Menu
What's New
By:
Filters

Probably a stupid question...but...do armour attachments make armour more eco?

Ace Flyster

Ace Flyster

Marauder
Joined
Aug 31, 2006
Posts
5,031
Location
England, London
Avatar Name
Dave Ace Flyster
What i mean is, made up numbers here

Is it more eco to wear an armour that has 15 protection, and plates with 10 protection...all impact for sake of argument
..
Or
..
Armour with no plates that have 25 protection?

I cannot get my head round the maths lol

I was thinking is like gun amps where the majority make guns more eco?

Rgds

Ace

EDIT: i understand all armours and plates have different stats, so it was more of a general quesiton
 
All depends on the mob. If the mob does more than 50 impact, so 25-50, then having the 15 + 10 will be the best. But if its a lower damage mob, you'll be overprotecting and then you'll just take extra decay due to damage being applied to both armour and plate, no matter whether its already been mitigated or not.
 
Okay i will change the question slightly, presuming i am always taking more damage than armour can take, under protection???

Rgds

Ace
 
I vote for yes

Because I looked up in the past for my own game play -> using a platecarrier and several set plates can save or free up peds.

Instead of getting a whole set new armours, the plates are cheaper , less MU (same MU for 7 plates) and tt. offer almost same protection with more flexibilty.

Flexibilty will work better with the dynamic nature of this game.

Plates are easier to sell/buy them, since they work for both genders and any bodyparts :)

Sometime small exceptions for female avatars, proably plates are no so eco, since they can get (L) parts cheaper than male.

Then again... with plates you can always use them and dont have to buy an expensive replacement if some (L) parts is broken or some unl parts that wont be dropped anymore, and the other way around you can sell parts for higher MU since you have plates to compensate :)

So I say yeh eco man , but dont use armours and sweat at Nea is more eco lol
 
offering mentorship@soc terminal :dunce:
 
Ace Flyster said:
Okay i will change the question slightly, presuming i am always taking more damage than armour can take, under protection???
Click to expand...

Yep, easy rule is if you take 1.0 dmg most the time then too much protection, try and take around 10% of your health per hit.
 
Harmony. said:
offering mentorship@soc terminal :dunce:
Click to expand...
Please please be my mentor harm ;) i notice you didnt give an answer though

PS i went to the dark side, just before server down, i hunted some fresc's ;)

Rgds

Ace
 
Well, to simplify things for you slightly, when you get hit, the full initial damage is done to both the armour and the plate. They both work the same way, in that damage is absorbed and the armour/plate will decay based on the amount of absorbed damage and the durability.

Pretty much if you take a 10 damage hit while wearing a 15 protection armour with 10 protection plates, the armour will absorb the 10 damage, and decay for 10 damage. The plate will also absorb 10 damage, and decay for that 10 damage. This will effectively double your armour decay.

But since the pieces decay quadratically off of the damage absorbed, splitting up a higher damage hit into two parts will lower your armour decay.
 
Hijacker27 said:
Well, to simplify things for you slightly, when you get hit, the full initial damage is done to both the armour and the plate. They both work the same way, in that damage is absorbed and the armour/plate will decay based on the amount of absorbed damage and the durability.

Pretty much if you take a 10 damage hit while wearing a 15 protection armour with 10 protection plates, the armour will absorb the 10 damage, and decay for 10 damage. The plate will also absorb 10 damage, and decay for that 10 damage. This will effectively double your armour decay.

But since the pieces decay quadratically off of the damage absorbed, splitting up a higher damage hit into two parts will lower your armour decay.
Click to expand...

Wasnt there a thread testing these on this forum somewhere? I seem to remember reading it

Rgds

Ace
 
Armour + Plates are always more eco in my opinion if you take more than they can protect - reason:

When you hunt longer you'll take more damage as the armour decays more and you'll end up fapping more.
When you got plates on the decay is divided and you take less damage.
 
Armor damage impact is exponential so the more damage an armor absorbs the more decay per point is created.

For example 20 pts of damage will decay your armor more then double 10 pts of damage (As long as your not over protected).

