Menu
What's New
By:
Filters

Armour decay – the truth (stats and instruction for testing)

Scatha

Scatha

Guardian
Joined
Sep 14, 2005
Posts
231
Location
Germany
Since the alteration of the armour decay there has been a lot of discussion and guessing about the new decay stats but no proved figures so far (or I didn't see them, if so I'm sorry). So I decided to find a possibility to analyse the armour decay in spite of the varying damage every mob deals nowadays and to do some tests to provide you here not only with an instruction but with some first results, too.

How to test:
Use a complete and fully repaired armour set.
Get a mob that deals sufficient more damage as your armour absorbs.
Take care that every hit your getting gives you more then 1 damage point, to assure you can calculate 1 hit = damage amount armour absorbs.
Use a mob with only one damage type (i.e. Ambulimax does impact only). The results of tests with mobs dealing more then one damage type (i.e. Argonaut: cut and impact) varied in a wide range.
Count carefully the number of hits (not the damage amount) you get
Relog before repairing for server update.
Repeat the test minimum one time to assure everything went right and you are getting the same result as from the first test.

Calculation:
Absorbed damage = number of hits x armour protection for this damage type
Armour decay = repair costs for complete armour / absorbed damage

Results:

armourdecay.jpg


By testing Ghost armour with Ambulimax (impact) and Cersumon (electric) and Rascal with Ambulimax young and old I could assure that neither damage type nor mob maturity have a bearing on the decay of the armour.

Thanks for lending to Orion (Angel), EyeContact (Ghost) and Analytic Thunder (Shadow) for the tests.
 
Last edited:
From what I can see this looks like a good test. Thanks!!
 
just a few points, if u use singledamage mobs as ambu you only need one armor part, they all decay the same, they just get hit a diffrent amount of times (or atleast they did in my minitest). however you only need one part to compare anyhow.

you list ambu damage as stab only in the beginning and impact only in the end, i think the impact is the right one ;)

damage absorbed? the VU listing when it changed indicates full damage taken, not absorbed
The amount of decay is based on attack type and the amount of damage dealt. Decay only occurs when an armor can protect for the kind of damage
Click to expand...

anyhow, good to see someone start up a chart like this, because im to lazy these days ;)
 
Ty So Much!

Scatha ... Ty very much!

I was asking in one thred to do this but none seemed to be intrested.
Here is the Link to my thread with a shorter ,similar test...

I was thinking if you could do a test with Shogun. I would like to buy one set but i wouldn't like to spend 100+ ped for just testing it....

Could you do this for all of us? :rolleyes:
PLzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz :bowdown:

+rep (and i'll give you more everytime i can)
 
Ouch, bad news for ghost owners :D Great test. So armors DO have different decay :D It seems ghost decays more then nemesis after all. Interesting.
 
e-lite said:
Ouch, bad news for ghost owners :D Great test. So armors DO have different decay :D It seems ghost decays more then nemesis after all. Interesting.
Click to expand...

Ghost has 4 extra impact protection, which should explain the extra decay. And something to add regarding Roth's post; if mobs do multiple damage types, all types are applied to a single part of the body now, unlike before (unless MA have changed it again :p).
 
Avery said:
Ghost has 4 extra impact protection, which should explain the extra decay. And something to add regarding Roth's post; if mobs do multiple damage types, all types are applied to a single part of the body now, unlike before (unless MA have changed it again :p).
Click to expand...

It says "pec per damage" on the chart. In that case the chart is wrong then. But yeah, you are right, the chart shows total cost for the protection for each armor.
 
Last edited:
Hi All,

This is something about durability from www.pe-auction.com:
"from pe-auction"
Durability and Max TT help you find the decay of an armor part. So, for example, a fully repaired Pixie Armor harness has a tt of 2.90 PED and a durability of 1200. Every time that you get hit on the harness, the harness decays 2.90 / 1200 = .00242 PED or 0.242 PEC per point of damage.(V)

Also, over the course of a hunt, the total amount that you are hit on each part is not equal. It will decay as follows:
- 1/3 for harness
- 1/6 for arms and thighs
- 1/9 for face/helmet, gloves and shins

and now me.

Now that an armor only decays for damage it protects against this is the easiest way to look at it. it doesn't matter what type of damage. As long as your armour offers protection against the damage you take the number that matters is the total durability as every hit will take a figure off this total. Ghost has 2000 durability and will therefore take 2000 points combined total of ANY protected damage before becoming 0TT value. (actually 3% minimum but we will ignore this for now)

Full Ghost: (303 ped full TT)
Harness (74 ped full TT)
74 / 2000 durability = 0.037pec per point dmg.
Mask (48 ped)
48 / 2000 dur = 0.024pec.
Gloves (46 ped)
46 / 2000 dur = 0.023
Arms + Shins + Thighs (45 ped)
45 / 2000 dur = 0.0225pec.

