AC softcap and low level hardcap discussion

[Goregasmic]

What jumps at me is you save about 1.5khp over a thousand hits with the shield past the cap, which is sub 4%? Seems like you'd have better mitigation with quicker kills using a 2hand/DW.

Only real reason I see using a shield is maybe for raid encounters where a max hit round could 1shot the MT. It would lower the chances of getting such a round but I'm a non raider, wouldn't surprise me if MTs didn't bother at this point.

[sammoHung]

Originally Posted by Goregasmic [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

What jumps at me is you save about 1.5khp over a thousand hits with the shield past the cap, which is sub 4%? Seems like you'd have better mitigation with quicker kills using a 2hander.

Only real reason I see using a shield is maybe for raid encounters where a max hit round could 1shot the MT. It would lower the chances of getting such a round but I'm a non raider, wouldn't surprise me if MTs didn't bother at this point.

Agreed. In later xpacs, like GoD and OoW: Sword and Board was the preferred warrior MT setup. But that was with shields that had like 100AC and also Shield Block AA which allowed warriors to completely block incoming attacks with shield equipped.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

Originally Posted by Goregasmic [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

What jumps at me is you save about 1.5khp over a thousand hits with the shield past the cap, which is sub 4%? Seems like you'd have better mitigation with quicker kills using a 2hand/DW.

Only real reason I see using a shield is maybe for raid encounters where a max hit round could 1shot the MT. It would lower the chances of getting such a round but I'm a non raider, wouldn't surprise me if MTs didn't bother at this point.

I believe the final value is closer to 2k damage according to my 363 AC tests:

https://www.project1999.com/forums/s...&postcount=162

I think it was 1.5k on the 250 AC test because I wasn't that far above the softcap. But it could be a bit of RNG as well.

Assuming a 46 AC shield would double this value, a higher AC shield like whitestone shield at 39 AC would reduce damage by (39 / 46) * 4000 damage = 3388 damage.

That would be more like 8% for a Warrior with a 39 AC shield perhaps, but this is just a guess.

[Snaggles]

There is some rumor that Vulak axe ac acts like a shield. Or at least I’ve heard it floated once. Unfortunately there aren’t any 80 AC shields to use to test this, nor do I have a Vulak axe.

My pally does have a Rocksmasher which has 25 ac and I can borrow my Druids sarnak shield. Just a FYI it’s in the queue but I’m not sure when I’ll be able to get that done.

[Goregasmic]

Originally Posted by DeathsSilkyMist [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I believe the final value is closer to 2k damage according to my 363 AC tests:

https://www.project1999.com/forums/s...&postcount=162

I think it was 1.5k on the 250 AC test because I wasn't that far above the softcap. But it could be a bit of RNG as well.

Assuming a 46 AC shield would double this value, a higher AC shield like whitestone shield at 39 AC would reduce damage by (39 / 46) * 4000 damage = 3388 damage.

That would be more like 8% for a Warrior with a 39 AC shield perhaps, but this is just a guess.

Yeah for sure, thought about that but I think the point still holds in the vast majority of situations.

Originally Posted by Snaggles [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

There is some rumor that Vulak axe ac acts like a shield. Or at least I’ve heard it floated once. Unfortunately there aren’t any 80 AC shields to use to test this, nor do I have a Vulak axe.

My pally does have a Rocksmasher which has 25 ac and I can borrow my Druids sarnak shield. Just a FYI it’s in the queue but I’m not sure when I’ll be able to get that done.

Item type 1 according to lucy, so probably not.

[kjs86z2]

good job dsm

[Vivitron]

I ran some tests on my bard which were too underpowered to tell me much but it seems right to post here anyway.

All tests at 166 dex / 121 agi against the same 14-88 hitting sarnak champion in burning woods.

I ran the first parse about half an hour (watching how long I could keep it up without heals and within my patience), and then before running the following parses decided to hit-match instead of time-match them; the first parse happened to be 256 hits so I took the first 256 hits from each of the others. All parses were done facing away from the sarnak.

Parses were: 1297 ac unbuffed (+380 gear), 1400 ac unbuffed (+455 gear), 1445 ac (1400 setup but add arch shielding and guard -- my self buffs). No AC in offhand, although I was wearing 20 ac Nature's Melody prime hand in all parses.

1297 ac; 256 hits; 8493 total damage:

Count Damage
    127 14
      9 17
      7 21
      9 25
      7 29
      6 33
      4 37
      2 41
      5 45
      6 49
      9 52
      8 56
      9 60
      6 64
     12 68
      5 72
      4 76
     11 80
     10 84

1400 ac; 256; 7932 total damage:

Count Damage
    127 14
     13 17
      5 21
      9 25
      7 29
     10 33
     12 37
      6 41
      7 45
      5 49
      3 52
      7 56
      8 60
      6 64
      7 68
      4 72
      4 76
      5 80
      7 84
      4 88

1445 ac (1400 + arch shielding + guard); 256 hits; 8322 total damage:

Count Damage
    135 14
      3 17
      6 21
      4 25
      4 29
     11 33
      4 37
     10 41
      6 45
      8 49
      6 52
      6 56
      9 60
      7 64
      5 68
     10 72
      9 76
      6 80
      5 84
      2 88

[Goregasmic]

At face value it looks like around 1297 you weren't quite softcapped yet but 1400 you were.

Taking more damage at 1445 kinda shows sample size is probably just too noisy to draw any conclusion though. On paper you should softcap around 180ac worn against that mob.

My memory is hazy, I'm not sure if someone tested buff AC to be equivalent to worn. Like if you took 50ac worn off and replaced it with a 50ac buff if it would be the same mitigation. Total AC number displayed is a composite number though, I think it also includes avoidance so it doesn't mean anything really workable.