Hey I was wondering if you wouldn't mind running my Claws/SR through your scoring system. Take your time of course, whenever you have time to get around to it I'd greatly appreciate it. Here's the link:
[u]Click this DataLink to open the build![u]
[ QUOTE ]
Seeing everyone else has been giving this a shot today, i'd love to see what my survivability is if you can Werner, thanks.
[/ QUOTE ]
I'm guessing the empty slot is for the other +3% defense unique? With that, 638. I'm not accounting for Against All Odds in any way, though, which could take you to 690 in ideal circumstances.
"That's because Werner can't do maths." - BunnyAnomaly
"Four hours in, and I was no longer making mistakes, no longer detoggling. I was a machine." - Werner
Videos of Other Stupid Scrapper Tricks
[ QUOTE ]
Hey I was wondering if you wouldn't mind running my Claws/SR through your scoring system. Take your time of course, whenever you have time to get around to it I'd greatly appreciate it. Here's the link:
[/ QUOTE ]
646
"That's because Werner can't do maths." - BunnyAnomaly
"Four hours in, and I was no longer making mistakes, no longer detoggling. I was a machine." - Werner
Videos of Other Stupid Scrapper Tricks
Ooh, thanks, I'll have to work on getting that up higher.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Do you figure in hitpoints in this number?
[/ QUOTE ]
Yes and no. We're looking at sustainable average incoming damage as if it comes as smoothly as possible with no spikes, or more accurately with the exact spikes to match your heals. At that point, hit points don't really matter directly. On the other hand, they matter a great deal indirectly, as they buff regeneration and some heals. Generally speaking, hit points have a linear effect on the number. Twice the hit points will give you roughly twice the number.
[/ QUOTE ]
I would consider this a major flaw in the rating system then. There's no question a 1800hp scrapper has a much greater survivabilty factor then a 1400hp scrapper with the same stats... and it's not from 28% more regen.
I look at it from a "what are the odds of the thing happening that's going to kill me" perspective. If the thing that kills me is getting hit by 2 alpha shots in succession, and each shot has a 5% chance of landing, then my chance of dieing is 1 in 400. If I increase my hp by enough to turn that into 3 alpha shots, i'm now at 1 in 8000.
That's an oversimplifed model, that assumes for example, that I can always get back to full hp after the barrage of alpha shots that we're calculating... and that all alpha shots are created equal...etc. But it illistrates my point. In this game, very few AVs can string together 1-2 combos of over 1600 hp, but most can do over 1336.
Your calculation would rate the 1600hp build and the 1400hp build as nearly identical, yet I think you'll agree, in practice they most certainly are not.
I gotta make pain. I gotta make things right. I gotta stop what's comin'. 'Least I gotta try.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Do you figure in hitpoints in this number?
[/ QUOTE ]
Yes and no. We're looking at sustainable average incoming damage as if it comes as smoothly as possible with no spikes, or more accurately with the exact spikes to match your heals. At that point, hit points don't really matter directly. On the other hand, they matter a great deal indirectly, as they buff regeneration and some heals. Generally speaking, hit points have a linear effect on the number. Twice the hit points will give you roughly twice the number.
[/ QUOTE ]
I would consider this a major flaw in the rating system then. There's no question a 1800hp scrapper has a much greater survivabilty factor then a 1400hp scrapper with the same stats... and it's not from 28% more regen.
I look at it from a "what are the odds of the thing happening that's going to kill me" perspective. If the thing that kills me is getting hit by 2 alpha shots in succession, and each shot has a 5% chance of landing, then my chance of dieing is 1 in 400. If I increase my hp by enough to turn that into 3 alpha shots, i'm now at 1 in 8000.
That's an oversimplifed model, that assumes for example, that I can always get back to full hp after the barrage of alpha shots that we're calculating... and that all alpha shots are created equal...etc. But it illistrates my point. In this game, very few AVs can string together 1-2 combos of over 1600 hp, but most can do over 1336.
