Bio Engineer Archive
Thread: Resist notes
Page 1 of 1
furrycat
Sun Aug 15, 2004 9:17 am
#1
Recently I've been playing about with resists and I'd like to take a moment to clarify a couple of points in the community-written guides that you can find either in the FAQ here or on external sites. The point of my post is not to say "this is wrong" or "this is badly explained" but rather to try to dispel some of the confusion I know I felt when I first starting reading through the various documentation that's available.
Concepts
Before I begin I'll review the standard resist formula which you can read in Mirrl's guide. Experienced bio-engineers may wish to skip straight to the section headed "My Observations."
where R1 is the value of the resist from the sample in the physique slot, R2 is the value from the prowess slot, R3 from mental, R4 from psychological and R5 from aggression.
So for example if you have three venom-filled arachne (kinetic resist 45) samples and two mantrigue night stalker (kinetic resist 35) samples, and you arrange them VFA/MNS/VFA/MNS/VFA, you would expect your kinetic resist to come out as 40.
We also know from Mirrl's guide that, and I quote, "specials resists always override effective resist making the effective resist act as a 0 for the calculation." In other words, the above formula is only valid for five special resists. If we introduce a sample with an effective resist, the value for that slot in the formula counts as zero.
Example: Grassland voritor tracker (30 effective heat resist) and kimogila hatchling (55 special heat resist) arranged GVT/KH/KH/GVT/KH. Because the GVT's heat resists are effective, they count as 0 in the formula and the template's final resist is 30.
Furthermore, the guide says "Vulnerable acts as a -99 special resist" and "If the final resist is negative then the resist will be marked as vulnerable."
Consider the voritor dasher (vulnerable to energy) and huurton pup (0 effective energy) combination VD/HP/HP/HP/VD. Creating a template with these samples will yield a vulnerability to energy as can be seen by evaluating the formula.
The final value is negative so the resist is marked vulnerable.
In this post, Kevm says "The only way you can get an 'effective' resist in your clone is if there aren't *any* special protections on *any* of the DNA samples for that stat." In this post, LoakG says "Look at the fortitude and round down to the nearest 50. I.E. 378 becomes 350 and 129 becomes 100. Divide that by 10 and you have your effectiveness resists value." We also know that effective resists "reset" when AR1 is achieved.
In other words if all five samples have effective resists, the template's resista will also be effective, and its value will be
Where int(x) is the integer part of x.
We can see this by taking greater sludge panther (fortitude around 110), kima (60 fortitude) and savage guf drolg (60 fortitude). All of these animals have effective blast resist and when arranged GSP/GSP/K/SGD/K will yield a template with an effective blast resist of 0 and a fortitude of 20-ish. Experimenting in physique can raise the fortitude up to 90 and the effective resist rises to 5.
My observations
After much research and number crunching I am quite confident of two things which are not mentioned in the sources I have quoted. First of all it seems that the criterion for getting an effective resist is more general than having all sample resists being effective. Recalling that effective resists count as 0 in the calculation formula, I believe that a resist will be effective when the formula evaluates to 0 (trivially this includes the case where all resists are effective). Secondly I have observed that the statement "vulnerable acts as a -99 special resist" is only true for samples taken from wild creatures. When sampling from a pet deed the values of the deed's vulnerabilities are transferred to the sample.
To demonstrate both observations take gurreck forest stalker (20 effective blast and acid), savage quenker (15 effective blast and acid), dewback (10 special blast, vulnerable to acid), quenker (10 effective blast and acid), bolle bol stomper (50 special acid) and verne bull (25 special acid).
In the first instance create a template GFS/SQ/SQ/D/Q. Looking first at the blast resist we see that the standard formula gives:
This would in theory evaluate to a 0 special resist. If you create the template, however, you will see that experimenting in physique increases the blast resist. This means that it is an effective resist, contradicting the theory that all sample resists must be effective to yield an effective template resist. It is consistent with the theory that a resist with value 0 becomes effective.
Consider next the acid resist. We expect this to evaluate to -4 and vulnerability.
This is indeed the case.
These results are available as template q94633pb in my database. Selected other templates showing the same behaviour regarding effective resists are o84putqr and v3kjslnh.
Creating a pet from the above template and resampling gives a sample with vulnerability to acid. Call this sample A and combine with GFS/SQ/BBS/A/VB. If we assume that vulnerabilities always count as -99, we should expect an acid resist of 3.
In fact the template takes a special acid resist of 8, consistent with the claim that negative resist values are retained when resampling.
This is template ntktb3hj. See also templates c3qfuo8a and nbfjgqh0, which show the interesting case where a template can actually gain resists which the standard "-99 is vulnerable" method predicts would be vulnerabilities.
Conclusions
We have seen that templates can gain effective resists when the special resist formula evaluates to zero. We have seen that the system keeps track of the final (negative) value for vulnerabilites and passes this value on to samples further on in the generational cloning process. Furthermore we have seen that failure to account for this may introduce resists which are unwanted (for example when trying to reduce a pet's level by breeding vulnerablities).
Concepts
Before I begin I'll review the standard resist formula which you can read in Mirrl's guide. Experienced bio-engineers may wish to skip straight to the section headed "My Observations."
R = 0.4 x R1 + 0.25 x R2 + 0.05 x R3 + 0.05 x R4 + 0.25 x R5
where R1 is the value of the resist from the sample in the physique slot, R2 is the value from the prowess slot, R3 from mental, R4 from psychological and R5 from aggression.
So for example if you have three venom-filled arachne (kinetic resist 45) samples and two mantrigue night stalker (kinetic resist 35) samples, and you arrange them VFA/MNS/VFA/MNS/VFA, you would expect your kinetic resist to come out as 40.