Because of that if you can spread the damage between plates and armor it reduces the decay since more of the damage is absorbed by the lower decay levels which are cheaper.

Let me find the formula so I can give you an exact mathematical analysis of what armor and plates do decay wise.
 
Lol and there was me thinking it was a straight forward yes or no. Oh well, it was a hope at best

Rgds

Ace
 
Ace Flyster said:
Please please be my mentor harm ;) i notice you didnt give an answer though
Click to expand...


Ahh but a good mentor let's the disciple find things out for himself, teach a man to fish and all that :)
But the second post with the link to entropedia holds the answers.

In general the most eco use is to have armor and plates combined, preferably matches so that the plate offers the same protection as the armor, and combined you don't get hit for 1.0 damage too often.


Or in your case gremlin+5b for the fresco's (and stop wasting your hard earned mining peds! We are a mining soc after all! (ducks and hides :silly2:))
 
Harmony. said:
We are a mining soc after all! (ducks and hides :silly2:))
Click to expand...
:handgun:
transpdot.gif
 
ehhh..i always thought after some vu couple years ago all armours decay was the same,that it di9dnt matter which armour with which durability you used but that decay was directy determined by damage taken..

hmm..i cannot phrase it the way i want,so let me give an example...if i take 10 damage say on trox..i always thought it dont matter if i wear shadow or gremlin or ghost..decay will be the same on it

if im wrong,i must have wasted quite some decay in all those years hunting :p
 
Well the formula for unlimited armors shows virtually the same decay regardless of durability so on unlimited it does not mean much. Limited armor on the other hand is a large variance in decay depending on durability.

fluske said:
ehhh..i always thought after some vu couple years ago all armours decay was the same,that it di9dnt matter which armour with which durability you used but that decay was directy determined by damage taken..

hmm..i cannot phrase it the way i want,so let me give an example...if i take 10 damage say on trox..i always thought it dont matter if i wear shadow or gremlin or ghost..decay will be the same on it

if im wrong,i must have wasted quite some decay in all those years hunting :p
Click to expand...
 
If armor and plates are UL, yes, armor probably does probably make hunting more eco in the long run since you are paying only repair cost on the armor. If armor is L, you are paying markup on the entire thing, but it'll protect you a bit longer as L armor protects at some level til it's all gone.
 
Last edited:
Here is the decay formula

http://www.codecogs.com/gif.latex?Decay%20=%20\left%28%200.003%20*%20dmg^{1.75}%20+%200.05%20*%20dmg%20\right%29%20*%20\left%28%201-%20\frac{Durability}{100000}%20\right%29

using 3000 durability (lets say both armor and plates are the same for simplicity) I will show how much decay a 20 pt hit will be on just one piece or if it was spread between plates and armor (10 pts each)

20 pt hit

Decay=(.003X20^1.75+.05X20)X(1-3000/100000)

You get 1.52 pec decay

10 pt hit
Decay=(.003X10^1.75+.05X10)X(1-3000/100000)

you get
.65 pec decay times two since the plates absorb 10 pts and armor absorbes 10 pts. You get 1.3 decay or .22 less


Now to think about exponential decay some more let me analyses of a 70 pt hit on a 4000 durability armor
Decay=(.003X70^1.75+.05X70)X(1-4000/100000)

You get 8.24 total decay on the armor.

Lets break that down now by how much each pt of damage on that 70 pts costs.

First 10 pts .64 pecs
second 10 pts .86 pecs
third 10 pts 1.04 pecs
4th 10 pts 1.2 pecs
5th 10 pts 1.35 pecs
6th 10 pts 1.49 pecs
7th 10 pts 1.63 pecs

so lets say you switch armor to protect only 60 pts and plates to protect 10. What you will do is not pay 1.63 pecs decay for the protection from 60-70 pts but instead pay the .64 pecs decay that the first 10 pts of the plates protect.

Its always best to try to get as even split of protection you can to even out the damage to the lower decay levels.
 