Your calculation would rate the 1600hp build and the 1400hp build as nearly identical, yet I think you'll agree, in practice they most certainly are not.
[/ QUOTE ]
I'll agree they aren't identical in practice, yes.
Basically, I already covered this briefly in the discussion of the difference between average performance and the discreet effects. I'm sure Arcanaville covered it much better. I think the right answer is to write a simulator, and I'm not going to go that far. I could add some sort of fudge factor to overweight hit points, but I'm not a big fan of just making up fudge factors. I prefer, instead, to just keep the weaknesses in mind when using my model.
I'll keep stressing that these numbers aren't particularly meaningful, and are best used for comparisons of rather similar builds, which is how I've personally used them. Even then, it's good to keep in mind what they're over and underweighting to avoid being led astray.
Another way to think of these numbers is something like DPS. Hopefully we all know that DPS is only moderately related to in-game damage output, and our simple models of doing damage will only approximate real damage in-game on edge cases like soloing pylons. They don't tell us much at all about AoE, which is actually king in much or most of the game.
But, similar to DPS, I find them useful personally. They're just no substitute for an understanding of what you'll actually face in the game. If you're facing down AVs, you'll want the hit points to survive the hits. It doesn't matter how fast you heal if you can get killed by two hits in a row, because eventually, that's gonna land.
"That's because Werner can't do maths." - BunnyAnomaly
"Four hours in, and I was no longer making mistakes, no longer detoggling. I was a machine." - Werner
Videos of Other Stupid Scrapper Tricks
Thanks Werner, alot lower then I expected, but it is a PvP build. In your sheet soft cap at 45% is the same as 68%? Mind you 68% melee and I'm like oh wow, something actually hit me, wow. If i hit elude then its 3 mins of me feeling like I grabed the lil star out of Mario.
The build used to have less def, still all at soft cap, and less net recov, but 200% rech. it was fun having almost no "down" time, but still i got hit more.
Also is there a way to rework your spread sheet for PvP analysis. I would love to work with you on it if it's possible.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Seeing everyone else has been giving this a shot today, i'd love to see what my survivability is if you can Werner, thanks.
[/ QUOTE ]
I'm guessing the empty slot is for the other +3% defense unique? With that, 638. I'm not accounting for Against All Odds in any way, though, which could take you to 690 in ideal circumstances.
[/ QUOTE ]
Thanks mate, lower than I thought she'd be, and another reason to work on my new Dark/Inv (or maybe Fire/SR with Aid Self could be the better choice)
[ QUOTE ]
Thanks Werner, alot lower then I expected, but it is a PvP build.
[/ QUOTE ]
Exactly, it's a PvP build, and it also doesn't mean you can't do incredible things with the build in PvE if you're willing to violate the unreasonable assumptions baked into the spreadsheet, like not using inspirations or temporary powers, not having anyone on your team buffing you, and so on. I'm sure you already know that since it's your character, but yeah, once again, don't take the number too seriously.
[ QUOTE ]
In your sheet soft cap at 45% is the same as 68%? Mind you 68% melee and I'm like oh wow, something actually hit me, wow. If i hit elude then its 3 mins of me feeling like I grabed the lil star out of Mario.
The build used to have less def, still all at soft cap, and less net recov, but 200% rech. it was fun having almost no "down" time, but still i got hit more.
[/ QUOTE ]
Right, my sheet assumes the normal PvE enemy to-hit, which is 50%, which means that any defense over 45% doesn't change their chance to hit you at all. A few enemies have to-hit, but it's been few and far between. Architect Entertainment is changing that somewhat, so I may need to reevaluate at some point.
[ QUOTE ]
Also is there a way to rework your spread sheet for PvP analysis. I would love to work with you on it if it's possible.
