Terror Tank - 20 Barbarian Endgame R10 Tank

[Hobgoblin]

Troll harder. Seek to go beyond.

to infinity and beyond?

 

[Shear-buckler]

Troll harder. Seek to go beyond.

The post you posted a picture of is exactly right. There is no point where PRR starts getting diminishing returns, because the effect follows a linear equation.

All linear stats have lower relative marginal returns for the same input, but that is not what is typically refered to as diminishing returns and it is not what the OP was refering to.

The semantics is not that interesting though so I keep making the point that PRR follows the exact same formula as MP. If MP has diminshing returns by your definition then so does PRR. If MP does not have diminishing returns by your definition then neither does PRR.

Pointing this out is not trolling, its education on a subject that apparently confuses people. Why it is leading to hostile reactions is beyond me.

I suggest you stop derailing the thread.

 

[Hobgoblin]

I would love to see a definition of diminishing returns just saying

 

[Vox]

The post you posted a picture of is exactly right. There is no point where PRR starts getting diminishing returns, because the effect follows a linear equation.

All linear stats have lower relative marginal returns for the same input

I suggest you stop derailing the thread.

Pretty sure it wasn't me that started the derail express or carried on with it after @Cordovan was asked to help sort out the thread.

 

[Hobgoblin]

Pretty sure it wasn't me that started the rerail express or carried on with it after @Cordovan was asked to help sort out the thread.

I feel targeted

 

[Shear-buckler]

I would love to see a definition of diminishing returns just saying

That is only a google away.

My main point though is that the definition does not really matter. MP is easy to understand and PRR follows the exact same linear formula. You dont look for a certain breakpoint where diminishing returns start there, and neither should you for PRR.

You can even think about it in the same way as HP. If you have 100 HP getting +10 is 10%. If you have 1000 HP getting +10 is only 1%. If you want to call that diminishing returns go ahead, but from my experience when people say that PRR has diminishing returns they are refering to something different.

 

[Frantik]

It has the same diminishing returns as MP and any other linear stats. This conversation started because the OP misunderstood this, and it is a pretty common misunderstanding.

No my friend, you are not only confused, you are confusing others. MP does not have diminishing returns because it is a linear progression. And, in game, EHP is a meaningless contrived value.

 

[Frantik]

That is only a google away.

My main point though is that the definition does not really matter. MP is easy to understand and PRR follows the exact same linear formula. You dont look for a certain breakpoint where diminishing returns start there, and neither should you for PRR.

You can even think about it in the same way as HP. If you have 100 HP getting +10 is 10%. If you have 1000 HP getting +10 is only 1%. If you want to call that diminishing returns go ahead, but from my experience when people say that PRR has diminishing returns they are refering to something different.

No, for one final time, MP and PRR do NOT follow the "exact same linear formula" because PRR and its mitigation of physical damage increase in a non-linear fashion (logarithmic). You may believe otherwise, but swallow your pride, spend a little time on google to understand the basic maths behind PRR, or ask a friend. But please don't keep repeating the same nonsense.

 

[Shear-buckler]

No my friend, you are not only confused, you are confusing others. MP does not have diminishing returns because it is a linear progression. And, in game, EHP is a meaningless contrived value.

There is no confusion on my part. The effect of PRR follows the exact same linear equation as MP. I think it is technically wrong to call that diminishing returns but another poster made a big deal that all linear progressions have diminishing returns because the marginal relative return decreases.

The EHP value in game may be rather useless because it includes avoidance, but EHP as a concept is still very meaningful and makes the effect of PRR much easier to understand.

 

[Shear-buckler]

No, for one final time, MP and PRR do NOT follow the "exact same linear formula" because PRR and its mitigation of physical damage increase in a non-linear fashion (logarithmic). You may believe otherwise, but swallow your pride, spend a little time on google to understand the basic maths behind PRR, or ask a friend. But please don't keep repeating the same nonsense.

I understand the math behind PRR just fine. I really think you should take your own advice.

Drop the hostility and take the opportunity to learn something.

Here is a question that will help you get to the core of this, is the effect of dodge linear?

 

[Frantik]

T

I understand the math behind PRR just fine. I really think you should take your own advice.

Drop the hostility and take the opportunity to learn something.

Here is a question that will help you get to the core of this, is the effect of dodge linear?

Then i challenge you to produce the math behind PRR. No words, no excuses, just maths.

