AC softcap and low level hardcap discussion

[Goregasmic]

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

Level difference has a huge effect on damage as well. Which is why even if you ultra twink a low level toon you still get your ass beat by an even con. But ultra twinks often offset this difference by wearing a regen item that essentially counters most of the damag they take so they can repeatedly kill even cons with little downtime. I mean, its all anecdotal to us. Sometimes it feels like my armor isnt even working, and it probably isnt.

I think it is because people don't understand how AC works. It negates max hits. They'll put a ton of AC on and expect to get straight 1s as incoming damage almost as if they activated DA but the rest of the hits are evenly distributed so you get less 82s but still ~25x 78s, 75s 72s and so on if you look at the above parses. So I suspect people will put AC on, see all the high hits and go like "this is bullshit". While soloing with my ranger in KC with ~200 AC worn I kept an eye on max hits and I was barely seeing any so AC does what it is supposed to do but with like ~2.4khp unbuffed (IIRC?) you're still going to feel the rest of the higher numbers in the distribution. After a long session of farming/grinding soloers/healers will definitely feel it though but not on single kills.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

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

I think it is because people don't understand how AC works. It negates max hits. They'll put a ton of AC on and expect to get straight 1s as incoming damage almost as if they activated DA but the rest of the hits are evenly distributed so you get less 82s but still ~25x 78s, 75s 72s and so on if you look at the above parses. So I suspect people will put AC on, see all the high hits and go like "this is bullshit". While soloing with my ranger in KC with ~200 AC worn I kept an eye on max hits and I was barely seeing any so AC does what it is supposed to do but with like ~2.4khp unbuffed (IIRC?) you're still going to feel the rest of the higher numbers in the distribution. After a long session of farming/grinding soloers/healers will definitely feel it though but not on single kills.

At high enough AC you will see a lot of min hits, at least on trash mobs. If you look at this parse:

=========================
60 SK 1000 hits from Shiel Glimmerspindle - 351 AC, Using 55 AC Shield
=========================
DV, Count
19, 541
22, 29
25, 26
28, 25
32, 29
35, 25
38, 27
42, 27
45, 26
48, 18
52, 22
55, 26
58, 27
62, 21
65, 25
68, 20
72, 27
75, 22
78, 27
82, 10

Total Damage = 33211

541 hits out of 1000 total hits were the minimum of 19 damage. So that should be quite noticeable.

The way AC works is it basically just weights the d20 damage roll in one direction or the other. An unweighted d20 has an average roll of 10.5. When you have really high AC, the dice roll would be weighted so that the average roll is something like 5. That is why you see a lot more minimum hits getting rolled, and less max hits.

[Goregasmic]

Yeah I understand that part.

I've seen so many "AC does nothing on p99 it has been parsed to death" posts when it obviously does. I'm trying to theorize what lead to these. They also see ~460 hits not being min hits. I also feel like "ac does nothing" was probably a self fulfilling prophecy.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

I did one more test on my Shaman at 300 AC, no shield just to make sure there are three of the same exact test for Shamans and Shadowknights:

[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Shadowknight - 1000 Hits from Shiel Glimmerspindle per test, No Shield
=======================================
100 AC Test - 52865 Total Damage Taken
200 AC Test - 41544 Total Damage Taken
300 AC Test - 35754 Total Damage Taken

Shaman - 1000 Hits from Shiel Glimmerspindle per test, No Shield
=======================================
100 AC Test - 53149 Total Damage Taken
200 AC Test - 41805 Total Damage Taken
300 AC Test - 39588 Total Damage Taken

The 100 AC and 200 AC tests are basically identical. The Shadowknight is taking slightly less damage due to the small AC boost you get from the Defense Skill.

At 300 AC the Shadowknight takes 5790 less damage compared to the 200 AC test.

At 300 AC the Shaman takes 2217 less damage compared to the 200 AC test.

We can see that the Shadowknight has reduced their damage taken by an additional 3573 damage compared to the Shaman at 300 AC.