[/ QUOTE ]
Well... maybe. I don't PvP, so the project doesn't interest me much. But some of it seems like it would be easy. I can make some suggestions and maybe work with you a little on it. Warning I tend to bite off more than I can chew, feel overwhelmed, and then suddenly I stop answering most PMs for a while, which kind of makes me a dick, but ah, well. Anyway, there's a to-hit formula hidden in my spreadsheet with 50% plugged in. I didn't put that number external anywhere, but it wouldn't be too hard to pull it out and plug in some other number. 50% to hit is probably ridiculously low for PvP, which is part of why my DM/SR build with 2242 would get get me my [censored] handed to me going up against your build with 396. The other and probably bigger factor is skill. I'm great at beating on big bags of hit points with stupid AI that spam the same attacks over and over. I have no clue how to fight a player.
Anyway, the formula looks something like this:
=E4*(50%-MAX($D488;E$487))*(100%-$C488)
The 50% there is the to-hit of your enemy. I'd put some cell at the top of the sheet for the enemy to-hit, and plug in 75% or something. Use it in the formula. Also add another term to the max which is 5% less than that. I've been doing that manually in my head, but that's retarded. So you'd want something like this:
=E4*($A$2-MAX($D488;E$487;$A$2-5%))*(100%-$C488)
I should set up the formula like that anyway, even if I never change the number for my own purposes.
Yeah, maybe I just need to write a more user-friendly version of this thing, with more readable templates for various power combinations, and more things that you can plug in rather than having them baked into the formulas.
What other changes would you want for PvP? You might want to change the percentage distribution of various attack types and positions, but that's already enterable.
Here's one big problem for PvP analysis so VERY much is based on skill, far more so than in PvE. So how much is a number going to mean? Ah, but I guess it serves the same purpose as it does for me comparing various versions of builds for a single character as I try to tweak and optimize. Since it's all for you, the skill level is the same regardless, so it'll provide at least SOME information. Not a ton, but some, and some may be better than none.
Hmmm.
"That's because Werner can't do maths." - BunnyAnomaly
"Four hours in, and I was no longer making mistakes, no longer detoggling. I was a machine." - Werner
Videos of Other Stupid Scrapper Tricks
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Seeing everyone else has been giving this a shot today, i'd love to see what my survivability is if you can Werner, thanks.
[/ QUOTE ]
I'm guessing the empty slot is for the other +3% defense unique? With that, 638. I'm not accounting for Against All Odds in any way, though, which could take you to 690 in ideal circumstances.
[/ QUOTE ]
Thanks mate, lower than I thought she'd be, and another reason to work on my new Dark/Inv (or maybe Fire/SR with Aid Self could be the better choice)
[/ QUOTE ]
Eh, not really. John_Printemps' shield guide has a Broad Sword/Shield build that hits 2177. So it can play with the big boys for certain. And probably the biggest difference between the two builds is just Aid Self. And you know what? I HATE Aid Self. Keep in mind that I'm not taking inspiration use into account. So you might skip Aid Self because green inspirations are faster and easier. Frankly, I think that's a good choice for the vast majority of this game. But it'll KILL your numbers in my spreadsheet. So don't sweat it.
That said, both Dark Melee/Invuln and Fire/Super Reflexes are GREAT combinations. But then, they're scrappers. All scrappers are great.
"That's because Werner can't do maths." - BunnyAnomaly
"Four hours in, and I was no longer making mistakes, no longer detoggling. I was a machine." - Werner
Videos of Other Stupid Scrapper Tricks
Well Warner, you would have to also add the Zone Resists Buffs giving to each Architype, alon with DR and Travel Suppression. Say I heal with DP for bout 1100 out of a PvP zone, but in a PvP zones it's around 980.
Most PvPers have a acc or to hit at bout 75%-115%, perception and stealth are other issues, a simple steath proc, or the stealth power can make you invisible to some other builds, but I would make 7 different worksheets all within the same work book. 1 for each villain AT. I could run the Numbers for each AT. I just would need help making the formulas.
Skill isn't as big as a factor as you might have thought. I13 kinda [censored] the whole PvP world up.
But yeah send me a PM if you want to try to make a cell sheet.
