Quote:
Method 1 can't even answer the question categorically, though. The answer depends on the situation. 5% DEF doesn't mitigate a flat amount of damage irrespective of opponent. It mitigates 10% of the attacker's damage.|
Originally Posted by BunnyAnomaly
This is something very important for you to consider Werner. Look at the three methods.
Now answer me using this question only. Should I take 10hp/s of regen or 5% defence. Method 1. You should take the regeneration. Method 2. I can't answer. Method 3. I can't answer. That summarises this whole thread. |
So what you should have written was: "Method 1. if you're facing a Boss that delivers 100 DPS, and you have no resistance and an initial regen rate of 50 HP/sec, then you should take the regeneration."
Most build questions come down to the same answer: "It depends on X, Y, or Z." You're basically saying that because Werner's example happened to include X but not Y, the methodology that gives an instant answer is therefore superior. The example was just that, an example.
In any case, what difference does it make that one method gives you a faster and less thoroughly considered answer? Is that really your magic bullet to put the thread to rest?
Do you honestly not believe that proportional mitigation effectively multiplies regeneration?
Do you honestly believe that doubling your life expectancy under fire is equivalent to adding 10%?
Do you honestly not consider the probability that debuffs (and particularly DEF debuffs) will land on you? Even if we ignore all other considerations, it seems to me that that one little wrinkle pokes your proposed theory of build evaluation full of little machine-gun-bullet-sized holes.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Iggy_Kamakaze
Nice build
 |
Feel free to summon Arcanaville
Or anyone who has studied mathematics.
Quote:
Dead wrong.|
Originally Posted by Stupid_Fanboy
where's arcana?
i'm fairly sure she's disagree with you Bunny, and perhaps strongly. She and... damn who was that, nevermind. Anyway, this discussion about how to treat increasing amounts of defense has been done several times and IIRC, it's been concluded repeatedly that you must consider the current level of defense when looking at adding more. I apologize for this type of "nuh-uh, someone else says your wrong but I can't point to why right now" reply. i'd type a real reply but i'm lazy and not the crazy math lady. and it's 1am. hopefully someone else who remembers the discussions better than me will post about them. or maybe someone will summon Arcanaville. |
I will write a lengthy reply to explain why.
Compare 10 regen/second to 5% defence, assuming 100 dps incoming before defence factored.
You would say it depends on how much defence you have already. That is why you do NOT use method 2 or 3.
Here's why:
0% defence to 5% defence.
You take 45 hp/s of damage (base 100 - 55).
0%, but with an additional 10 hp/second of regen.
You take 40 hp/s of damage (base 100 -50 - 10)
Answer: Take the regen (5 hp/s better)
Next up:
40% defence to 45% defence.
You take 5 hp/s of damage (base 100-95)
40% still, but with 10hp/s regen.
You take 0 damage (Base 100 - 40 - 10)
Answer: Take the regen (5hp/s better)
You are 5 hp/s ahead regardless of your initial defence. It doesn't matter about defence UNLESS you are going to exceed a cap.
Must I provide more additional proof? Just because a system is used for a long time doesn't make it any less stupid.
Quote:
Ok, let's pretend the underlying assumption is that you have 50 hp/sec in regeneration and you don't know what the unmodified incoming damage is.|
Originally Posted by BunnyAnomaly
Dead wrong.
I will write a lengthy reply to explain why. Compare 10 regen/second to 5% defence, assuming 100 dps incoming before defence factored. You would say it depends on how much defence you have already. That is why you do NOT use method 2 or 3. |
Then what? How much extra regeneration equals how much extra DEF? You can't answer, because you can't assign an absolute value to the DEF's mitigation.
Your most recent argument amounts to, "It isn't good to use other methodologies because in one specific example, my methodology answers the question faster." It's not clear why you'd prefer a metric for making build decisions that relies on knowing the precise damage output of the opponent(s), rather than a metric that relies on simply knowing your own regeneration/healing rate and resistance values.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Iggy_Kamakaze
Nice build
|
Quote:
Really? Do it then.|
Originally Posted by Obitus
rather than a metric that relies on simply knowing your own regeneration/healing rate and resistance values.
|
Which is better, 5 hp/s of regen or 5% defence.
You presently have 30% defence and 20 hp/s regen.
Quote:
I'll play along.|
Originally Posted by BunnyAnomaly
Really? Do it then.