So actual decay costs will depend on where you are hit AND on type of damage received. For those who are just interested in numbers and not their practical use the average decay of Ghost is calculated by taking all 6 parts (303 ped) and dividing by 6 x 2000 durability (12000) which = 0.02525pec per point taken IF you received equal damage to every part at the same time
on every attack received.
 
Last edited:
Roth said:
you list ambu damage as stab only in the beginning
Click to expand...
Opps... typo. Corrected that, it has to be 'impact'. Thanks for the hint.

e-lite said:
It says "pec per damage" on the chart. In that case the chart is wrong then.
Click to expand...
Sorry but why is it wrong? I hope I didn't cause confusion by using PED for repaircosts and PEC for decay. If you calculate the decay with the given absorbed dmg and repair costs you should see it is PEC/dmg. Or did I miss something else?


levithanikos said:
I was thinking if you could do a test with Shogun. I would like to buy one set but i wouldn't like to spend 100+ ped for just testing it....
Click to expand...
I'm very happy to see that there is a great interesst in this tests :) . But sorry levithanikos, I won't do any further tests, as it costed me two weeks time and about 500 PED to get this results. The data in the chart are only the tests with repeatable results. This is why I posted the iunstruction how to do it, too. I invite everybody to do this tests with other armour so we get hopefully the stats for all armour in a few weeks.
 
Scatha said:
Sorry but why is it wrong? I hope I didn't cause confusion by using PED for repaircosts and PEC for decay. If you calculate the decay with the given absorbed dmg and repair costs you should see it is PEC/dmg. Or did I miss something else?
Click to expand...

well yeah, the chart says "pec/damage" but shows "pec/total damage absorbed". pec/damage would be what it costs per 1 damage to be absorbed. So in short you need to rename that colomn to "pec/total damage" and add another one for "pec/damage".

Other then that it's an impressive research. :)
 
Nice posts both Scatha and Kyndig. (+rep to both)

Kyndig said:
...So, for example, a fully repaired Pixie Armor harness has a tt of 2.90 PED and a durability of 1200. Every time that you get hit on the harness, the harness decays 2.90 / 1200 = .00242 PED or 0.242 PEC...
Click to expand...
You mean it decay that much per HP it absorbs, right? Not per HIT as it says.

Kyndig said:
......So actual decay costs will depend on where you are hit AND on type of damage received...
Click to expand...
Ehh... How did you end up with the conclusion that the decay depends on the type of damage?

Kyndig said:
Full Ghost: (303 ped full TT)
Harness (74 ped full TT)
74 / 2000 durability = 0.037pec per point dmg.
Mask (48 ped)
48 / 2000 dur = 0.024pec.
Gloves (46 ped)
46 / 2000 dur = 0.023
Arms + Shins + Thighs (45 ped)
45 / 2000 dur = 0.0225pec...
Click to expand...
In all the above calculations you do this:
X PED / Y durability = Z PEC. Is this intentional? It seems a bit strange to me.
 
e-lite said:
Ouch, bad news for ghost owners
Click to expand...

why ?
decay is not bad at all , its very nice i think , just lil abone neme , and lower from far to angel ..


something interessing is that rascal and nemesis got exactly same decay for exactly same protection.
do you tryed to see if decay per domage is proportional with given protection on a specific domage type?

exemple :
pixi (9) => gobelin (12) => 3 more protection =>0.009 pec more decay per domage
gobelin (9)=> nemesis (15) =>3 more protection protection point =>0.009 pec more decay per domage

this mean protection is near to 0.009 pec per 3 domage protected

ghost looks like very near to that rule too
 
Etopia, read my next post after that.
 
e-lite said:
well yeah, the chart says "pec/damage" but shows "pec/total damage absorbed". pec/damage would be what it costs per 1 damage to be absorbed. So in short you need to rename that colomn to "pec/total damage" and add another one for "pec/damage".
Click to expand...

sorry , but i take chart as it is , and in first place , i do not doubt about the chart poster job.

still , its nice som of us doubt , and verify math.

e-lite said:
Etopia, read my next post after that.
Click to expand...
and after your post its what i have done :

ghost protection : 19
number of hit : 80
total domage absorbed : 1520
total decay : 1.30 ped

130/1520 = 0.0855 pec per damage point absorbed.
still ghost looks good
 
Etopia said:
ghost protection : 19
number of hit : 80
total domage absorbed : 1520
total decay : 1.30 ped

130/1520 = 0.0855 pec per damage point absorbed.
still ghost looks good
Click to expand...