Skill still does count though. If you take two players with absolutely identical builds and put them in a PvP match, the better player will win 9 times out of 10.
Say if you and I were put in a PvP match with our claws/regens built exactly the same. You would win the majority of the matches because you PvP more than I do, and have the advantage of more PvP experience with scrappers. It would probably be a much more even fight if I were to use my blaster because I have more experience with that build.
Put us in the same builds in PvE and our performance would probably be very similar. I have a different playstyle by far, which is why our builds look nothing alike. You would suck running my build as bad as I would suck running yours.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Dechs Kaison See, it's gems like these that make me check Claws' post history every once in a while to make sure I haven't missed anything good lately. |
Guess I'd have to figure out how diminished returns work, but I'm sure there's a way to take them into account. The spreadsheet assumes you're spamming your survival powers as fast as they come up, so I'd do diminished returns based on that same frequency somehow.
I'll want to clean up the PvE version first, but that's at least a step in the right direction.
"That's because Werner can't do maths." - BunnyAnomaly
"Four hours in, and I was no longer making mistakes, no longer detoggling. I was a machine." - Werner
Videos of Other Stupid Scrapper Tricks
Hmm...this looks interesting. You think you could see how well my Spines/Willpower stacks up on that spreadsheet?
<font class="small">Code:[/color]<hr /><pre>| Copy & Paste this data into Mids' Hero Designer to view the build |
|-------------------------------------------------------------------|
|MxDz;1402;710;1420;HEX;|
|78DAA593D94F534114C6E776A12DB49452DAB2236BCB76A16 F2E894645139426541|
|05C1072A9035CADB74DEF65A9BEF8E29B4F9AE81341659177 5CE39FA652CF326D78|
|F726FD7E33A7E79C99F93293D9990A0AF1F28AD01AAFE70DD B5E99CB958C625196F|
|C994DC770CC82E5BDFACC302C9F102256FD6F2523F352EAD9 4D339FB7DB6BD129B9|
|262D5BEA8B102E16B66529326D6DC892B41CBD3A08CE160A7 97D461A45D35AE7C94|
|DD3B1A46D87D4647DC381BF22349BB6B64CDB5C35F3A6538E DC289A39FD5AE17179|
|2563D88E2C955B614BC3F0DBC3BDD157F18835405AB836182 6C1F384F194B080E91|
|AA57B451C065DA22EC16825F8B31AE6F9E708F577091F7CAA 08AAB42D6A54BF4D08|
|EE30CA84C6E78C178445A872F35A6EF7000C92A2699091243 4A7081F21CFCBDD5DD|
|E5D971051D1BCE7C20E2DFB844F90E053CBFBF6A977CB0121 7EC83822B47E661C13|
|EE4349402D1F68A273B447185142678C1087BC06EE2E1A389 48050488542A7147A0|
|0A1B0A6D126C3EC51277BD4CD1EDD8384082FE78ADCA28375 67CF263C8484A8DA4F|
|F40D1DECDC5BC63BC67BC201E4C5D469636C762F9BDDCB66F 7B2D9FD6C763F9B5D0|
|75509EE2E12290A1D42A84D356AFB4DBDFBFF1006FE324E19 15C290702396A0AA43|
|6DB3836D1B62DB86D8B6247BE483BC2E75DEAECB7477927CD 0E402E108127AD4F23|
|D27B4A3E12F8CAF8C6F8491EF8C1F043F54F5A9B67DECD208 BB34C62E2D43C220B7|
|750F8ED04A63A30C9D305E814FCCC36152EA52A50EA872FC8 8714C70419F5165D8E|
|82B0AB921A4ABA3EB7C6127F8C24EF0859DE00BEB81BC4995 37C916A5D9A2345B94|
|668B3A3DB5B729C46D8116CD9C0D0568D5594FED71096D804 CE8F1D45EE97F7D3F8|
|3D53E813BF5A0F328B320DA028E96501EE1741947068E5651 7238ADFC0A56F71A3E|
|8F1BBA807211E512CA6B4CF2E1CB694009A284501A51C2284 D285194384A3BCA2E4|
|AE51FA5C8F591|
|-------------------------------------------------------------------|</pre><hr />
If it means anything, the empty slot in SoW is for the Gladiator's Armor: 3%, which I do have. Unfortunately, Mid's hasn't updated for I14 so I had to leave it empty
Rising to the Challenge: Spines/Willpower
[ QUOTE ]
Hmm...this looks interesting. You think you could see how well my Spines/Willpower stacks up on that spreadsheet?