Which is better, 5 hp/s of regen or 5% defence. You presently have 30% defence and 20 hp/s regen. |
30% defense (and no resistance) and 20 hp/s regen allows me to survive indefinitely an incoming DPS of 20 / (1 - (30 /50)) = 50.
35% defense (and no resistance) and 20 hp/s regen allows me to survive indefinitely an incoming DPS of 20 / (1 - (35/50)) = 66.7.
So, against a generic opponent using the attack type in question, the extra DEF is better than 5 hp/sec regen. Against attacks that don't apply, the regen is better. The extra DEF may provide ancillary benefits too though -- like decreasing the chance of a Debuff hitting me by about 25%. Notable here is that the first 5% DEF (assuming I started at 0%) would only lower the chance of a debuff landing by 10%.
Now, your turn. Which is better? 10 hp/sec of regen or 5% extra DEF, assuming you don't know anything about the opponent.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Iggy_Kamakaze
Nice build
|
Quote:
30% defense and 20 HP/S regen will let you survive 1 boss as previously defined.|
Originally Posted by BunnyAnomaly
Really? Do it then.
Which is better, 5 hp/s of regen or 5% defence. You presently have 30% defence and 20 hp/s regen. |
35% defense and 20 HP/S regen will let you survive 1.33 bosses.
30% defense and 25 HP/S regen will let you survive 1.25 bosses.
It is better to be able to survive 1.33 bosses than 1.25 bosses.
You should take the 5% defense.
"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:
uhmm...|
Originally Posted by Obitus
I'll play along.
30% defense (and no resistance) and 20 hp/s regen allows me to survive indefinitely an incoming DPS of 20 / (1 - (30 /50)) = 50. 35% defense (and no resistance) and 20 hp/s regen allows me to survive indefinitely an incoming DPS of 20 / (1 - (35/50)) = 66.7. So, against a generic opponent using the attack type in question, the extra DEF is better than 5 hp/sec regen. Against attacks that don't apply, the regen is better. The extra DEF may provide ancillary benefits too though -- like decreasing the chance of a Debuff hitting me by about 25%. Notable here is that the first 5% DEF (assuming I started at 0%) would only lower the chance of a debuff landing by 10%. Now, your turn. Which is better? 10 hp/sec of regen or 5% extra DEF, assuming you don't know anything about the opponent. |
You are wrong. Let's see why it depends on incoming damage and you must know them to make calculations.
Example (5% defence or 5% regen):
500 dps incoming.
Defence is better (75 damage taken with defence, 95 damage taken from regen)
100 dps incoming.
They are equal (15 damage taken with defence, 15 damage taken with regen)
50 dps incoming
Regen is better (7.5 damage taken with defence, 5 damage taken from regen).
Would you like to try it again? Or is it really that defence is better?I mean... I just gave you an example where it isn't.
Quote:
So you keep saying. But your entire premise is based around the idea that we're trying to make mutually exclusive build decisions, right? Well that's fine and dandy, except that no build always goes up against the same opponent, or even the same type of opponent.|
Originally Posted by BunnyAnomaly
uhmm...
You are wrong. Let's see why it depends on incoming damage and you must know them to make calculations. |
So at some point you have to make build decisions based on generic foes.
Quote:
|
Example (5% defence or 5% regen): 500 dps incoming. Defence is better (75 damage taken with defence, 95 damage taken from regen) |
20 HP/sec mitigates 20 of that initial 200 DPS, leaving us at 180 with 30% DEF. Adding 5 HP/sec to that leaves us with 175 in incoming DPS. Life expectancy increased by 2.8%.
Quote:
|
100 dps incoming. They are equal (15 damage taken with defence, 15 damage taken with regen) |
You net 15 DPS with the extra 5 hp/sec in regen. DEF wins again.
Quote:
|
50 dps incoming Regen is better (7.5 damage taken with defence, 5 damage taken from regen). Would you like to try it again? Or is it really that defence is better?I mean... I just gave you an example where it isn't. |
That's the problem with regeneration. It has no side benefits; if you're already going to survive anyway, then more regeneration does nothing for you. More DEF at least reduces the chance that you'll get hit with a troublesome debuff or mez or whatever -- a qualitative improvement at worst.