This shows that Shadowknights have a higher AC softcap compared to Shamans. We can see that the 100 AC and 200 AC tests are identical in terms of damage taken, so both classes are using the same AC mitigation formula before the class specific softcap.

The difference in softcap returns by itself does not account for this discrepancy. If both Shamans and Shadowknights had a softcap of 200 AC:

300 AC - 200 AC Softcap = 100 * 0.17 Softcap Return = 17 + 200 = 217 worn AC on the Shaman.
300 AC - 200 AC Softcap = 100 * 0.33 Softcap Return = 33 + 200 = 233 worn AC on the Shadowknight.

A difference of 16 worn AC after softcap by itself would not be enough to account for the difference in damage taken. When my Shaman is wearing 363 AC without a shield, he took 39236 damage. The difference in damage taken between 300 AC and 363 AC was ~300 damage taken. That would be an additional worn AC boost of 63 AC * 0.17 Softcap Return = 10 AC when above softcap.

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

Yeah I understand that part.

I've seen so many "AC does nothing on p99 it has been parsed to death" posts when it obviously does. I'm trying to theorize what lead to these. They also see ~460 hits not being min hits. I also feel like "ac does nothing" was probably a self fulfilling prophecy.

I agree. I do get tired of people claiming they have parsed something "to death", but then they never show the parses.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

Here is a bit more information on my previous post:

https://www.project1999.com/forums/s...&postcount=214

Looking at the data, going from 100 AC to 200 AC reduces damage taken by ~11000 on the Shadowknight.

However, going from 200 AC to 300 AC only reduces damage taken by ~5800 on the Shadowknight.

People may be wondering why going from 200 AC to 300 AC has significantly less benefit.

The reason for this is the AC mitigation formula isn't a linear equation:

1. ~10.5 D20 Damage Roll Average occurs when the Defender's Mitigation is equal to the Attacker's Wrath.

2. ~6.5 D20 Damage Roll Average occurs when the Defender's Mitigation is 2x larger than the Attacker's Wrath.

3. ~4.0 D20 Damage Roll Average occurs when the Defender's Mitigation is 4x larger than the Attacker's Wrath.

In the Shiel Glimmerspindle tests, I only need somewhere between 100 AC and 150 AC to get to the point where her Wrath was equal to my Mitigation. Looking at the data, I think that value is somewhere around ~125 AC. This means that past ~250 worn AC (Mitigation is 2x larger than Wrath), you will see diminishing returns even if your AC softcap is 300 or higher in this specific fight.

On a higher level mob with a larger Wrath value, I would need more AC to get to the point where my Mitigation is equal to the mob's Wrath.

[kjs86z2]

AC moar good the lower the mob is

HP moar good the higher the mob is

this isnt difficult

[DeathsSilkyMist]

Originally Posted by kjs86z2 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

AC moar good the lower the mob is

HP moar good the higher the mob is

this isnt difficult

You should read the thread.

AC has a hardcap at lower levels. A full BiS Warrior deleveled to 5 is hard capped at 55 worn AC. This means stacking AC isn't always "moar good" against lower level mobs.

That is why people like to know how the game works. Repeated talking points often have nuance to them that gets lost.

[bcbrown]

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

Here is a bit more information on my previous post:

https://www.project1999.com/forums/s...&postcount=214

Looking at the data, going from 100 AC to 200 AC reduces damage taken by ~11000 on the Shadowknight.

However, going from 200 AC to 300 AC only reduces damage taken by ~5800 on the Shadowknight.

People may be wondering why going from 200 AC to 300 AC has significantly less benefit.

The reason for this is the AC mitigation formula isn't a linear equation:

1. ~10.5 D20 Damage Roll Average occurs when the Defender's Mitigation is equal to the Attacker's Wrath.

2. ~6.5 D20 Damage Roll Average occurs when the Defender's Mitigation is 2x larger than the Attacker's Wrath.