[/ QUOTE ]
OK, with the +3% defense IO thrown in, looks like 640 to 1035 depending on the number of targets in range of Rise to the Challenge. That doesn't take any of the slows into account.
"That's because Werner can't do maths." - BunnyAnomaly
"Four hours in, and I was no longer making mistakes, no longer detoggling. I was a machine." - Werner
Videos of Other Stupid Scrapper Tricks
Okay, this thread has got me curious to how my new dark melee/invul project stacks up with the competition.
<font class="small">Code:[/color]<hr /><pre>| Copy & Paste this data into Mids' Hero Designer to view the build |
|-------------------------------------------------------------------|
|MxDz;1404;710;1420;HEX;|
|78DAA5936D53125114C7EFF2E00A2C4F8108A280A4210AABB ECBA72C35679CA4489|
|C5E55B6E24D99988576F1815EF5012CEB03F8419A3E5B43E7 E1C2F4BE1DF8FFEE3D|
|F79CB3F79C7BB776B36708F1755B6891DDB6E5BA278DA6637 5BBD2F1D7ACF35633D|
|0E85CB60BFB962D75214466B87852936D29CD3DCBF9C4C3C2 68654F7E94B62BCD03|
|FBEAB26D4BC73A6DB55BBD7EFCC0BE908EB47BE67060D43B9 DB6B9DFEAD9D275797|
|228AD6ECB3E0FAB95F38B1ECC82346B74A53C8B3FEFB69AE6 4EE7AC7F52B3DC9E74|
|FA69D85519FE9F717BF40CFCA20E280ACF6BC611C1D760340 1AB62EC98661B18A55|
|19457E4605012B379C62CA15A2438BA7283EC1A671FE3ECE3 9C7D9CB307397B90B3|
|6F41945745795F68B8621C326A84C84BC62B42AC4E7021CAC F513EFF15E58B5D131|
|EDC30FA84E417C225B8EBEA253AA74DF1BB529C36CD7B4A9F 12A63E10362124A00A|
|0F70E1535CF834173ECD85FBC12FC47E2254A5501D4C61650 ACF91691B4C51952DC|
|AD9729C2DC7D90A9C2D057E71F6F3C4FF0066442147199627 C09C16E3E09060077F|
|E2D68331C93B405214BED16CF93B61F507E3276112A226B80 5DA44C68BF97259404|
|03C859549B5D7491CCC881B3065A863037F66CB83CEB36B84 87EB8C0DC62661EE1E|
|9010CF2020AB6914950D6A78BA7321864178146644185182A 6E31BF9F5330378441|
|F2C79755A79BE4825BE4825BE4825BE48653EB47280AAD981 A8A2EA6F3146AD2CC7|
|09CB49C22AB7CF0B7EF3CA6F9ECF6191CF6191CF6191CFC10 77E0BAACD0B5C4D85A|
|BA9703515AEA6CAD554B99A5D885A52D52C2DD1FEAEC164D2 973110E61D35EC0998|
|5654CB572AE435ED1B7D9BF0C3361CFE6BE16B55F78D3E31A 19153DE37FA38FFEBF|
|9650CF3048E82A0C7287510ED0D8EDEA2BCC3E97B1C59383A 4569E274F0DB186E35|
|FA1837B486B28EB281728B4E7A08248462A08451222851941 84A0225853285728F3|
|2F80BA45FEA9F|
|-------------------------------------------------------------------|</pre><hr />
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'm curious as to how you account for IH and MoG. Do you just figure out their average contribution over time? Or do you have some other method
[/ QUOTE ]
Yeah, since the base idea here is average survivability over time, yes, I just work out the average contribution over time. So for Instant Healing, what's the average additional healing it provides over time, with a little extra complexity if Dull Pain isn't permament. For Moment of Glory, I use a time-weighted average of resists and defense with it up and down. It would be better instead to use a time-weighted average of survivability with it up and down, and I'll probably change that at some point.