Anyway, find an example where the extra regeneration wins and the build is in some remote danger of dying. Then maybe you can crow. Until then, not so much.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Iggy_Kamakaze
Nice build
|
Everything you wrote was wrong.
500 incoming becomes 250 DPS with 0 defence when the base 50% miss chance of enemies is considered.
The rest is just a page worth of incorect numbers.
Incoming damage has to be known to make a decision between these considerations.
Quote:
If the enemies have an inherent 50% chance to miss, then that should be baked into their unmodified DPS figures, because clearly if the mob loses half its damage to begin with, then that half of its damage is irrelevant for any meaningful discussion. The fact that you'd dismiss my post on the basis that I didn't assign the opponent twice as much DPS as it can actually do smacks of gotcha-game nonsense, frankly. It's almost as if you purposely made a bizarre and hidden assumption just so you could play the "you're an idiot" card when I inevitably failed to read your mind.|
Originally Posted by BunnyAnomaly
Everything you wrote was wrong.
500 incoming becomes 250 DPS with 0 defence when the base 50% miss chance of enemies is considered. The rest is just a page worth of incorect numbers. |
I was using your example of the character with 30% DEF and 20 hp/sec, by the way. If you were using something else just now, then my bad. It's hard to tell from your post. Please be more explicit about your assumptions.
Regardless, you still haven't come up with an example to disprove my rationale posted earlier. Let's look at your numbers again, taking into account that when you say "500 DPS," you really mean "250 DPS":
1. 250 DPS incoming (500 originally) :
30% DEF cuts that down to 100 DPS. We regenerate 20 hp/sec, so we initially net 80 DPS. Adding 5% DEF would put us at 75 incoming DPS, and net us 55 DPS after regen is accounted for. Adding 5 hp/sec instead would net us 75 DPS.2. 50 DPS incoming (100 originally) :
Surprise, surprise. Your numbers (75 and 95) are still wrong. This is why I ask if you suddenly changed assumptions on me.
As before, the 30% DEF reduces our incoming DPS down to 20 DPS, which is equal to our regeneration rate. So both choices result in infinite survivability.3. 25 DPS incoming (50 originally) :
As above. If 50 DPS results in infinite survivability, then 25 DPS sure does too. The extra regeneration would be irrelevant.There. Happy?
Quote:
| Incoming damage has to be known to make a decision between these considerations. |
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Iggy_Kamakaze
Nice build
|
Here we go again!
Initial regen value is irrelevant because it is equal to both equations.
But to discard the rest of your argument:
Do you honestly believe that regen, a static form of mitigation, will always give the same benefit as defence, which changes in benefit depending on incoming damage, are always better or worse than the other?
Example:
+10 Regen:
+10 hp/s always
+5% Defence:
Against 100 DPS, it's worth 5hp/s
Against 200 DPS, it's worth 10hp/s
Against 400 DPS, it's worth 20 hp/s
Stop to think that defence is less and less valuable when damage is low because it mitigates less. Of course how much damage is coming your way must be known, else how can you possibly know the value of defence?
Consider this before replying.
Quote:
So that's how you address the fact that the character already has infinite survivability in your only examples where the 5 hp/sec wins? Really?|
Originally Posted by BunnyAnomaly
Here we go again!
Initial regen value is irrelevant because it is equal to both equations. |
Quote:
|
But to discard the rest of your argument: Do you honestly believe that regen, a static form of mitigation, will always give the same benefit as defence, which changes in benefit depending on incoming damage, are always better or worse than the other? |
Beyond that, though, it's crazy to try to make a build decision based on this-or-that opponent's potential damage output. Just from playing the game casually, I can know which mob faction uses this-or-that attack type, this-or-that mez or debuff effect, etc. I'd need to parse logs endlessly to figure out what each mob's DPS is, and even then I'd be left with an answer that slides around based on difficulty level.
Quote:
| Stop to think that defence is less and less valuable when damage is low because it mitigates less. Of course how much damage is coming your way must be known, else how can you possibly know the value of defence? |
Quote:
| Consider this before replying. |
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Iggy_Kamakaze
Nice build
|
Thanks for the laugh, this is fantastic!
+5% defence or +50 hp/sec regen.
1a. 0% -> 5% defence
100 dps incoming: Damage now taken is 45/second
1a. +50 hp/s regen.
100 dps incoming: Damage taken is now 0.
Regen wins.
2a. 0% -> 5% defence.
