|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Altina McAlterson
Not Guilty
EoN.
551
   |
Posted - 2013.06.19 19:37:00 -
[1] - Quote
EnglishSnake wrote:Resistances or anything which are given for skills shouldnt have stacking penalties
So with shield core skills you get 10% resistance for lvl5 and the same with caladri logi LAV skill so in total you should have 20% off the bat
Then if you add a passive resistance mod then its 35% then the 2nd mod will have stacking penalities because its a mod
Thats how it should work tbh
Skills never have stacking penalties but they are always multiplied so two skills both giving 10% boost to resistances would be give you only a 19% damage reduction. This is just a result of multiplying values that reduce a particular stat as opposed to increasing it.
With bonuses that increase a stat the total bonus you get from multiplying them together is more than you would get from adding them, but with bonuses that decrease a stat the opposite is true. It honestly is just math. This is not a stacking penalty any more than having two skills that increase something by 10% each giving a total bonus of 21% is a stacking bonus.
And as for the number that was .0001 off I would say that's definitely just a result of the game rounding everything up. |
Altina McAlterson
Not Guilty
EoN.
551
|
Posted - 2013.06.20 09:59:00 -
[2] - Quote
Winsaucerer wrote:KEROSIINI-TERO wrote:Ok, as I don't have access to games resistance results, I checked your value of 10%skill and 2x 15% res mod ==> 33,47% res I tested with stacking penalty values from http://www.eve-wiki.net/index.php?title=Stacking_penaltyand found out that: Base: 10% skill = 1-0,10 = 0,90 1st 15% res mod = 1-0,15 = 0,85 2nd 15% res mod WITH stacking penalty = (1- 0,15*0,87) = 0,8695 All those multiplied are 0,6651675 and 1-0,6651675 = 33,48325% resistance after skill, unpenalised mod and first penalised modThis is so close to value (33,47%) you reported it is possible that it's some rounding issue. Yep, that one works correct, as you can see from the preceding conversation. There is a problem with a scenario where you have 1x15% and 1x10%, as discussed above.
I've looked through the thread and I don't know what problem you're talking but I'm going to infer that it has to do with the order the values are calculated when using modules with varying bonuses. It's always done in whatever order will yield the maximum total bonus.
If using a 15% reduction module and a 10% reduction module the penalty should apply to the 10%. |
Altina McAlterson
Not Guilty
EoN.
551
|
Posted - 2013.06.20 10:27:00 -
[3] - Quote
Winsaucerer wrote:Altina McAlterson wrote:
I've looked through the thread and I don't know what problem you're talking but I'm going to infer that it has to do with the order the values are calculated when using modules with varying bonuses. It's always done in whatever order will yield the maximum total bonus.
If using a 15% reduction module and a 10% reduction module the penalty should apply to the 10%.
Correct. That's my understanding of how it should be, too. But in order to obtain the value that is shown in game for me, you would have to apply the penalty to the 15% rather than 10% module. So that's the bug -- it appears the penalty is applied to the wrong module. But it may be a display bug, an actual bug in resistances, or working as intended (contrary to the way it normally works for other modules).
I'm sorry but this thread is really hard for me to keep straight for whatever reason. What modules are you using, what's you skill level and what value is the game displaying? |
Altina McAlterson
Not Guilty
EoN.
551
|
Posted - 2013.06.20 10:39:00 -
[4] - Quote
shaman oga wrote:Skills bonus should not count as a module, they should be implied in your basic resistance.
They don't and they are. |
Altina McAlterson
Not Guilty
EoN.
551
|
Posted - 2013.06.20 11:28:00 -
[5] - Quote
EDIT: Post under construction to remove stupid and compensate for lack of sleep. |
Altina McAlterson
Not Guilty
EoN.
551
|
Posted - 2013.06.20 12:29:00 -
[6] - Quote
shaman oga wrote:it's not a good thing, it should have a total of 25% of resistance, why a skill should decrease the efficiency of our modules?
your logic
first module
100-10=90
15*90%= 13.5
10+13.5=23.5
second module
100-10-15=75
(15*87%)*75%= 9.7875
10+13.5+9.7875= 33.28
instead of
first module
25%
second module
15*87%= 13.05
25+13.05= 38.05
All bonuses are calculated the exact same way so even though in this case you get less of a bonus things like weapon damage and shield recharge rate actually get a larger bonus so in the end it all works out.