0.4 x 45 + 0.25 x 30 + 0.05 x 45 + 0.05 x 30 + 0.25 x 45
= 18 + 7.5 + 2.25 + 1.5 + 11.25
= 40.5
We also know from Mirrl's guide that, and I quote, "specials resists always override effective resist making the effective resist act as a 0 for the calculation." In other words, the above formula is only valid for five special resists. If we introduce a sample with an effective resist, the value for that slot in the formula counts as zero.
Example: Grassland voritor tracker (30 effective heat resist) and kimogila hatchling (55 special heat resist) arranged GVT/KH/KH/GVT/KH. Because the GVT's heat resists are effective, they count as 0 in the formula and the template's final resist is 30.
0.4 x 0 + 0.25 x 55 + 0.05 x 55 + 0.05 x 0 + 0.25 x 55
= 0 + 13.75 + 2.75 + 0 + 13.75
= 30.25
Furthermore, the guide says "Vulnerable acts as a -99 special resist" and "If the final resist is negative then the resist will be marked as vulnerable."
Consider the voritor dasher (vulnerable to energy) and huurton pup (0 effective energy) combination VD/HP/HP/HP/VD. Creating a template with these samples will yield a vulnerability to energy as can be seen by evaluating the formula.
0.4 x -99 + 0.25 x 0 + 0.05 x 0 + 0.05 x 0 + 0.25 x -99
= -39.6 + 0 + 0 + 0 + -24.75
= -64.35
The final value is negative so the resist is marked vulnerable.
In this post, Kevm says "The only way you can get an 'effective' resist in your clone is if there aren't *any* special protections on *any* of the DNA samples for that stat." In this post, LoakG says "Look at the fortitude and round down to the nearest 50. I.E. 378 becomes 350 and 129 becomes 100. Divide that by 10 and you have your effectiveness resists value." We also know that effective resists "reset" when AR1 is achieved.
In other words if all five samples have effective resists, the template's resista will also be effective, and its value will be
(fortitude mod 500)
5 x int (-----------------)
( 50 )
Where int(x) is the integer part of x.
We can see this by taking greater sludge panther (fortitude around 110), kima (60 fortitude) and savage guf drolg (60 fortitude). All of these animals have effective blast resist and when arranged GSP/GSP/K/SGD/K will yield a template with an effective blast resist of 0 and a fortitude of 20-ish. Experimenting in physique can raise the fortitude up to 90 and the effective resist rises to 5.
My observations
After much research and number crunching I am quite confident of two things which are not mentioned in the sources I have quoted. First of all it seems that the criterion for getting an effective resist is more general than having all sample resists being effective. Recalling that effective resists count as 0 in the calculation formula, I believe that a resist will be effective when the formula evaluates to 0 (trivially this includes the case where all resists are effective). Secondly I have observed that the statement "vulnerable acts as a -99 special resist" is only true for samples taken from wild creatures. When sampling from a pet deed the values of the deed's vulnerabilities are transferred to the sample.
To demonstrate both observations take gurreck forest stalker (20 effective blast and acid), savage quenker (15 effective blast and acid), dewback (10 special blast, vulnerable to acid), quenker (10 effective blast and acid), bolle bol stomper (50 special acid) and verne bull (25 special acid).
In the first instance create a template GFS/SQ/SQ/D/Q. Looking first at the blast resist we see that the standard formula gives:
0.4 x 0 + 0.25 x 0 + 0.05 x 0 + 0.05 x 10 + 0.25 x 09
= 0 + 0 + 0 + 0.5 + 0
= 0.5
This would in theory evaluate to a 0 special resist. If you create the template, however, you will see that experimenting in physique increases the blast resist. This means that it is an effective resist, contradicting the theory that all sample resists must be effective to yield an effective template resist. It is consistent with the theory that a resist with value 0 becomes effective.
Consider next the acid resist. We expect this to evaluate to -4 and vulnerability.
0.4 x 0 + 0.25 x 0 + 0.05 x 0 + 0.05 x -99 + 0.25 x 0
= 0 + 0 + 0 + -4.95 + 0
= -4.95
This is indeed the case.
These results are available as template q94633pb in my database. Selected other templates showing the same behaviour regarding effective resists are o84putqr and v3kjslnh.
Creating a pet from the above template and resampling gives a sample with vulnerability to acid. Call this sample A and combine with GFS/SQ/BBS/A/VB. If we assume that vulnerabilities always count as -99, we should expect an acid resist of 3.
0.4 x 0 + 0.25 x 0 + 0.05 x 50 + 0.05 x -99 + 0.25 x 50
= 0 + 0 + 2.5 + -4.95 + 6.25
= 3.8
In fact the template takes a special acid resist of 8, consistent with the claim that negative resist values are retained when resampling.
0.4 x 0 + 0.25 x 0 + 0.05 x 50 + 0.05 x -4 + 0.25 x 50
= 0 + 0 + 2.5 + -0.2 + 6.25
= 8.55
This is template ntktb3hj. See also templates c3qfuo8a and nbfjgqh0, which show the interesting case where a template can actually gain resists which the standard "-99 is vulnerable" method predicts would be vulnerabilities.
Conclusions
We have seen that templates can gain effective resists when the special resist formula evaluates to zero. We have seen that the system keeps track of the final (negative) value for vulnerabilites and passes this value on to samples further on in the generational cloning process. Furthermore we have seen that failure to account for this may introduce resists which are unwanted (for example when trying to reduce a pet's level by breeding vulnerablities).
Page 1 of 1