500 dps incoming: Damage now taken is 225/second
2b. +50hp/s regen.
500 dps incoming: Damage now taken is 200 hp/second
Regen wins.
3a. 0-5% defence.
1500 dps incoming: Damage taken is 675/second
3b. +50 hp/s regen.
1500 dps incoming: Damage taken is 700/second
Defence wins.
But surely this is impossible! You have told us all that it doesn't matter how much damage is coming, you can decide without knowing that!
You know what, I can keep this up all day. You simply have to know how much damage is coming for you to determine the value of defence.
Actually I won't keep this up. I've proven absolutely what I needed to do Orbitus, and what you write is utter, utter tripe.
Quote:
Epic. If you don't know maths then why get involved in a maths discussion. "I don't decide what to do on what damage my opponent can do".
| Beyond that, though, it's crazy to try to make a build decision based on this-or-that opponent's potential damage output. Just from playing the game casually, I can know which mob faction uses this-or-that attack type, this-or-that mez or debuff effect, etc. I'd need to parse logs endlessly to figure out what each mob's DPS is, and even then I'd be left with an answer that slides around based on difficulty level. |
Quote:
I notice you went out of your way not to give me a starting regeneration rate in your latest set of pure-sophistry examples. So let me say this one more time:|
Originally Posted by BunnyAnomaly
Thanks for the laugh, this is fantastic!
|
For any given value of additional DEF that is more valuable than a given value of additional regen at a given initial regeneration rate, that DEF will always be more valuable than the Regen under the following conditions:
- The incoming damage is applicable to the DEF in question (uses the corresponding position or type).
- The incoming damage is sufficient to kill the character eventually before we even consider the addition of DEF or regen.
Your numbers aren't wrong; they're just so abstract as to be useless. No one makes mutually exclusive build decisions based on some arbitrary opponent's specific DPS. People can and do make build decisions based on the perceived commonality of a given attack type or mez/buff/debuff effect, but they can't make an intelligent judgment about how often or how likely it is that they'll see a given amount of incoming damage.
So what we're left with is the sustainable survivability metric. It's not perfect for a number of reasons, but it's the easiest and the most practically useful way to measure the relative benefit of X amount of regen/healing or DEF or RES or +HP.
Again, regeneration is possibly the worst standard you could pick for your argument, because it offers no side benefits. Once you're at a point of sustainable survivability, regeneration does nothing for you.
Quote:
| But surely this is impossible! You have told us all that it doesn't matter how much damage is coming, you can decide without knowing that! |
You're falling into the worst kind of theory-crafting.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Iggy_Kamakaze
Nice build
|
Quote:
+5% defence or 50hp/s regen, go! Base regen is 20hp/s and 0% defence. Which is better! You claim to know so tell us.| rather than a metric that relies on simply knowing your own regeneration/healing rate and resistance values. |
Until you can show me then quit expressing your profound ignorance. I can't teach people to be smart here.
Quote:
Your bluster is unwarranted. Your math is fine as far as it goes, and I've never disputed that (except in certain specific examples where it turned out you were making unstated and completely abstract assumptions).|
Originally Posted by BunnyAnomaly
Actually I won't keep this up. I've proven absolutely what I needed to do Orbitus, and what you write is utter, utter tripe.
Epic. If you don't know maths then why get involved in a maths discussion. "I don't decide what to do on what damage my opponent can do". |
My math is fine, too. The only difference is that you don't accept (without saying why) that mitigation multiplies regeneration.
No, I don't make build decisions based on an incoming DPS figure. I base build decisions (as far as DEF/RES/regen/healing/HP are concerned) based on how much damage I can survive without intervention.
There are so many considerations that make your approach impractical. For instance, how much regeneration is your DEF worth if you have five Respite Inspirations in your back pocket? Someone throwing heals on you? How much is your DEF worth if you immediately lose it because your initial DEF was low enough that the first salvo of debuffs hit you?
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Iggy_Kamakaze
Nice build
|
Quote:
Didn't we already do this?|
Originally Posted by BunnyAnomaly
+5% defence or 50hp/s regen, go! Base regen is 20hp/s and 0% defence. Which is better! You claim to know so tell us.
Until you can show me then quit expressing your profound ignorance. I can't teach people to be smart here. |
5% DEF is 10% mitigation. Therefore it increases your regeneration (and your healing, and any heals thrown your way by teammates, and your chance of avoiding a debuff) by 1 / 0.9 = 11.1%.
