Rifleman Archive
Thread: How AR really works
Are we sure the "floater" number is the damage that is actually done? I mean. . . has anyone every actually checked the HAM bars to see if the floater number is what is subtracted or the combat spam number is? Seriously?
I know that sounds like an obvious question, and maybe it is just late in the day and I am losing my mind talking to idiots on the phone.
But can anyone confirm this? Is it the floater damage or the combat spam damage that is actually SUBTRACTED from the HAM bar? Short of hovering your mouse over the target's HAM, there's no way to check that. Someone ought to.
ok if this is correct, then how come we arnt doing 100% damage to creatures with no armor?
the dude has 10% enegery resist and no armor rating.
with an AR 3 weapon, this should completely negate the % dont you agree?
In other words, the T-21 (for example, since it has such high AP) will only get the AP3 bonus if the target atleast has an AP of 1. If the AR of the target is 0 (none), the AP is never calculated.
Ironicly, this means that wearing armor against heavy, piercing weapons is a BAD idea, but wearing it against light, non-piercing weapons is a GOOD idea.
Score one more for everyone but us.
Of course you can't exceed 100% damage because AP lowers resists, it doesn't add damage.
As for hitting an unarmored opponent for less than an armored one with a heavy ap weapon, i never noticed this, could be related to the armor hole bug. I can easily take screens of this bug if they are needed... something interesting i noticed that might help the dev fix this armor hole bug is that when i clone, i get one or more messages stating that i am "not healthy enough to wear this armor", even i have no wounds and positive overall stats. I get only one msg if i have positive stats, more than one with negative ones.
AldeonAvardulin wrote:
For those who dont want to read and get confused, I tell you in simple terms. It does not increase damage, it decreases resistance. Here is a qoute from one of the designers. A weapon cannot exceed 100 percent.
"Here's how it actually works. That 50% reduction or 25% increase is applied to the protection of the armor, not the base damage. So if an armor with effectiveness of 30 has an AR1 and is hit with a weapon of AR2, it actually protects as if it had an effectiveness of 15 (30 * .5 = 15). Against a weapon of AR0, it protects as if were 37.5% (30 * 1.25 = 37.5). This 50% reduction or 25% increase is applied for each level difference. So if the armor had an AR2 it would protect as if it had an effectiveness of 46.9% (30 * 1.25 = 37.5 * 1.25 = 46.9.
Therefore, if a weapon attacks with a damage type of the armor's vulnerability, all of the damage goes through with no damage reduction, but no damage increase either. So it appears as if it is working as coded. It's the armor guide that's incorrect. We'll have to get that fixed up."
I always wondered why a lot of times my armor would suck up a higher % than it resists said it should. I took for granted Holo's statement on the way armor piercing worked.
However last night, I was fighting something and I looked back to check my armor. I have a 44% resist composite BP, and according to the combat spam, it was sucking up 66% damage (.44 * 1.5). I assume the mob was using an AP0 weapon. Additionally, I was fighting a commando who flamed me for 1600ish damage, my armor stopped just over 1000 damage, which is 66%. Flamers are also AP0. It appears as though this is correct.
The pistoleers (who dissect everything immensely) have been complaining that their DX2, AP1, is not getting a damage boost against unarmored opponents, this would seem to explain why.
At any rate. If this is in FACT the case, you guys should be up in arms over your T21 rifles. Without the damage boost we were told existed, those things pretty much suck.
AldeonAvardulin wrote:
"Here's how it actually works. That 50% reduction or 25% increase is applied to the protection of the armor, not the base damage. So if an armor with effectiveness of 30 has an AR1 and is hit with a weapon of AR2, it actually protects as if it had an effectiveness of 15 (30 * .5 = 15). Against a weapon of AR0, it protects as if were 37.5% (30 * 1.25 = 37.5). This 50% reduction or 25% increase is applied for each level difference. So if the armor had an AR2 it would protect as if it had an effectiveness of 46.9% (30 * 1.25 = 37.5 * 1.25 = 46.9."
Um? Ok. Take a DLT20a rifle and use it against someone wearing bone armor rated for, say, 10%.
According to the statement in bold, they should get a damage reduction of 10*1.25 = 12.5%.
They will actually get a damage reduction of just over 50%.
EVERYONE has surely seen and realized this. Even an armor with effectiveness of 1% will stop half the damage from an AR0 weapon.
I mean, is this guy talking about some theoretical magic-land or what? Has he actually looked at the code? At all? Ever?
Daxl wrote:
However last night, I was fighting something and I looked back to check my armor. I have a 44% resist composite BP, and according to the combat spam, it was sucking up 66% damage (.44 * 1.5). I assume the mob was using an AP0 weapon. Additionally, I was fighting a commando who flamed me for 1600ish damage, my armor stopped just over 1000 damage, which is 66%. Flamers are also AP0. It appears as though this is correct.
I guarentee that if your composite was rated for 1% it will still block 50% of the damage to that damage type from an AR0 weapon.
Surely everyone who's been here since the game started as noticed this because back then all armor sucked. As a swordsman, my current suit of ubese is rated for about 20% kinetic resistance and it stops over 50% of all damage from all creature attacks.
Basically, the dev is certifiably wrong on this. I'm astounded that he can even make this claim when it's so obviously not true. I mean, like, wow.
Ok tested the above head damage, it is the real total damage done to a target. I wrote down the HAM of the target before and then compared it tothe targets HAM after my shot.
I shot the target for 327 damagein the combat window, 512 damage over the targets head.
Before- After = damage to pool
Health: 819 - 750 = 52
Action: 779 - 380 = 408
Mind: 736 - 701 = 52
52 + 408 + 52 = 512 totalHAM damage
It seemsthe damage overhead is the total damage done before it is spread throughout the three HAM pools. Thisleads me to believe that AP does increase damage as thought by many players, unless you shoot an unarmoured player target where it does not. To back this up, my previous screenshots show that AP does increase the damage done, as there is no way to do the overhead damage with that laser rifle, unless you apply the extra damagethat AP2 would do.
I did another test yesterday and found thatdamage above head is the same as the damage in the combat window when using an AP2 weapon on an unarmoured player. So AP on unarmoured player targets is not working the same as AP on non player targets with no AR. Which to me sounds likea bug.
Maybe the post should be rtitled "How some developer sitting in a room looking at inaccurate numerical data and never having played the game thinks AR really works." It's been established again and again that the developers are often way off in their assssments of how things work. This however is pretty amazingly farfetched; it's not even some issue like a developer thinking that Take Cover will ever be desirable, or not knowing about the impact of the heavy weapon melee damage type bug, but it's just... utterly wrong. Observational data from PvP testing, PvE observations (abstract since you can't have a status screen up on the target with exact numbers) and examining your pet in a shoot the pet test all contradict this bizarre statement.
What I observe: In PvE if the target has a vulnerability to your damage type, you do list damage, no bonus. If the target has any resistance at all to your damage type, AR calc goes into effect: inferior weapon, 50% damage flat (it seems), equal weapon, list damage - resist, superior weapon, (list damage - resist) * (1.25 * (AR superiority)). In PvP, everything holds except no bonus for superior AR. I'll trust my own observations more than a statement from a developer's words any day, given their track record of formulaic accuracy.
AldeonAvardulin wrote:
Every ar0 weapon is blocked 50 percent by an AR1 armor no matter what the resists.
That's not what your very first post says.