Armorsmith Archive

This is what I came up with in translating Armor Points to % resists, based on the results of the tests done on TC.
I came up with this under the assumption that 10,000 armor points is the absolute maximum, and translates into 60% resists.

The formula, then, is just a very simple weighted average:

% Resists = W1*60 + W2*ER

with W1 = Armor Points/10,000
W2 = (10,000 - Armor points)/10000
ER = Armor Points/200
(and W1+W1 always equal 1)

So the formula for 10,000 point armor is: (10,000/10,000)*60 + ((10,000-10,000)/10,000)*(10,000/200)
= (1)(60) + (0)(50)
= 60%

For 1,000 point armor it is: (1000/10,000)*60 + ((10,000-1000)/10,000)*(1000/200)
= (.1)(60) + (.9)(5)
= 10.5%

And so on. To show some:

_AP_..... %Resists
1248..... 12%
2248..... 22% <-- +1000 armor points = +10% resists
3096..... 29%
3248..... 30%
4096..... 36% <-- +1000 armor points = +7% resists
4944..... 42%
5096..... 43%
5944..... 47%
6000..... 48%
7000..... 52% <-- +1000 armor points = +4% resists
8000..... 56%
9000..... 58% <-- +1000 armor points = +2% resists
10000..... 60%

the CHART

It fits the TC tests very nicely, and it is not overly complicated. I mean it is far more complicated than what we have now, and it has its benefits and drawbacks, but it is not over-the-top.

Comments welcome.


(edited for visual clarity)
Cheers,

Message Edited by Big_Swifty on 04-17-2005 02:04 AM

Just in case people havent seen this yet.

No fancy polynomials here: a straightforward linear combination that fits the test data perfectly.

i just saw what happend to my kryt 80%/80% compo chest plate.

/sigh

this "WAS" a very nice chest with an encumbrance slice. now its not even good as an 80% kinetic 67% base plate i made over a year ago.
whats the deal with the coversion. is this gonna stay the way it is on the TC copy's. they're kidding us, right?
i checked my weapons and those of my buddy. i didnt want to tell him at first what happend to his stuff.
a loot LVA that had nice mods but almost no real damage now has up to 1000 max damage. and his damage sliced adk'ed lance wich moved to heavy acid weapons III and had about 900 max damage pre CU now is worthless cuz of the damage under crafted ones.

i am sad atm and dont know if i want to spend my time into this again. i worked hard in the last 2 years and tried building up something. i'm not this hardcore typ player with uberloot i just wanted to have fun in the first place and reach my goals.

i hope this thing will get fixed until CU.

...still got some hope.....

/salute

---

Brutus_Krylop wrote:

Upon further review ...

This is actually the same thing as the regression formula. Although this formula was probably how it was developed, it still reduces to:

0.011 * (Armor Rating) - 5E-7 * (Armor Rating * Armor Rating)

Nice work, nonetheless.

Message Edited by Brutus_Krylop on 04-17-2005 02:29 PM

---

EGAD! So it is.... exactly the same. Lol I spent soo much time working that out, too.

Well on the bright side, we now have a linear combination formula and a polynomial formula. The linear one has the advantage of being easily scaled if the devs decide to change things, so perhaps it wasn't a complete waste of time.

/cheers self up

As for the differences between the tests and the results of these two formulas (it can't be coincidence that these formulas are exactly the same.. I mean not all polynomials reduce to a linear combination that actually makes sense with the variables we are working with) I am proposing that it is due to the difference in the combat levels of the testers, and further, that the lower the AR of the armor, the more pronounced this difference will be. Of course, further testing is needed for verification.

BAH! Exactly the same formula!

---

Big_Swifty wrote:

EGAD! So it is.... exactly the same. Lol I spent soo much time working that out, too.

Well on the bright side, we now have a linear combination formula and a polynomial formula. The linear one has the advantage of being easily scaled if the devs decide to change things, so perhaps it wasn't a complete waste of time.

/cheers self up

---

That's why I think yourexpression is how it was actually developed, since it's a fairly standard "diminishing returns" expression.

Been trying hard to understand how elemental damage work but no luck so far, some examples here.

Number 1
"Mcg attacks Hoshi with Melee Hit using Stun Baton and hits for 315 points (287 points of energy damage 28 points of electrical damage). Hoshi's armor absorbed 165 points out of 287 possible points of damage."

Hoshi was using a advanced frog armor, 5944 to all stats. 5944 should mean 47.7%, if we take that from 287 energy we get 137 absorbed, 165-137=28 so that means 100% of the energy damage was absorbed or?

Number 2
"Mcg attacks Hoshi with Melee Hit using Stun Baton and hits for 321 points (287 points of energy damage 34 points of electrical damage). Hoshi's armor absorbed 114 points out of 287 possible points of damage."

This time hoshi was using a home made chestplate with 3442 energy, 4170 electrical protection.
3442 = 31.9% so 92 points of energy damage should have been absorbed. 114-92=22, 22/34 = 64.7 % of the electrical damage absorbed.

Either there is something wrong with the combat spam or with the combat calculations because these numbers don't make sense. Anyone else that have had better luck at this?

Edit: After some more checking of combat logs I have discoverd that the inital value for elemental damage stated has already been modified by the armor value. The stun baton had 55 electrical damage, reduced by 47.7% this leaves 29, with 26 points reduced damage, with some rounding we could end up with the values above. Same for number 2.

If this is true than the only layer anyone would ever use is primus layers, from the above example if that suit had been primus layered with 6944 energy and 4944 electical the total damage absorbed would have been 173 instead of 165.

Message Edited by Mcgreag on 04-18-2005 01:57 AM

Message Edited by Brutus_Krylop on 04-17-2005 02:29 PM

This formula is exacly the same as 0.11x-(5*10^-7)*X^2 just written in another way
Still both formulas seems to miss a bit on the low end, 1248 in Okram2k's test protected for 11.6% and 11.4% but with these two formulas we get 12.9% A bit too much difference to be rounding errors.
Still I think they are good enough for all intent and purpose.

There are also PSGs and I don't know if anyone has made any tests on elemental damage but I would guess there is another formula there, reason for this is that devs have stated a PUP that moves damage from base to elemental would mostly be good as elemental protection in most cases would be lower than normal but if we look at armor ratings the only time elemental would be less would be if we used primus layers.

And even if we used primus layers (6000 kin/ene 4000 element) the total damage done with an elemental weapon (elemental damage seems to be around 10% for average normal) would be less than to an unlayerd suit (5000 kin/ene 5000 element). We need to do more testing.

Message Edited by Mcgreag on 04-17-2005 10:00 PM