 

[Frantik]

For increasing how hard of content that you can tank, the primary thing that matters is how many hits of a given size you can take before dying. That's equivalent to how much pre-PRR damage you can take before dying. The formula for that, leaving out stochastic factors, is (100+PRR)/100 x (HP). That's linear in PRR. It also lets us calculate roughly how many HP are worth the same as 1 PRR—the answer tends to be between 10 and 18.

I agree with your first sentence. A mathmatical formula may seem an easy weapon to brandish, but we need to think about units. What is the unit for PRR? Is it unitless? Or has it something to do with incoming damage? So can we consider it simply as extra health? What result do you think the formula is supposed to produce?

Look closer at the graphs posted above. There is no linear relationship between PRR and mitigated physical damage, so consequently the ill-thought-out formula you refer to is meaningless.

 

[Shear-buckler]

T

Then i challenge you to produce the math behind PRR. No words, no excuses, just maths.

"EHP-factor"=(100+PRR)/100

Now, please answer my question. Is the effect of dodge linear? This is important.
The damage reduction/avoidance from dodge is linear, its 1:1 even. If you come to the conclusion that the effect of PRR is not linear from looking at its damage reduction curve then you must conclude that the effect of dodge is linear by looking at its damage reduction/avoidance curve.

However, if you evaluate going from 0 to 1 dodge and going from 99 to 100 dodge you can pretty clearly see that its not a linear effect on your character. The first case decreases damage by 1% while the other makes you completely invulnerable to dodgeable attacks.

The conclusion here is that the shape of the damage reduction/avoidance curve is not the same as the actual effect on a character. So pointing to the PRR damage reduction curve to say its not linear is meaningless.

 

[PraetorPlato]

I agree with your first sentence. A mathmatical formula may seem an easy weapon to brandish, but we need to think about units. What is the unit for PRR? Is it unitless? Or has it something to do with uncoming damage? So can we consider it simply as extra health? What result do you think the formula is supposed to produce?

Look closer at the graphs posted above. There is no linear relationship between PRR and mitigated physical damage, so consequently the ill-thought-out formula you refer to is meaningless.

Ok, let's think about how we'd calculate how many hits of a given size we can take before dying.

Let's say we have a kobold that hits us for 1000 damage before PRR, DR, etc. If I'm on a character with 3000 hp, and 0 PRR, I can take 3 hits, right?

If I'm on a character with 3000 HP, and 100 PRR, how many hits can I take? Well, each kobold-hit would be 1000, but my prr reduces that to 1000 x 100/(100+100)=500 HP, so now I can take 6 hits.

What if I have 200 PRR? Well, now each kobold hit is only 333, so I can take 9 hits now.

Each 100 PRR lets me take 3 more hits from the kobold before dying.

Let's come up with a formula for how many kobold-hits I can take. First, let's calculate "HP I'd take from a single kobold hit" (the units of this are HP. PRR is unitless, because it's essentially ratio) PRR reduces kobold-hit damage to 1000 x 100/(PRR+100). Now, I want to figure out how many kobold-hits I can take, so I divide my HP by the damage of one kobold-hit, to get:

# of kobold hits I can take = HP / (1000 x 100 /(PRR+100)) = HP/1000 x (PRR+100)/100.

But there's no reason we need to look at only kobold-hits, so instead I can just ask how much damage I can take (equivalently, how many kobold-hits I can take if each kobold-hit deals 1 damage before PRR). By the exact same argument, this gives me

amount of damage I can take before dying = HP x (PRR+100)/100.

To show why that's useful, let's say I have a tank with 6k hp and 400 PRR that keeps getting one shot by Irk in r4 project nemesis. Irk's arrow deals ~35k before PRR in r4. I want to figure out how much extra HP or PRR I'd need to not die. To do this, my HP times (100+PRR)/100 has to be at least 35k. Right now, it's only 30k, which is why I keep dying. To get to 35k, I could either add 1k HP or 83 PRR, so at this point, each PRR is worth about 12 prr. However, the fact that an additional 83 PRR lets me absorb 5k more pre-PRR damage before dying is true *regardless* of how much PRR I have as long as I have 6k hp.

 

[Frantik]

"EHP-factor"=(100+PRR)/100

Now, please answer my question. Is the effect of dodge linear? This is important.
The damage reduction/avoidance from dodge is linear, its 1:1 even. If you come to the conclusion that the effect of PRR is not linear from looking at its damage reduction curve then you must conclude that the effect of dodge is linear by looking at its damage reduction/avoidance curve.

