VP was never the problem

Have anyone of you who think armor is garbade actually played a decent armor build before?

Well why don't you post your 90k armor builds clearing a T16 map in under an hour.

"

LowBudget780 написал:

Ok buddy, it's obvious you know something that everyone else seems to be missing so have fun with your OP 40k armor build in 3.1. Maybe you and Boem can team up and start a clan together.

I dont have a 40k armour build. Im just asking you to show me the maths on the statements youre making, back it up with the actual facts, the numbers. You have actually looked at the numbers? Youre not just saying it because you heard other people on the forums saying it right?


Are you here just to have an argument or do you actually care about the game? What matters more to you, that we get to the truth of things or that you 'win' some kind of confrontation?

"

Snorkle_uk написал:

"

CaptainWARLORD написал:

"

polimeris написал:

Oh yes. This graphic shows that armour works better on big hits.
For example, for a character with 10K armour:
-: getting hit for 1K damage means a reduction of 50% => 500 damage blocked.
-: getting hit for 10 K damage means a reduction of 10% => 1000 damage blocked.

That is not how Armour works.

The maximum damage it will block is /10 the Armour Rating. E.g. 1000 AR can max. prevent 100 Physical damage. Your 10k Example with 10k Armour results in 1000 Physical damage it can prevent at max.

That's why Armour is terrible compared to flat phys reduction from Endurance charges and Co.

If I have 40k Armour, trash mobs don't do shit, but bosses and buffed rares will still hit like a truck.

E: To make this more understandable: For your 10k example I'd need 90k Armour to prevent 90% of the damage, e.g. 9000 Physical damage.

so if we look at the guardian example earlier where a minotaurs sweep does 3295 physical damage, 40k armour would give you a 54.8% damage reduction. Thats more damage reduction than 13 endurance charges.

you played many 13 endurance charge builds in your time?

Show me the math on what physical damage you think a rare monster is dealing and how endurance charges are better than armour at mitigating it.

it bs you don't get 54% damage reduction. I had with armour, flask and endurance chances i think 95% reduction if i remember correctly. It was long time ago. I still received loooot of physical damage which easily killed me, so I abandoned that build. The tooltip about armour reduction is deceiving same like life leech was before correction.

"

so if we look at the guardian example earlier where a minotaurs sweep does 3295 physical damage, 40k armour would give you a 54.8% damage reduction. Thats more damage reduction than 13 endurance charges.

Rly don't want to be part of the drama,but that is pure bullshit. I mean,if only... You need to experience how bad armor really is,against anything that's not a trash mob.

"

Kastmar написал:

it bs you don't get 54% damage reduction. I had with armour, flask and endurance chances i think 95% reduction if i remember correctly. It was long time ago. I still received loooot of physical damage which easily killed me, so I abandoned that build. The tooltip about armour reduction is deceiving same like life leech was before correction.

did you even read his post ? his post has NOTHING to do with tooltip % reduction. he is using the actual formula for armour. seriously.

a 5k physical hit gets reduced to 2.78k hit with 40k armour. that is 45% reduction.

people who parrot shit that is factually wrong about armour(ie 'armour doesnt do anything for big hits') should take an introductory high school calculus class or something and learn about rate of change and stuff.


armour is great against phys damage. armour makes minotaur and uber izaro do very little damage to you.

the main issue with armour is that it only protects against phys damage. there really arent many heavy phys hitters in the game as of now, and most of those heavy phys damage dealers have nukes that can be avoided.

"

Kasapnica написал:

"

so if we look at the guardian example earlier where a minotaurs sweep does 3295 physical damage, 40k armour would give you a 54.8% damage reduction. Thats more damage reduction than 13 endurance charges.

Rly don't want to be part of the drama,but that is pure bullshit. I mean,if only... You need to experience how bad armor really is,against anything that's not a trash mob.

another 'math is wrong because of my anecdotal evidence' example eh ?

repeating what someone else said 1000 times doesnt make it anymore true if it's wrong.

"

grepman написал:

"

Kastmar написал:

it bs you don't get 54% damage reduction. I had with armour, flask and endurance chances i think 95% reduction if i remember correctly. It was long time ago. I still received loooot of physical damage which easily killed me, so I abandoned that build. The tooltip about armour reduction is deceiving same like life leech was before correction.

did you even read his post ? his post has NOTHING to do with tooltip % reduction. he is using the actual formula for armour. seriously.

a 5k physical hit gets reduced to 2.78k hit with 40k armour. that is 45% reduction.

people who parrot shit that is factually wrong about armour(ie 'armour doesnt do anything for big hits') should take an introductory high school calculus class or something and learn about rate of change and stuff.


armour is great against phys damage. armour makes minotaur and uber izaro do very little damage to you.

the main issue with armour is that it only protects against phys damage. there really arent many heavy phys hitters in the game as of now, and most of those heavy phys damage dealers have nukes that can be avoided.

I think this misconception can only be solved with a vid to be honest, because people tend to get more stuck-up in their beliefs the more they repeat it. But as someone who has a 60k armor build. This is pretty much on the spot. There are quite a few of bosses that are trivialized with high armor.

