PDA

View Full Version : Monkey PA Resists



mdares
05-08-03, 10:50
Erm is it a "bug" or are the resists meant to be added to the natural values? (i remember readong about this somewhere but i cant find the thread anymore)

IF its a bug, GOOD that means it'll be changed to armor resists; if not i'm wondering why does it have to be added to natural (hell tank PA's resists sure arent and they have 100 con to play with).

someone explain plz.

Mumblyfish
05-08-03, 10:52
I think it was Callash who said it was a simple mistake. It'll be fixed in the next patch more than likely, and reverted back to armour resists.

Because everyone knows Law Enforcers don't make your body more resistant to flames or big balls of "I'll fuck your face off" energy.

mdares
05-08-03, 11:06
ah thanks much (if it was meant to be then i'd have to retweak my resists again =( )

Arcadius
05-08-03, 11:07
Originally posted by Mumblyfish

Because everyone knows Law Enforcers don't make your body more resistant to flames or big balls of "I'll fuck your face off" energy.



:confused:



Originally posted by mdares
Erm is it a "bug" or are the resists meant to be added to the natural values? (i remember readong about this somewhere but i cant find the thread anymore)

IF its a bug, GOOD that means it'll be changed to armor resists; if not i'm wondering why does it have to be added to natural (hell tank PA's resists sure arent and they have 100 con to play with).

someone explain plz.

If it wasnt' a bug, what would be so bad about it?

KidWithStick
05-08-03, 11:29
whats the difference?

Rade
05-08-03, 11:36
Resists are about 10% worse than armor, unless you go over 100. Thats about the only difference.

Mumblyfish
05-08-03, 11:42
Yup yup. Armour points > Resist points.

So fighting a monk with, say, 200 energy armour points... is like fighting a monk with 250 energy resist.

Rade
05-08-03, 11:51
Well, resists becomes better than armor if you have over 103 in a resist, but it caps out at 114 where it gives 119 effective armor. But up to 100 its more or less just 10% less, ie 50 resist gives 45 effective armor.

Mumblyfish
05-08-03, 11:58
Great, so you've ruined all my work on making my resists as good as a PE's in one fell swoop.

I hope you're happy, Mr I Know More Than Mumbly. :(

Rade
05-08-03, 12:01
:D



Apus can have very nice resists/armor , a little lacking on the hitpoint side tho... If it werent for the fact that the stealth toy is so damn fun I would reroll to apu in an instant. People that have fought the gang in op wars can probably tell how much in love I am with that thingy.

Rizzy
05-08-03, 12:11
Also resists pretty much cap totally at 200 armour value. For example 114 resist (119 armour value) and 81 energy armour will give you the best resist to energy you can get. Having said that, the difference between 114 resist and 114 resist WITH 81 energy armour is only about 3-4% of dmg resisted.

Rade
05-08-03, 12:17
Nod, theres no real point of going above 125-150 except for in force/pierce since its so easy. Diminishing returns are too bíg.

Sleawer
05-08-03, 14:47
Ok, neocron.ems.ru (http://neocron.ems.ru/resist.html) says 114 natural is the same as 119 armors, but also says 125 is 71%, and Lupus said 114 natural is the cap with 72% absortion. I see a contradiction here.

If 114 natural absorbs 72%, then 119 armor should absorb 72% aswell...
In the same page 125 armor resists absorb 71%, that's a quite significant difference.

Here I see people mixing values about absortion percents. You cannot mix Rustot and Lupus' values because are different. If rustot is correct, then 125 armors=71%, and the best you can achieve by armors/natural-converted without spending too many points; If Lupus is correct the 114 natural=72%, and we dont know the values of his table.

The only thing sure is natural resists cap at 114, but how much is absorbed?

So who is right?

ericdraven
05-08-03, 14:52
Originally posted by Sleawer
So who is right?

Judging by origin i think Lupus should be right.. he can get all values from the developers, whereas rustot can "only" test to get the values, which can't be 100% accurate.

Rade
05-08-03, 15:05
Heh. Getting numbers from the client tends to be the most accurate. Rustots page is not based on tests.

Anyway, Ive done some small tests and it seems like those numbers are right, I havent done extensive testing tho so not enough to prove anything with yet.

QuantumDelta
05-08-03, 15:12
Lupus, is correct, I was his test subject for that test, 72% Absorbsion @ 114 + No increase after 114.

Rizzy is also correct, maximum non-shelter/deflector resistance is 76% for a resist.
Hense why I still don't understand tanks that wear pure Duranium4 - simply because they're not getting the benefit of probably 50ish+ points of armor if they have an even HALF WAY decent CON Setup.
Hell, I'm a long way (levels wise, not so long shooting a wall with moon striker wise) from capping CON and I'm starting to have to put points in POR / END (Depending on what armor I'm wearing) because I just don't get any decent benefit anymore LOL
oh man tanks get too much CON...

Sleawer
05-08-03, 15:54
If Lupus is correct, then rustot table is wrong, and those resist-absortion values are wrong.

QuantumDelta
05-08-03, 15:59
Correct :p


However I have tried to point that out repeatedly :p

rustot
06-08-03, 13:01
Originally posted by Sleawer
Ok, neocron.ems.ru (http://neocron.ems.ru/resist.html) says 114 natural is the same as 119 armors, but also says 125 is 71%, and Lupus said 114 natural is the cap with 72% absortion. I see a contradiction here.

If 114 natural absorbs 72%, then 119 armor should absorb 72% aswell...
In the same page 125 armor resists absorb 71%, that's a quite significant difference.

Here I see people mixing values about absortion percents. You cannot mix Rustot and Lupus' values because are different. If rustot is correct, then 125 armors=71%, and the best you can achieve by armors/natural-converted without spending too many points; If Lupus is correct the 114 natural=72%, and we dont know the values of his table.

The only thing sure is natural resists cap at 114, but how much is absorbed?

So who is right?

114 resist is 119 armor
119 armor is 71.03% absorbtion
125 armor is 71.67% absorbtion

i round all digits down, but if i will round all digits up, then will be 72% in both cases, so no any difference :)

Cryton
06-08-03, 15:17
umm you *can* actually get more than 76% damage reduction......

/Cryton

Lucjan
06-08-03, 15:29
Like Cryton wrote, you can push the damage reduction a little bit further with very much noticeable benefits from high level weapons. That would explain why some people think tanks have too much CON. It might look like they have enought, but the moment you start pushing the envelope on your resists you lack points like a spy ;-) But then, where would be the balance if a class could resist all damage types to the extreme...