Yes thats nice, but 0.066 pec per damage for nemesis ;)
 
e-lite said:
Yes thats nice, but 0.066 pec per damage for nemesis ;)
Click to expand...

:eek:
from my math :

domage absorbed 15
hit 151
total domage absorbed 2265
total decay 1.66

166 / 2265 = 0.0733

chart still right.
 
Etopia said:
:eek:
from my math :

domage absorbed 15
hit 151
total domage absorbed 2265
total decay 1.66

166 / 2265 = 0.0733

chart still right.
Click to expand...

Don't know how I calculated, I must have hit some button wrong. I am calculexic, so it's not so easy with numbers. but 0.0733 for nemesis is still lower then 0.0855 for ghost :)
 
Ive done some testing on my own on drones and find some difference on Vigi on that part, however these are not absolute nr. hence I culd have missed some hit or count some hit dubble but it give a fairly good idea that also different mob give different mutch decay on armor.

drones gen 01-03
Rascal ~0,8 pec/hit (700 hits)
Vigi ~1,67 pec/hit (370 hits)

and even if the Vigi cost more decay on drones I save more on my fap by using it so total economy is better.

So I think armors needs to be tested against several different mobs
 
Last edited:
i have done som math , and decay per domage absorbed is directly propotional to domage protection given.

formulle :

pec/domage = 0.00279 x A + 0.02926

where A is domage absobed by the armor. ( still this work for impact , need data to see for other kind of domage)
 
Last edited:
I guess i can add viking to the list
0.09pec /damage taken

it can be anywhere between 0.085 and 0.094 i guess :p was only a mini test vs thoriofoid seeker and it was done while damge was always max :)
 
Etopia said:
i have done som math , and decay per domage absorbed is directly propotional to domage protection given.

formulle :

pec/domage = 0.00279 x A + 0.02926

where A is domage absobed by the armor. ( still this work for impact , need data to see for other kind of domage)
Click to expand...
That would mean that the numbers on either Ghost or Nem are wrong, since Nem according to your formula, should have higher decay than Ghost.
If I understood your formula correctly?
 
Really NICE job Scatha :wise:
Its nice too see that we still have people that take the time and cost to do some research for all of us entropian players. :D
 
Vedder said:
That would mean that the numbers on either Ghost or Nem are wrong, since Nem according to your formula, should have higher decay than Ghost.
If I understood your formula correctly?
Click to expand...

neither ghost or neme are wrong.
but its hard to have the exact number.as tester we round here and there , and probably when MA put stat on armor they round it too.
the formula give a good idea of the resul for all armor , and alow us to avoid testing them all.

for neme you find :
0.00279 x 15 + 0.02926= 0.07161
with chart for neme : 0.07290
with chart for rascal : 0.07250

ghost :
0.00279 x 19 + 0.02926=0.08227
chart 0.08522


all are pretty near , but its hard to be more accurate since decay mesure is done at 1 pec.

more acurate methode could be for exemple use club to hit only 1 amor part one time in a ring , then go mesure decay with accurate methode ( use % of the repair terminal).
 
Great work (+rep).

What I find interesting is that the difference in cost per unit of protection seems to be much less than the main guide would have you believe. (For example, it suggests that decay on pixie is three times less than that on goblin.)

Maybe it matters more when there are multiple damage types.
 
So if i understand correct, the decay of an armor is determined by the highest protection it can give in one class?

So for example, when you are against a creature that does exactly 10 stab damage each time it hits, the ghost armor will decay more then the nemesis, because the ghost has a better impact protection?

Somehow this doesnt realy make sense, but these test results seem to imply this. Else the test with the electric mob would have given lower decay results.

Good test btw!


EDIT: I just remebered this is not the case, i have seen a test where vigi had lower decay then pixie vs ambus. I am confused now, can anyone explaing the reason for this oddity?
 
Last edited:
wish they would leave it alone just set it to whatever and stop playing with it, you never know where you stand
 
Witte So for example said:
i dont think we can say that
you have to look at stab protection i guess if you creature do stab.
we need 1 test for type of domage.
and i guess it work same for eatch domage type , but probably eatch type got its own decay amount.
but i think the amor that protect the most againt the stab will decay the most for a stab domage.
Click to expand...
 
Nice one thx for the stats + rep for the truble :D
 
Nice work, Scatha! Thanks for taking to time to gather this info and share it with us! :thumbup:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top