Survivability Analysis - How Tough is Your Character?

You may also want to take a look at this post I made a while ago while bored at work, giving a good quantitative means of survivability pre-battle/mid-battle for different armor sets mainly based around max hp, defense, and resistance.

http://boards.cityofheroes.com/showthread.php?t=193025

Hello All,

I understand this is an old thread, heck I don't even know where I found it, but I was wondering if I could get some information. I am a little confused. I am by no means a math wiz but I was looking at all the spreadsheets here for the various builds (added a bunch myself) and some of the numbers seem odd. For instance, in the One Foe column I can't figure out why the equation is used. Then, in the Shield builds there is a 60 second survivable dps column, however, the numbers do not seem to include regen or heals. Due to this, the numbers don't match between the One Foe and the 60 Second Survivable DPS columns, even on a WP tank, where there should be no difference between 60 seconds and 60 minutes since there should be no recharge taken into consideration. I know that Dechs didn't add the 60 Second Survivable DPS, I am not tying to blame him at all, he is an inspiration haha. :-) I am just a wanna be nerd (no insult intended to any nerds, I use the term favorably) and can't figure it out.


For instance, on the WP/SS build I added, here is the math I used that created my confusion (forgive me for the lack of proper typed equations, like I said, no math wiz here).

60 Second Survivable Damage, column H.

Equation used on spreadsheet is: = (B$12)/(60*D4) or Hitpoints / (60*total mitigation)

So, in my builds case this should be (2772) / (60*.0175) = 2768.36

Ok, that number makes sense, that amount of damage taken is less than the total hitpoints and therefore you could walk away (assuming no more incoming damage). Wait a second, what about the hitpoints you would regenerate over said 60 seconds? Shouldn't those additional hitpoints be taken into consideration? Shouldn't there be a part of this equation for that? I don't know, (60*B13) or something? In my specific builds case, (60*86.01)? Heals are also not used, which I won't go over as those are harder because... well because I can't figure out how to do it on the spreadsheet (or with my ghetto math). ;-)

More ghetto math here...

=((B$12 + (60*B$13)) / (60*D4)) - 1 (so you could run away or pop an inspiration)

((2772 + (86.01*60)) / (60*.0175)) - 1 = 7553.86

When broken apart and reversed...

(86.01*60) = 5160.6 + 2772 = 7932.6

(7554.86 -1)*.0175 = 132.19

132.19*60 = 7931.4

This leaves you with about 1 hp to spare (which is why I added the -1 at the end). I am sure my equations are ghetto and probably wrong but I hope you can understand them. I added another column that might illustrate what I am trying to say here.

Now the One Foe column is basically doing the same thing, except it is using the regeneration figures (including heals converted to regeneration) and total mitigation but not touching hitpoints. I do think this is a better equation, because if you do the math with the same build the equation is close to the total hitpoints regenerated over 60 seconds. However, it isn't worrying about hitpoints so the build would end up at 100% health after 60 seconds, which now that I think about it makes more sense haha. Otherwise, it wouldn't be sustainable if it was higher than the total regen, but it would be *survivable* given a finite period of time.

Here it is using broken down like I did with the other one.

Spreadsheet equation: =(B$13+B$14)/D4

(86.01+0)/1.75% (or .0175) = 4914.86 (which oddly enough doesn't equal what the spreadsheet says, even did the math a few times to figure out what I was doing wrong, and I failed).

If you reverse this, 4914.86 * .0175 = 86.01

86.01 * 60 = 5160.6 (exactly how much the build would regenerate)

I guess, my lack of math knowledge is hurting me, maybe I am looking at it incorrectly. Maybe I shouldn't be adding in the hitpoints regenerated or something to the first equation and I just don't know how to get it closer to perfect on the 2nd equation. Bah, I should have just quit... Can somebody explain in my ghetto terms why the numbers don't add up on the One Foe column?

Well, anyway, I appreciate you taking the time to read this, I think I might have typed it up to ease my interwebs OCD...

-Fractious

Edit: After rereading the original post I see that Dechs wasn't going for just survivable DPS on this spreadsheet but indefinitely survivable DPS. Knowing that it makes his equations make perfect sense (still can't figure out why the math is different on a calculator than it is in Excel). Teaches me to read over something like this more than once, and not just use the spreadsheet to determine everything.

This is actually a topic I got to wondering about after watching a /stone brute basically never die during the Tinman TF while the rest of us were being murdered over and over. He could basically tank absolutely everything, he just couldn't kill it by himself. If 16 boss/AV/LT/EB +4-6 combos can't dent him, I'm really curious what can. (Gimmics aside of course)

As a personal observation, stoners are the only ones ive witnessed actually show true invulnerability. My old one was for the most part, but times have changed since then. No numbers, just what I've seen an opinion.

I'm very interested to see how this testing goes, but alas I'll leave that to the more numerically inclined and patient folks.