When you guys say that you get a 10 point dmg hit, do you mean that the armor just absorbed 10 points and the rest i.e. 2 dmg or whatever was deducted from your hp? as in 2 dmg inflicted blah blah msg in chat window?

please use the words armor absorbed 10 dmg, I'm getting confused... ;)
great thread!
 
that is correct.

Amber Knightley said:
When you guys say that you get a 10 point dmg hit, do you mean that the armor just absorbed 10 points and the rest i.e. 2 dmg or whatever was deducted from your hp? as in 2 dmg inflicted blah blah msg in chat window?

please use the words armor absorbed 10 dmg, I'm getting confused... ;)
great thread!
Click to expand...
 
PopFuzz said:
Well the formula for unlimited armors shows virtually the same decay regardless of durability so on unlimited it does not mean much. Limited armor on the other hand is a large variance in decay depending on durability.
Click to expand...

ah thx,ive never even looked at durability before ,but i will from now on whenever i use limited armours :)
 
Ace Flyster said:
Lol and there was me thinking it was a straight forward yes or no. Oh well, it was a hope at best
Click to expand...

I think a simple rule is: plating an smaller armor to get the same protection as an higher unplated armor is usually cheaper in decay.

Edit: of course assuming you don't overprotect
 
Last edited:
fluske said:
ehhh..i always thought after some vu couple years ago all armours decay was the same,that it di9dnt matter which armour with which durability you used but that decay was directy determined by damage taken..

hmm..i cannot phrase it the way i want,so let me give an example...if i take 10 damage say on trox..i always thought it dont matter if i wear shadow or gremlin or ghost..decay will be the same on it

if im wrong,i must have wasted quite some decay in all those years hunting :p
Click to expand...

For an brief period, years ago, we thought that durability has no effect. Some test was done and the difference was simply not noticable.. until L armors came.

Minimal decay was always in place as far as i remember and hunting small mobs in big armor even went more expansive a few years ago, but the cost effect of high dmg hits got reduced.

Like said, all years ago, but i can't remember a time where choosing the right armor/plate setup wasn't important.
 
Decided to do a small test. We (as a community) know the general formula for figuring decay, however, this might show something interesting.

Test method:

Test #1: Unplated kobold fully repaired after putting it on. 10 hits from Bery puny.

Result: 3 pec decay




Test #2: kobold +5B fully repaired after putting it on. 10 hits from Bery puny.

Result: 6 pec decay





Yes, of course the kobold was already overprotection, but the point is to show that even then, plates take dmg too.

Conclusion: There are plenty of cases where UNplated is WAY more eco. Those cases are when the armor itself can do the job already.

As for the 15+10 vs 25 protection, I'll try to test that a bit later. Gotta run some numbers first.
 
JohnCapital said:
Conclusion: There are plenty of cases where UNplated is WAY more eco. Those cases are when the armor itself can do the job already.
Click to expand...

Well, in those cases one downgrades armor and still add plates, as long as you don't overprotect thats still cheaper. Ok, maybe doesn't make much sense on bery puny. :laugh:

Anyway, i use small setups like Gnome + 5A or even smaller ones a lot, and the difference to just using a larger amor unplated is noticable.

Btw. i notice a lot of people have 5B and 6A but no smaller plates., i think thats a mistake. I avoid 5B in example except for the biggest mobs i hunt.
 
Yes, the puny test was silly, :laugh: but it proved a point. When you're out hunting big mobs, and you let a lil exa or something chew you, it costs a bit more than you think.

Meanwhile, I did test #2:

UNplated ghost vs vigi+5B on bery prowler. Both armors give 19 impact protection.

Unfortunately, the bery got 11 hits on the vigi+5B, however. here's the repair bills:

Unplated ghost


vigi+5B


Due to the extra 1 hit, and factoring in whatever micro-pec of dmg, I'm willing to consider these the exact same cost, or as close enough to matter.

and yes, I completely agree having multi-plates to choose from increases your options. My collection includes 2A, 5A, 5B, 6A & 6B.

But having a collection is only useful if you are not a long-term camper. Then of course you get the best set you can for your situation, and sell the rest for ammo ped.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top