|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
J Lav
OSG Planetary Operations
Covert Intervention
237
   |
Posted - 2013.10.06 13:01:00 -
[1] - Quote
Your math is wrong. This is an area CCP hasn't been very clear in their wording. Think of it this way:
If my shields are 60% more durable, then 1000 shields requires 1600 damage to get the shields down, 1800 against explosive damage. This is based on observable in game tests. The math is not based on the incoming attack. |
J Lav
OSG Planetary Operations
Covert Intervention
238
|
Posted - 2013.10.06 22:54:00 -
[2] - Quote
Alan-Ibn-Xuan Al-Alasabe wrote:J Lav wrote:Your math is wrong. This is an area CCP hasn't been very clear in their wording. Think of it this way:
If my shields are 60% more durable, then 1000 shields requires 1600 damage to get the shields down, 1800 against explosive damage. This is based on observable in game tests. The math is not based on the incoming attack. Let's imagine you have 1600 ehp after a 60% resist has been applied, and you want to know what your base hp is. Since by definition the base HP is 40% of the eHP, the answer is obvious: 1600*(1-.6)=640 In other words eHP*(1-resist)=baseHP Some simple algebra then gives us eHP = baseHP/(1-resist) In other words, when you make something 60% more durable you don't multiply by 1.6, you divide by .4.
Your formula would be correct if you were calculating the actual resistance of a shield, however it is based on the assumption that CCP is mathematically calculating the amount of resistance, and not applying a modifier to the shield itself.
For example, if your math is correct, then 60% of the damage from a weapon would be absorbed. In that case, the value of the attack needs to be known to calculate the damage, and the value of the shields is inconsequential.
In my mathematical example, the known value at time of the vehicles build is the shield value, and the modifier is applied to the shield value, not the attack.
Now, this is where CCP's wording is confusing, because they haven't specified which it is. Is it 60% less damage, or 60% harder shields?
So try it out and fire a proto swarm at a tank and you will see that with the known value of the attack and the shields/armour, you can verify that the modifier is applied to the shield/armour value, and not the attack.
It would help if CCP could verify this one way or the other, but it is a simple matter of applying your math to the wrong value. |
J Lav
OSG Planetary Operations
Covert Intervention
238
|
Posted - 2013.10.06 23:05:00 -
[3] - Quote
Alan-Ibn-Xuan Al-Alasabe wrote:J Lav wrote:Your math is wrong. This is an area CCP hasn't been very clear in their wording. Think of it this way:
If my shields are 60% more durable, then 1000 shields requires 1600 damage to get the shields down, 1800 against explosive damage. This is based on observable in game tests. The math is not based on the incoming attack. Let's imagine you have 1600 ehp after a 60% resist has been applied, and you want to know what your base hp is. Since by definition the base HP is 40% of the eHP, the answer is obvious: 1600*(1-.6)=640 In other words eHP*(1-resist)=baseHP Some simple algebra then gives us eHP = baseHP/(1-resist) In other words, when you make something 60% more durable you don't multiply by 1.6, you divide by .4.
After examining the math more accurately, I think you're right, but that CCP hasn't published if the resistance modifier is applied to the attack or the shields/armour. That is where the value needed to overcome the shields would change. |
J Lav
OSG Planetary Operations
Covert Intervention
239
|
Posted - 2013.10.07 09:55:00 -
[4] - Quote
Monkey MAC wrote:J Lav wrote:Alan-Ibn-Xuan Al-Alasabe wrote:J Lav wrote:Your math is wrong. This is an area CCP hasn't been very clear in their wording. Think of it this way:
If my shields are 60% more durable, then 1000 shields requires 1600 damage to get the shields down, 1800 against explosive damage. This is based on observable in game tests. The math is not based on the incoming attack. Let's imagine you have 1600 ehp after a 60% resist has been applied, and you want to know what your base hp is. Since by definition the base HP is 40% of the eHP, the answer is obvious: 1600*(1-.6)=640 In other words eHP*(1-resist)=baseHP Some simple algebra then gives us eHP = baseHP/(1-resist) In other words, when you make something 60% more durable you don't multiply by 1.6, you divide by .4. After examining the math more accurately, I think you're right, but that CCP hasn't published if the resistance modifier is applied to the attack or the shields/armour. That is where the value needed to overcome the shields would change. It makes sense for it to be damage coming in since shield tanks are supposed to be more reliant upon hardners!
It would make sense, but when running tests, the math lines up with the modifier being applied to the shield value, and not the attack.
ie. my Limbus takes about 4 shots from a proto swarm with no damage modules, at 20% shield and 50% armour resistance. According to your math, it should take more like 7-8. But then maybe I'm looking at it wrong. |
|
|
| |
|