests, range influences the outcome. At melee range the SvS contest is weighed toward the caster, so for a spell like Halo, since it is used exclusively at close quarters, it's not surprising that folks think it hits more often than other SvS spells.

FGM Ricinus
Logistics Lead
Magic, Sentients Team Member
Cleric Advocate

>I just think high level SvS is broken or at the very least is a severely flawed system that needs a serious overhaul.

There are SvS which I've either outright lost, or had such a marginal influence over that the debilitation lasted only a few seconds, or the curse was so weak it didn't influence the fight at all. These are with 100+ in all the corresponding attacking stats. High level SvS isn't necessarily broken, there's a lot of factors dictating the success or failure of a contest.

Since there's so many types of SvS contests out there, it makes the game interesting. A bunch of us were actually just talking about post 100 stats and the best stats to train yesterday. There's Vs Will, Reflex and Fortitude each with their corresponding stats, and as your stats are breaking 100 it's costing more precious TDP's. You have to make a decision, do you want pure offensive stats, defensive stats or a mix of both. You're not going to defend well against every type, but with Stats in your SOI you may want to focus your defense against the spells that do the most harm to you.

This isn't broken, this adds variety and decisions.

Have you big guys ever really lost to anyone you severely outclass due to losing an SvS contest alone?

Straight skill contests alone, especially with uncapped 20% buffs, would be boring for everyone participating and watching. That's pretty much what it'd be in fights with an underdog.

Deleted my post to add: I think diminishing returns should be a thing for more debilitations, albeit on separate timers. Not thinking about halo specifically here... Some debilitations are as annoying as chain stuns used to be but don't fall under the same rules.

>Just to throw it out there, on test Halo was hitting me with around 1000 TM against 1650 buffed evasion. And I am cursed/undead. I also beat the stat contest by a fair amount. Never once failed against me.

>-Zerreck Arkarm

Would be more than happy to hop on test and play with Halo and compare stats/ranks if you want.

Maybe there's something going on since you're a Necro and are classified as cursed/undead that might not be working with Diminishing returns, but non Necro's I've used Halo on have definitely had DR reduce/remove the stun.

>Maybe there's something going on since you're a Necro and are classified as cursed/undead that might not be working with Diminishing returns, but non Necro's I've used Halo on have definitely had DR reduce/remove the stun.

Oh that would make me feel much better about the spell. I can only look at cleric spells for what they do to my character. And they seem crazy. HE ignores shield and armor. 975 TM does 50% vitality against 1650 evasion 1000 shield. Seems a bit to much against another player. But yeah.

-Zerreck Arkarm

Severely outclassing doesn't provide any context to stats, do you want to post actual numbers?

As someone that has tested with Gort, I've been both successful and failed my attempts to Halo him. Any success I do get after fully buffed includes minimal stun durations.

This is with:

100 Wisdom
100 Int
100 Disc

and a +20 Wisdom from GG.

I don't know Gorteous' current stats and it's been a while since we tested, but if he wants to post around that time he can.

Gorteous and I just re-tested this and here are the results with numbers.


Test 1: No Buffs

Cleric: 100/100/100 Wisdom/Int/Disc Solidly Balanced
Barbarian: 115/100/100 Reflex/Agility/Intelligence Solidly Balanced

Halo successful from Pole 100% of the time, first stun duration lasted 7-8 seconds.

Test 2: No Cleric Buffs, Barbarian is running Monkey

Cleric: 100/100/100 Solidly Balanced and also tested Nimbly Balanced with Centering
Barbarian: 138/100/100 Adeptly Balanced - from Monkey

Fail

Test 3: No Cleric Buffs, Barbarian is running Piranha

Cleric: 100/100/100 Solidly Balanced
Barbarian: 115/115/100 Solidly Balanced

Halo successful from Pole 100% of the time, first stun duration lasted 6-7 seconds.

Test 4: Cleric Buffed with Gylthide Gift + 20 to Wisdom, Barbarian is running Monkey and Piranha

Cleric: 120/100/100 Solidly Balanced
Barbarian: 138/115/100 Adeptly/Nimbly balanced

Halo Successful from Pole 100% of the time, first stun duration lasted 6-7 seconds

>> also Successful from Pole 100% of the time, first stun duration lasted 6-7 seconds

There is something weird going on with stuns. I outclass AJ by 30/0/45 in the Fortitude vs Fear department, yet I can't even seem to get full effect on Strike's duration(around 17 seconds on him). Strike is an advanced ability, I have 824 debil + whatever amount of bonus the mastery grants.

Comparing that to Wail(an expert ability which should be much more difficult to get success on), which I outclass him by 0/0/15, with a 15 second immobilize.

It seems to me that by the numbers, I should be easily be getting max duration with Strike, and a moderate duration with Wail. Wail seems fine, but something is not adding up with Strike.

I do not believe this to be a particular issue with Strike.

I've noticed that even fully buffed against a Thief that I outclass by 15/20/-10, I only get a 5-6 second duration with Strike. That's just.... HUH?

I cannot find a reason for these things to be happening. So, I think something is wrong with stun in core mechanics that is making itself known in every different branch of the stun tree. I can't completely explain every reason why I think this, there are things I haven't said that are factoring into this particular belief, but I trust what my intuition is telling me.

Unless there was some ninja-nerf besides -balance that I'm not aware of.

---

IM: Dannyboy00001111

"Fool proof system do not take into account the ingenuity of fools, nor the power of numbers."