Bio Engineer Archive
Thread: A possible flaw in the CL calculations, not a bug but a matter of logic
First of all we can agree that the CL is supposed to dicate the threat of a mob. A simple analogy would be damage protection + damage output = threat. So that would mean a CL1 pet with no specials would always defeat a CL2 pet for example. Simple logic. But something has been on my mind recently, we all know that vulnerabilities to certain damage types are used to further lower a CL rating. This can also be seen on mobs already in the game but it really strike me when I made this CL27 pet recently which was vulnerable to many damage types but was 50% kinetic and 11k of HAM for health and action. The damage was quite decent too but it was the kinetic and ham which draw my attention.
My point is that a vulnerablity allows certain damage types to bypass armor. However if there is no armor then the damage is literally the same. That's the problem. If you compared two clones you'll start seeing where the issue is. Lets say you have Clone A and Clone B. Both have 10k of HAM, even DPS and everything is identical aside from one key features. Clone A is has 0 protections to everything while Clone B has vulnerabilities to everything. However both clones do not have armor. As any bio-engineer who knows their profession the one with loads of vulnerabilities will have a lower CL but when you apply this to a combat situation these two clones would have identical potential to win since vulnerabilities without armor are not actually a vulnerability at all.
What I guess I'm suggesting is that either the CL maths (not just for clones but all mobs in the game)need to be adjusted so that vulnerabilities without armor don't create a lower CL or that vulnerabilities should actually cause x2 damage when armor isn't present and simply bypass armor as itcurrently does what it is present.
For more information on how resistances, armor and vulnerabilities work please consult the offical guide for details: http://starwarsgalaxies.station.sony.com/content.jsp?page=Advanced%20Guide%20Armor%20Fundamentals
Well take a look at all of the CL10 pets with something like 50% kinetic, they all have massive vulnerabilities and when you check many peoples equastions for working resistances against CL you often see we have vulnerabilities creating a lower CL leading in many cases to an accurate estimation of what the final CL for the clone is. You can also see this in effect with wild animals like the Boarwolf which has a larhe ham, 50% kinetic but is vulnerable to a wide variety of damage types however it is without armor.
Tal-N, even though you put more work in this than I do, I must say that I do not see the vunerabilities on low CL pets making much difference.
Why do many have Vunerabilities? The more combining you do the more vunerabilities you are going to have since it is a dominant trait. Often, each species have different vunerabilities.
But I am open minded on this and would more than willingly look at any information to the contrary.
Well I'm going to see if I can do some math on these to see if vulnerabilities result in the CL being lowered or not. Here's a quick sample of what I compared first, these are all CL27 animals. You can see a range of around 200 when the vulnerabilities are counted assubtractions to the totaland a range of 175 when they're counted as being 0. This looks like the value of zero leads to a more accurate determination as there is less variation. I'll keep checking but here's the results from these 4 checks.
- Bolma Male = 120 resist quota / 9000 HAM / 260-270
- Blushing Jax = 185 resist quota / 9400 HAM / 220-230
- Arachne Drone = 335 resist quota / 7100 HAM / 240-250
- Bolle Bol Bark Biter =310 resist quota / 8600 HAM / 240-250
..and here's without using subtractions for vulnerabilities.
- Bolma Male = 180
- Blushing Jax = 245
- Arachne Drone = 355
- Bolle Bol Bark Biter = 330
I'll check the upper range next which DO have armor to see if anything happens there, all are CL50...
- Roba boar = 295resist / 12000 HAM / 395-500
- Arachne Webmaster =420 resist / 11000 HAM/ 405-520
- Roha Kwi Pack Leader =360 resist / 11000 HAM / 380-470
- Blurrg=295 resist / 11400 HAM / 395-500
..range for subtraction vulnerabilities is 125.
- Roba Boar = 335
- Arachne webmaster = 450
- Roha Kwi Pack Leader = 360
- Blurrg = 325
.. and the range for vulnerabilites being equal to 0 is also 125.
Notice that again the lower the resist quota the higher the other stats are, there also appears to be something odd about mobs which have no vulnerabilies at all. Take a look at the Roha Kwi, lower resist quota and damage than the webmaster. A closer look at the DPS here might be worthwhile:
- Roha Kwi PL = 380-470 / 47% / 2.0 seconds
- Arachne WM = 402-520 / 50% / 2.0 seconds
..now this shows that clearly the webmaster still has a higher DPS and accuracy so there appears to be special penalties for mobs which have no vulnerabilities. The curious thing is how vulnerabilities where which would be most problematic for mobs with armor actually do NOT result in a lower CL. When clearly they should, any mob with armor and a vulnerabily is essentially losing that armor for that damage type which does make them weaker. The Roba Boar and the Blurrh being a fantastic case in point. Both are CL50, both have armor, both have very similar stats and yet when you compare them to the webmaster your seeing that even though they use less resists they are still inferious to the webmaster aside from having an extra 1000 HAM and around 20 points of damage. They use only around 2/3 of the resists the webmaster does and yet end up with an identical CL rating and bearly any advantage.