However, if you evaluate going from 0 to 1 dodge and going from 99 to 100 dodge you can pretty clearly see that its not a linear effect on your character. The first case decreases damage by 1% while the other makes you completely invulnerable to dodgeable attacks.

The conclusion here is that the shape of the damage reduction/avoidance curve is not the same as the actual effect on a character. So pointing to the PRR damage reduction curve to say its not linear is meaningless.

Please see my reply just above. The formula you refer to is incorrect as it assumes PRR and the physical damage it mitiigates is a linear function. It is not. Look at the graphs already posted on this thread [and how have we hijacked the OPs wonderful build] and try see why that formula makes no sense.

 

[Shear-buckler]

Please see my reply just above. The formula you refer to is incorrect as it assumes PRR and the physical damage it mitiigates is a linear function. It is not. Look at the graphs already posted on this thread [and how have we hijacked the OPs wonderful build] and try see why that formula makes no sense.

The formula is correct and makes perfect sense. It does not assume that the damage reduction from PRR is a linear function. The point you are missing is that the actual effect of PRR is not the same as the damage reduction curve. I think the dodge parallel you ignored makes that clear.

If the damage reduction formula was linear then increasing your PRR would have increasing returns. Every point would have more value then the last. That does not describe a linear progression.

 

[Mindos]

I dont even know what linear means. I looked it up, and no. so whatever
so lookling at all this going on and all you all just going on and on im like wut, like wut are you all even doing

I dont understand WHAT you all are talking about
I dont understand WHY you are talking about
and its making my head hurt. stop making my head hurt

 

[Contessor]

There is no confusion on my part. The effect of PRR follows the exact same linear equation as MP. I think it is technically wrong to call that diminishing returns but another poster made a big deal that all linear progressions have diminishing returns because the marginal relative return decreases.

The EHP value in game may be rather useless because it includes avoidance, but EHP as a concept is still very meaningful and makes the effect of PRR much easier to understand.

No this is false. PRR follows a bell curve, not a linear depreciation. 50 PRR provides 33%, for example, 100PRR provides 50%,, 200 PRR provides 66%, 300 PRR provides 75%, 400 PRR provides 80%, 500 PRR provides 84%. Now plot those into a graph and tell me that is linear? It has a sharp upturn and flattens out at the top.

Melee power is totally different, despite the formula looking similar. The difference is melee power is affected by more than just a set of static number like PRR. As your weapon damage increases, melee power progression increases as well. The bell curve looks completely opposite of PRR. Neither are anything close to linear. They both have a curve, but MP curve looks nothing like PRR because cirt profile and base weapon damage are variables and multipliers for MP, as well as other added damages.

 

[Contessor]

"EHP-factor"=(100+PRR)/100

Now, please answer my question. Is the effect of dodge linear? This is important.
The damage reduction/avoidance from dodge is linear, its 1:1 even. If you come to the conclusion that the effect of PRR is not linear from looking at its damage reduction curve then you must conclude that the effect of dodge is linear by looking at its damage reduction/avoidance curve.

However, if you evaluate going from 0 to 1 dodge and going from 99 to 100 dodge you can pretty clearly see that its not a linear effect on your character. The first case decreases damage by 1% while the other makes you completely invulnerable to dodgeable attacks.

The conclusion here is that the shape of the damage reduction/avoidance curve is not the same as the actual effect on a character. So pointing to the PRR damage reduction curve to say its not linear is meaningless.

This formula is not correct. PRR is 100/(100+PRR), not (100+PRR)/100.

Conversly, MP, nor SP is a set of static numbers, so the formula is not the same. SP is easy because its base spell damage x SP as a 100+MP as a %. MP is a more complex formula since it impacts certain imbues, sneak attack, etc. But to make it simple its base weapon damage x MP as a %. I think you might not understand this and are looking at the wiki, in which case they present a negative melee power formula to determine the % damage, which is 100/(100+negative melee power). This is simply to figure what % you would use for your multiplier. This actually reduces your base weapon damage with this formula.

 

[Bjond]

This formula is not correct. PRR is 100/(100+PRR), not (100+PRR)/100.

This is correct for (1-mitigation). He flipped it and called it a factor; ie. eHP = HP/(1-M) or (HP x (100+PRR)/100) to highlight how eHP grows with PRR; ie. you're kinda both correct.