"

Kastmar написал:

"

Snorkle_uk написал:

so if we look at the guardian example earlier where a minotaurs sweep does 3295 physical damage, 40k armour would give you a 54.8% damage reduction.

it bs you don't get 54% damage reduction. I had with armour, flask and endurance chances i think 95% reduction if i remember correctly. It was long time ago. I still received loooot of physical damage which easily killed me, so I abandoned that build. The tooltip about armour reduction is deceiving same like life leech was before correction.

"

Kasapnica написал:

"

so if we look at the guardian example earlier where a minotaurs sweep does 3295 physical damage, 40k armour would give you a 54.8% damage reduction. Thats more damage reduction than 13 endurance charges.

Rly don't want to be part of the drama,but that is pure bullshit. I mean,if only... You need to experience how bad armor really is,against anything that's not a trash mob.

the armour formula is armour / (armour + 10x damage) = damage reduction

Im not talking about tooltip % damage reductions, Im not talking about the number you see on the character sheet which is essentially always wrong, Im doing the math on the actual formula that the game uses to calculate the damage you take. Look it up on wiki.


Armour = 40,000
Damage = 3,295

3,295 phys damage x 10 = 32,950

40,000 + 32,950 = 72,950

40,000 / 72,950 = 0.548


so the damage reduction from that armour against that hit is 54.8%.

That is an undeniable fact, that is the hard math wired into the game.


With that armour total you would show a 90% damage reduction in your character sheet. That number is wrong and armour is less effective against big hits, these things are true. So you can just take those statements and say well then armour is shit, it doesnt work against big hits, which is what most people on these forums do. Or, if you know the size of the hit in question and the amount of armour you have you can run the numbers and find out how effective it really is. In this case its a 54.8% reduction, which is an absolutely gigantic damage reduction that in no way could be considered bad.

Even a 20% damage reduction is significant, esp against big hits. If you doubt armour, if you suspect it might be shit, then go find out how much damage the sort of monsters you are fighting are doing, go find out how much armour its realistic to get on an investment ud be happy to make a run the maths, see what comes out. Maybe you like the numbers, maybe you dont. When I run the numbers Im never left thinking armour is worthless, and when I play armour builds my experiences match up with those numbers.

I never end up with 40k armour on an armour build because I dont invest the sort of points in armour you would need to get to 40k, more often than not all I am getting on my tree is life nodes that also have armour % on them. I get in the realm of 20-30k armour, were talking without flasks here. I feel like thats a standard amount youd expect to see on an armour build. Some people go all out on the armour, they get more in the 40k, 60k, 80k+ armour levels, RPGlitch above I think has a guardian with their crazy armour buffs right? Thats fair enough, I respect it Im not knocking it, but personally I dont make characters like that.

"

RPGlitch написал:

"

grepman написал:

"

Kastmar написал:

it bs you don't get 54% damage reduction. I had with armour, flask and endurance chances i think 95% reduction if i remember correctly. It was long time ago. I still received loooot of physical damage which easily killed me, so I abandoned that build. The tooltip about armour reduction is deceiving same like life leech was before correction.

did you even read his post ? his post has NOTHING to do with tooltip % reduction. he is using the actual formula for armour. seriously.

a 5k physical hit gets reduced to 2.78k hit with 40k armour. that is 45% reduction.

people who parrot shit that is factually wrong about armour(ie 'armour doesnt do anything for big hits') should take an introductory high school calculus class or something and learn about rate of change and stuff.


armour is great against phys damage. armour makes minotaur and uber izaro do very little damage to you.

the main issue with armour is that it only protects against phys damage. there really arent many heavy phys hitters in the game as of now, and most of those heavy phys damage dealers have nukes that can be avoided.

I think this misconception can only be solved with a vid to be honest, because people tend to get more stuck-up in their beliefs the more they repeat it. But as someone who has a 60k armor build. This is pretty much on the spot. There are quite a few of bosses that are trivialized with high armor.

I just dont get why people have this misconception when generally people dont have that issue with concept of diminishing returns- which is exactly what armour formula means for different hit sizes

for super large hits, the relationship is pretty much linear. each 10k armour will result in roughly 7% reduction for 10k hit

against a 10k hit 20k armour results in 15% reduction yet against the same hit 40k armour will net you around 28% reduction (but again, almost nothing in the game hits for 10k raw physical damage)

for smaller hits, the increases from something like 5k armour to 10k armour will result in more overall damage reduction effectiveness CHANGE than from 10k armour to 20k armour. for 1k hit, you go from mitigating 30% of damage to 50% of damage if you go from 5k armour to 10k armour
yet you only go from 50% to 65% if you go from 10k armour to 20k armour

the higher the hit and the more armour you stack, the closer to linear relationship you get. ie, diminishing returns

all of this can easily be seen on the graph which was provided in this very thread and that graph has been posted on the wiki since 2013

I fail to comperehend how people equate diminishing returns to lack of effectiveness of actual reduction if they at least took some time to look at the graph.