As as to the OP's question, when you are doing your calculations are you applying the stacking penalty to the modifier of the module or it's compliment? |
Altina McAlterson
Not Guilty
EoN.
551
|
Posted - 2013.06.20 14:01:00 -
[7] - Quote
Winsaucerer wrote:Altina McAlterson wrote:
As as to the OP's question, when you are doing your calculations are you applying the stacking penalty to the modifier of the module or it's compliment?
My OP question has been answered. I was doing things wrong in my OP, and wrong in the next thing I did, also. But I'm quite sure I'm doing it right for the case where I have 10% from skills, 15% module, and 10% module. For that situation, the game applies the stacking penalty to the 15% module, where it should apply it to the 10%. If you're not sure, then work it out yourself for that scenario and see what you get.
Here's what I got for each module when I switched the penalty.
10% - 29.57%
15% - 30.16%
Applying the penalty to the 15% module is the correct choice. |
Altina McAlterson
Not Guilty
EoN.
553
|
Posted - 2013.06.21 02:14:00 -
[8] - Quote
After further research my statement that modules are ordered so that you receive the maximum possible bonus. In fact the poster above is correct in that module are ordered by magnitude starting with the highest value module and moving to the lowest.
It would seem I was confused and after I finally tracked down the source for my information I found that the actual statement was that modules are ordered as stated about because that method consistently results in the player getting the maximum bonus possible.
So this issue with the resistance mods is unique in that applying the penalty to the larger value module would result in a higher bonus but the game nonetheless applies the penalty to the smaller module same as it always does. This quirk would most likely only affect reduction bonuses due to how the math works out. |
Altina McAlterson
Not Guilty
EoN.
564
|
Posted - 2013.06.25 20:13:00 -
[9] - Quote
KEROSIINI-TERO wrote:
Hmm, I don't think that's the case as it's possible to calculate resistances without using the 1-x style (0,85) which I used in order to explain things easier.
But I won't be checking that as well.
As above poster, I hope CCP has a quick look at how dust handles.
they have the real values and they know how they intend things to be. Just hoping that they shed some light on it....
I plugged the formulas in to excel and when when I went back and looked they appeared to be correct but I guess I cut a paste something somewhere. Anyway, calculator agrees with you.
When I looked at it for a minute I had to laugh because it's so simple I can't believe I didn't see it earlier and it's been staring us in the face the whole time. In fact it may not be a bug at all as just to be on the safe side they purposefully left out the additional code needed for you to end up with the higher resistance.
Basically we hate negative numbers and don't use them. We say that the 15% modules has higher resists than the 10% and that's true. And when I wrote out the formula it looked like this:
...( 1 - x ) * ( 1 - ( y * .87 ) ) ...
Though this formula will give you the right answer it's not not actully correct and is not the way the game would do it. The percent change is the difference of the initial value to the final value all divided by the initial value. You can rewrite that to find the final value(damage taken) given the initial value (damage dealt) and the percent change (% resistance). Not going to type those out though, don't need them. Graph these values for any given amount of incoming damage and each % resistance and you get a line that goes from the initial value to zero and has a slope of -1.
y = (-1) * x + 1
That is the simplified to:
y = 1 + ( -x )
Even though in arithmetic all those equations for any given number would be the same because you're dealing with addition and subtraction , doesn't matter what it is. Here things do matter in the sense that a particular term might consist of a product or quotient and will be different than either other the individual terms themselves. In this case x represent the % bonus of the module the rate of change in the graph is given by negative x because the graph is decreasing.
So for resistance mods the rate of change for a 15% resistance module is -.15 but if it was a 15% increase then the rate of change would be .15.
So the equation the game will use in this calculation is:
( 1 + ( -.1 ) ) * ( 1 + ( -.1 ) ) * ( 1 + ( -.15 * .87 ) ) = .7043
Even though the 15% module would appear to be the larger module the rate of change is actually less than that of the 10% module because -.15 < -.1.
The game just puts them in order from smallest to largest and is correctly applying the penalty to the smaller value.
EDIT: Rate of Change isn't the right word but I'm tired and I really don't what it should. My explanation there as a little off you still understood it enough. I know it's long and mathy and maybe it's stuff you already understand I just did it this way because trying to explain it without using math was impossible for me tonight. |
|
|
| |
|