While I started off saying it appeared that vulnerabilies were lower the CL when they shouldn't it's starting to look at the opposite end of the scale that they ARE NOT lowering the CL when they SHOULD.
Either that or the devs think that 20 points of damage and another 1000 HAM is worth to the equal of around 35% of kinetic or energy protection or even 100% of heat resistance as according to my system both of these cost around 100 resistance points. Might be worth arguing the point on this case since frankly those resists are far more valuable than an extra bit of HAM. If you had a mob with 50% kinetic resistance and 9000 HAM than you'd find they can take a total of 13500 damage to a single pool. However if you are then offered a choice between another 1000 HAM or an extra 35% of kinetic protection it looks like this:
50% + 10,000 HAM = 15,000 points of damage
85% + 9000 HAM = 16,650 points of damage
Meaning that your effectiveless gaining an extra 1500 bonus damage with that extra HAM or an extra 3150 damage with the extra resistances. Thats more than double the benefit!! Now this is assuming my equastions are correct but if since we're making this animals I'd prefer to see an even trade between extra HAM or extra resists not a favourtism towards one or the other but a genuine case where both add the same amount more or less.
Tal-N wrote:
...So that would mean a CL1 pet with no specials would always defeat a CL2 pet for example. Simple logic.
Hmmm....I think that's a typo, right? Otherwise, I'm lost from the get go 
. [btw...glad you were only temporarily banned...your discussions are always meaningful and insightful]
Let me come at this another way since the point is important. In non-armored pets breeding a clone with multiple vulnerabilites has no detrimental effect, unless armor is introduced as well. This is an intriguing issue. Sure, the pet won't have the resistances that will reduce the damage done, but they won't sustain a penalty either.
That leads me to wonder which would be better? A pet with AR1 and vulns to some damage types or a pet with high kinetic with vulnerabilities to most other damage types. In this hypothetical, the pet with armor will suffer more damage to its vulnerabilities than it would to other damage types, but that damage that bypasses the armor would then do ENHANCED damage leading to a more rapid death. However, the nonarmored pet will get damaged easier (except to kinetic where it will suffer less point loss), but will never get nailed by its vulnerabilities.
I guess where I'm coming from is trying to figure out if that armor is worth experimenting in. This is in the backdrop of the drops in resists seen when fortitude is >500. Is it better for me to target balanced resists and dodge the armor (since the vulnerabilities become a big issue), or is it important to cover the pet in armor anyway?
May not have been your point, I realize, but this is an intriguing issue.
LoL yeah sorry i meant always lose to a CL2.
That leads me to wonder which would be better? A pet with AR1 and vulns to some damage types or a pet with high kinetic with vulnerabilities to most other damage types. In this hypothetical, the pet with armor will suffer more damage to its vulnerabilities than it would to other damage types, but that damage that bypasses the armor would then do ENHANCED damage leading to a more rapid death.
The vulnerabilities mean that all of the damage goes through, they don't suffer enhanced damage. The fact is though that armor is great for tanks in PvE unless your against NPCs with weapons as we know they cause various types of damage plus they have grenades too. A mob with light armor and kinetic protection means that the damage is first reduced by 50% and then the reductions from the resists are applied. Basically in PvP pet with armor runs the risk of being made weaker by a smart opponent. In that situation it's better to have no armor and raw resists. A pet which is 50% to everything would be far more relaible in PvP that something with armor. This is just another example of why there is no such thing as a pet which is 'the best overall', there is only specialist pets which are the best at certain roles.
So if you want a kick ass PvPcombo for a CH Master I'd suggest two CL35pet which are unarmored with lots of HAM and 50%+ resists for everything.
Can you point me to the "resist quota" equation you're using to compare these mobs or show a calc example here in this thread? Thanks.
I'm gaining some good insight here, but would like to do some comparisons of my own.
CANCELLED NOVEMBER 2, 2005 - SOE BURN IN HELL
Tal-N wrote:
So if you want a kick ass PvPcombo for a CH Master I'd suggest two CL35pet which are unarmored with lots of HAM and 50%+ resists for everything.
Im working on it 
http://www.imagedump.com/index.cgi?pick=get&tp=24467