Regarding the stun at wills of the githzerai cenobites:
Yep, I did notice them, but how do you include these in a dpr calculation?
I would calculate damage using that power rather than their other at-will since it's much better against most characters than their power that targets AC and does 1d8 extra, but doesn't stun (not sure what you did here). Once I did that, I definitely wouldn't say
This leaves one question open: what about non-numeric affects, like the daze powers that are involved in some of these encounters?
I actually think they don't matter a lot. I'd rather say the odds are stacked in the pcs' favour when you're looking at paragon or even epic tiers:
At level 14, unless the PCs start uncorking all of their dailies (and they shouldn't have to do this, it's an even level encounter), having four +14 vs. Fort at-will stun attacks among the opposition will be much better than the status conditions the PCs churn out. This is somewhat mitigated by the fact this is a level 14 encounter, so the Cenobites are lower level and thus less likely to hit than they would be if they were used in a lower level encounter; remove the Zerth and make this a lower level encounter and it should get comparatively tougher for its level.
Bayuer said:When you campare Flameskull attack to Wyvern attack you can see that they are the same but Flameskull gives also an effect! My question is:
Why attacks that give the same amount of damage + effects are fine to you? You can easily see that the gap is too huge to simply say "this what it suppose to be!". Monsters that hit AC are so... useless, becouse they hit chance is lower and they do the same amount of damage. If hitting on 2-5 was what 4E designers have in they minds, why they did AC targeting of monsters attacks on Epic tier? They should just do all attacks target NADs or scall AC the same as NADs. The fact they didn't... Bingo. They just forget about NADs and then PHB2 comes out and we have defense feats to fix this issue.
This idea is what I've been trying to get at. FRW attacks scale relatively better in chance to hit than AC attacks, but there's no indication that the effects on a hit are weaker to compensate. However, I specifically didn't want to make monster comparisons of this sort because monsters of different roles should have different offensive abilities, FRW vs. AC scaling issues aside. In particular, Artillery, which tends to target FRW more often than Skirmishers, should have stronger attacks (and ranged attacks) to compensate for worse defenses and lower HP.