To explain that in a little more detail, say you're at 25% to all defense half the time, and some power puts you at 45% defense half the time, no resists, and you heal 60 hit points per second. I'd average to 35% defense, so 15% of attacks getting through, and 60/15% = 400, which is the score I'd give.
But let's look at it a little more realistically. Half of the time, we're at 25% defense, 25% of attacks getting through, 60/25% = 240. The other half of the time, we're at 45%, 5% of attacks getting through, 60/5% = 1200. Our average performance over time is actually (240 + 1200) / 2 = 720, not 400.
Now, I chose the example to exaggerate the problem, but in any case, it's something I should fix at some point.
[/ QUOTE ]
Strangely enough, the "wrong" way might actually be the right way in this case. The question is whether you want the average score or the average survivability. What you're currently calculating is roughly a measure of average survivability. The proposed calculation is the average score.
The issue is that fluctuating scores only help the player in two main circumstances: first: if the actual threat is variable, and the player can align their own variable performance to that variable threat, they can leverage that variability. So if the player is diving head first into a large spawn, the incoming damage will of course tend to be higher at the start of the fight, and lower at the end. Powers like heals can help in that environment, because they can theoretically be expended at the start of the fight when they are most needed, and then recharged during periods when they are less needed.
Alternatively, the player could deliberately *seek* more hazardous environments (with presumptively higher rewards) when their survivability was higher, and "downshift" when it was lower. A regen scrapper, for example, could be a little more conservative when IH was down, and more aggressive when IH was up, and in that way make better use of the extra strength granted by that power.
The thing is that at least in very rough terms, the first situation tends to "average out" and you end up with an average survivability strength that is comparable with the average size of the threat. However, the second case doesn't necessarily average out because it can more easily be manipulated by the player.
An extreme example would be the case of a player that has 30% defense most of the time, but can jump to 45% defense with Elude for short periods of time with long recharge. If Elude is up, say, 25% of the time then in one sense we could say that the average survivability strength in this case is comparable to about 33.75% defense, but in reality the benefit can be higher because in theory that player might get full mileage out of the 30% defense during most of the mission, and then on top of that get full mileage out of the 45% defense at the end by using it against the boss. If the boss had commensurately higher rewards per unit time (they don't necessarily) then the true "benefit" of that variable mitigation is actually closer to the average of the scores, rather than the score of the averages.
However, in general the score of the averages (what your sheet does now) is less likely to generate weird numbers than the average of the scores (the proposed calculation modification) and its for that reason I don't calculate that way in general.
By the way, my Giant Mega Spreadsheet (the latest version of which is still retrievable by the link on the OP of that thread) can theoretically be used to generate numbers similar to the Wernerscore numbers, but with a megaton more complexity to have to wade through. However, its one advantage is that it can do the calculations under PvP DR rules (at least, as of the last time I updated it, which was a while ago). There's a column in the center of the spreadsheet where one could punch in any numbers one wants (called the "sandbox") or for that matter you could just make a copy of the sheet and then replace all the powersets with your own builds. But its probably massive overkill for that.
However, if Werner or anyone else wants to take that sheet and make a simplified version for build comparisons, I'm not opposed to that. The macro trickeration I use to do things like flip between PvE and PvP calculations might be useful for someone to steal^H^H^H^H^Yborrow.
[Guide to Defense] [Scrapper Secondaries Comparison] [Archetype Popularity Analysis]
In one little corner of the universe, there's nothing more irritating than a misfile...