0.111 * 20 = 2.22 HP/sec.
So clearly the 50 hp/sec wins.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Iggy_Kamakaze
Nice build
|
If you make a claim back it up or don't say it at all. You can't, and every attempt has been awful.
Now that you recognise you cannot substantiate it, you say "oh but I'll be getting healed" or "yes but what if you are one shotted".
Quote:
| rather than a metric that relies on simply knowing your own regeneration/healing rate and resistance values. |
Quote:
When incoming damage > 1000, defence is better. |
Originally Posted by Obitus
Didn't we already do this?
5% DEF is 10% mitigation. Therefore it increases your regeneration (and your healing, and any heals thrown your way by teammates, and your chance of avoiding a debuff) by 1 / 0.9 = 11.1%. 0.111 * 20 = 2.22 HP/sec. So clearly the 50 hp/sec wins. |
Defence:
1001 damage = 450.45 received. Regen is 20, so over that second you actually take 430.45 damage.
Regen:
1001 damage = 500.5 received. Regen is 70, so over that second you actually take 430.5 damage.
When incoming damage <1000, regen is better.
Defence:
999 damage = 449.55 received. Regen is 20, so over that second you actually take 429.55 damage.
Regen:
999 damage = 499.5 received. Regen is 70, so over that second you actually take 429.5 damage.
Different damage = different answers.
Quote:
Are you denying that 20 hp/sec and 45% DEF allows you to survive 20 / (1 - (50 / 45)) = 200 DPS indefinitely?|
Originally Posted by BunnyAnomaly
If you make a claim back it up or don't say it at all. You can't, and every attempt has been awful.
|
Oh, I'm sorry; I forgot. You like to double the mob's DPS for no good reason. Let's make that number 400 DPS to account for the fact that the average mob has an inherent 50% chance to miss.
See, when you slide your standards all over the place, it leaves you an all-too-convenient opportunity to claim the other side is stupid. Cool story, bro.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Iggy_Kamakaze
Nice build
|
Quote:
Your claim was that damage doesn't matter, so I do get to move the damage to prove to you it does matter.
|
Originally Posted by Obitus
Are you denying that 20 hp/sec and 45% DEF allows you to survive 20 / (1 - (50 / 45)) = 200 DPS indefinitely?
Oh, I'm sorry; I forgot. You like to double the mob's DPS for no good reason. Let's make that number 400 DPS to account for the fact that the average mob has an inherent 50% chance to miss. See, when you slide your standards all over the place, it leaves you an all-too-convenient opportunity to claim the other side is stupid. Cool story, bro. |
Quote:
Yeah, great. Meanwhile, if you're taking 1000 damage per second and your only source of mitigation is 5% DEF, then you're screwed anyway without huge outside intervention.|
Originally Posted by BunnyAnomaly
When incoming damage > 1000, defence is better.
Defence: 1001 damage = 450.45 received. Regen is 20, so over that second you actually take 430.45 damage. Regen: 1001 damage = 500.5 received. Regen is 70, so over that second you actually take 430.5 damage. When incoming damage <1000, regen is better. Defence: 999 damage = 449.55 received. Regen is 20, so over that second you actually take 429.55 damage. Regen: 999 damage = 499.5 received. Regen is 70, so over that second you actually take 429.5 damage. Different damage = different answers. |
Again, the point isn't that your numbers are wrong in theory. The point is that your numbers are practically useless. No one in his right mind would choose 5% DEF over an extra 50 HP/sec in regeneration when he has no access to any other mitigation. (and no heals to speak of).
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Iggy_Kamakaze
Nice build
|
where's arcana?
i'm fairly sure she's disagree with you Bunny, and perhaps strongly. She and... damn who was that, nevermind. Anyway, this discussion about how to treat increasing amounts of defense has been done several times and IIRC, it's been concluded repeatedly that you must consider the current level of defense when looking at adding more.
I apologize for this type of "nuh-uh, someone else says your wrong but I can't point to why right now" reply. i'd type a real reply but i'm lazy and not the crazy math lady. and it's 1am. hopefully someone else who remembers the discussions better than me will post about them.
or maybe someone will summon Arcanaville.
Level 50 is a journey, not a destination.
▲Scrapper Issues List - Going Rogue Edition▲