3. ~4.0 D20 Damage Roll Average occurs when the Defender's Mitigation is 4x larger than the Attacker's Wrath.

In the Shiel Glimmerspindle tests, I only need somewhere between 100 AC and 150 AC to get to the point where her Wrath was equal to my Mitigation. Looking at the data, I think that value is somewhere around ~125 AC. This means that past ~250 worn AC (Mitigation is 2x larger than Wrath), you will see diminishing returns even if your AC softcap is 300 or higher in this specific fight.

On a higher level mob with a larger Wrath value, I would need more AC to get to the point where my Mitigation is equal to the mob's Wrath.

This is a perfect explanation of "squelch point theory" as I currently understand it.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

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

This is a perfect explanation of "squelch point theory" as I currently understand it.

It is not. Let us take a look at your last post on the "squelch point" theory:

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

Excellent. Care to make a prediction? My prediction is that all three parses will be similar because at 200+ ac my 60 druid has passed the squelch point of the level 40 Shiel Glimmerspindle. If the no-shield test is worse than the other two, I'll update my understanding to include that shields provide an effect, even when worn in the back slot. If only the shield in secondary is better than the other two, I'll update my understanding to be that shields provide an effect, but only when worn in the secondary slot.

From my understanding, you were trying to claim the "squelch point" is around 200 AC for Shiel Glimmerspindle. You believe that past the "squelch point", you get no noticeable gains:

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

Oh, yes, I do mean that. Thanks for clarifying. My prediction is that this mob's squelch point is around 30, such that at any level and any AC above that you will get the same results. I think there's a fixed squelch point, and that this squelch point is lower than the Haynar cap of 55AC at level 55.

This is because there's already so few max hits, only 1.75%. I don't think it'll ever go below 1-2%. There's just no room for improvement left.

Your idea that you will get no noticeable gains past the "squelch point" as you understand it is false based on the data in this thread:

Shadowknight - 1000 Hits from Shiel Glimmerspindle per test, No Shield
=======================================
100 AC Test - 52865 Total Damage Taken
200 AC Test - 41544 Total Damage Taken
300 AC Test - 35754 Total Damage Taken

Shaman - 1000 Hits from Shiel Glimmerspindle per test, No Shield
=======================================
100 AC Test - 53149 Total Damage Taken
200 AC Test - 41805 Total Damage Taken
300 AC Test - 39588 Total Damage Taken

Shadowknight - 1000 Hits from Shiel Glimmerspindle per test, 55 AC Shield
=======================================
351 AC Test - 33211Total Damage Taken

Shaman - 1000 Hits from Shiel Glimmerspindle per test, 23 AC Shield
=======================================
363 AC Test - 37110 Total Damage Taken

As you can see, I am still able to get noticeable damage reduction gains at 300 AC and past 300 AC on both classes. A Plate class like Shadowknight is getting larger gains than a Chain class like Shaman.

From your past posts, it is my understanding you have been trying to suggest that AC Softcaps do not exist, and the reduction in damage taken past a certain point (squelch point) is exclusively due to the non-linear nature of the AC mitigation formula. This is obviously false. Please do not try to claim you were simply suggesting the "squelch point" is the AC value at which the average roll on the D20 is 4 or less. Even in your example with the level 5 mob, A squelch point of 30 wouldn't be realistic for forcing the average roll on the D20 to 4 or less. This is because the Wrath value of a level 5 is something like 45. A Mitigation value of ~30 is not 4x larger than a Wrath value of 45.

In reality the AC mitigation formula has multiple ways to reduce the gains you get from AC:
1. The AC hardcap at low levels ((level * 6) + 25)
2. Class specific AC Softcaps
3. Class specific AC Softcap return values
4. Diminishing returns due to the non-linear nature of the AC Mitigation formula

It would be nice if you explained your "squelch point" theory in detail if you think I misunderstood something in your theory.

If you agree with everything I said regarding the AC mitigation formula, then there is no "squelch point" theory that you made up. We are just experiencing the reality of what Haynar already said exists.