(Please support the best webcomic about a cosmic universal realignment by impaired angelic interference resulting in identity crisis angst. Or I release the pigmy water thieves.)
I just respeced into this great stone/stone brute build and i wanna see how it stacks up against tanks and stuff in terms of survivability so it would be really cool if u could run this build through ur machine werner
Villain Plan by Mids' Villain Designer 1.401
http://www.cohplanner.com/
[u]Click this DataLink to open the build![u]
[ QUOTE ]
Okay, this thread has got me curious to how my new dark melee/invul project stacks up with the competition.
[/ QUOTE ]
840 to 1343 depending on the number of targets in range of Invincibility.
Your peak performance is much higher. Surrounded by 10 or more smashing/lethal enemies, you're at 4446. That's what Invulnerability gives you tanker performance in specific situations.
"That's because Werner can't do maths." - BunnyAnomaly
"Four hours in, and I was no longer making mistakes, no longer detoggling. I was a machine." - Werner
Videos of Other Stupid Scrapper Tricks
[ QUOTE ]
I just respeced into this great stone/stone brute build and i wanna see how it stacks up against tanks and stuff in terms of survivability so it would be really cool if u could run this build through ur machine werner
[/ QUOTE ]
391
Like other foe debuffs, I'm not accounting for Darkest Night, because the effect will depend greatly on the foe. But it will definitely add to your survivability. Same with all your knockdowns and holds in most situations. So definitely take the number with a grain of salt.
I went ahead and gave you the accolades, since I figure you have or will have at least some of them, and most people have included them in their builds. In mine, I don't have and probably won't ever have task force commander, so I skipped that one.
The main problem is that you get hit a lot, and don't have much of a way to recover health. So eventually, enemies will chip away at you, even through Granite. And this is about indefinite survivability without inspirations, so even if you overall lose a hit point per hour, it's going to call that lethal.
Another problem for you is that the number indirectly takes into account your Achilles' heel. With 5.9% psionic defense and 2.3% psionic resistance, it won't let you excel.
I could also be missing something, as I'm not very familiar with non-scrapper sets.
"That's because Werner can't do maths." - BunnyAnomaly
"Four hours in, and I was no longer making mistakes, no longer detoggling. I was a machine." - Werner
Videos of Other Stupid Scrapper Tricks
If you have the chance...
Villain Plan by Mids' Villain Designer 1.401
http://www.cohplanner.com/
[u]Click this DataLink to open the build![u]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Okay, this thread has got me curious to how my new dark melee/invul project stacks up with the competition.
[/ QUOTE ]
840 to 1343 depending on the number of targets in range of Invincibility.
Your peak performance is much higher. Surrounded by 10 or more smashing/lethal enemies, you're at 4446. That's what Invulnerability gives you tanker performance in specific situations.
[/ QUOTE ]
Wow. I was not expecting those numbers. Thanks Werner! 
As yet another warning on taking the numbers too seriously, the exact percentage I choose for incoming psionic damage makes a huge difference to Invulnerability. I'm saying 5%. At 10%, you'd drop to 1021 with 10 enemies in range. At 0%, you'd be at 1963 with 10 enemies in range. That's a huge range for an almost arbitrary choice in the spreadsheet setup.
"That's because Werner can't do maths." - BunnyAnomaly
"Four hours in, and I was no longer making mistakes, no longer detoggling. I was a machine." - Werner
Videos of Other Stupid Scrapper Tricks
My calculations for damage on heroside came up 2% psionic.
Anyway, I'm getting 576 on the stone brute. I think you've missed something, either Earth's Embrace or brutes higher HP. Our calculations have been fairly even so far.
But the Dark Armor build? I'm not touching that one with a ten foot pole.
I'm currently actually playing the game for once. Be with you later.
"That's because Werner can't do maths." - BunnyAnomaly
"Four hours in, and I was no longer making mistakes, no longer detoggling. I was a machine." - Werner
Videos of Other Stupid Scrapper Tricks