These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Ships & Modules

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
Previous page12
 

WTF is up with damage resist mods?

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Dersen Lowery
The Scope
#21 - 2014-03-11 19:04:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Dersen Lowery
Benny Ohu wrote:
although the mod description says 'penalty', i think resist mods are really more like diminishing returns, rather than the stacking penalty mechanic? the damage control is just additive to the resist rather than multiplicative?


Resists increase superlinearly as the percentage increases linearly:

To halve damage from 0% resist, you have to get all the way to 50% resist.

To halve damage again from 50% resist, you have to get to 75% -- half as much.

To halve damage again from 75% resist, you only have to get to 87.5% -- half as much again.

To halve damage again from 87.5% resist, you only have to get to 93.75%. Now, in just four steps, we've gone all the way down from +50% to +6.25% to get the same percentage reduction in net damage.

That's why resists work the way they do, and that's why they're stacking penalized on top of being multiplicative.

EDIT: Or, going by linear percentage increases in resist, so you can see the way the effectiveness of each 10% increase accelerates:

Going from 0% to 10% resistance nets you a 10% increase in damage resisted.

Going from 10% to 20% nets you a 11.1% increase.

Going from 20% to 30% nets you a 12.5% increase.

Going from 30% to 40% nets you a 14.2% increase.

Going from 40% to 50% nets you a 16.7% increase.

Going from 50% to 60% nets you a 20% increase.

Going from 60% to 70% nets you a 25% increase.

Going from 70% to 80% nets you a 33.3% increase.

Going from 80% to 90% nets you a 50% increase.

Going from 90% to 99% nets you a 1000%--factor of ten--increase.

Going from 99% to 99.9% nets you another factor of ten increase, to 10,000%.

You can see from this why CCP has effectively topped resists off in the high 80s and low 90s. After that they start to get really silly.

Proud founder and member of the Belligerent Desirables.

I voted in CSM X!
Batelle
Federal Navy Academy
#22 - 2014-03-11 19:07:53 UTC
Steve Ronuken wrote:

It's because, behind the scenes, they apply their damage reduction in different ways.

you have resists, from the regular hardeners, plates, etc.

And you have a damage resonance from the damage control and the reactive armour hardener.

so they get stuck in stacks based on that, then the penalties are applies, per stack.


whut. Resists are resists. the DC and RAH are special and get their own stack, but i've never heard of "damage resonance."

"**CCP is changing policy, and has asked that we discontinue the bonus credit program after November 7th. So until then, enjoy a super-bonus of 1B Blink Credit for each 60-day GTC you buy!"**

Never forget.
Pew Terror
All of it
#23 - 2014-03-11 19:08:14 UTC
The first non-penalized hardener does exeactly what it says on the box.
If you would have taken X damage before activating it, you will take X*(1-0.3) afterwards.

I can recommend this t-shirt: http://www.zazzle.de/funf_drittel_aller_leute_sind_mit_bruchen_schlecht_tshirt-235808457275536471
Benny Ohu
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#24 - 2014-03-11 19:59:59 UTC
Batelle wrote:
Benny Ohu wrote:

although the mod description says 'penalty', i think resist mods are really more like diminishing returns, rather than the stacking penalty mechanic? the damage control is just additive to the resist rather than multiplicative?


Diminishing returns is exactly what it is. Adding a new mod will never make you worse off in that particular area. Damage control is not additive, as nearly nothing is actually additive. The way it works is that all stacking penalized mods go on "a stack," sorted by the strongest first. Then diminishing returns apply starting from the second effect (not necessarily module) on the stack. Non-stacking penalized mods are not on the stack, and apply their full bonus. The exception is the damage control and reactive armor hardener, which are both not stacking penalized, but when used together, are considered stacked together, with the weaker bonus getting the 87% penalty. Note that things on the stack are effects, not a module itself.

yeh gotcha
Tau Cabalander
Retirement Retreat
Working Stiffs
#25 - 2014-03-11 20:15:37 UTC
Erotica 1
Krypteia Operations
#26 - 2014-03-11 22:12:05 UTC
I just throw stuff on and see what happens.

See Bio for isk doubling rules. If you didn't read bio, chances are you funded those who did.
Unsuccessful At Everything
The Troll Bridge
#27 - 2014-03-11 22:18:06 UTC
Erotica 1 wrote:
I just throw stuff on and see what happens.



You can never go wrong with a kitchen-sink leeroy fit. Sometimes they surprise even me.

Since the cessation of their usefulness is imminent, may I appropriate your belongings?
Lors Dornick
Kallisti Industries
#28 - 2014-03-11 22:20:56 UTC
Steve Ronuken wrote:

It's because, behind the scenes, they apply their damage reduction in different ways.

It should be noted that the devs are coding a game that they want to work.
We, the players, has used all the frightening little skills that science has made available to figure out how it works.

But they are not bound by any creed to use any data, formulas and eventual exception that we think we have figured out (or even extracted from their datasets).

If a gadget work differently in EvE than it does in EFT/Pyfa, then it's a bug in the latter.

Even if that bug is missing a bug in EvE ;)

CCP Greyscale: As to starbases, we agree it's pretty terrible, but we don't want to delay the entire release just for this one factor.
Hasikan Miallok
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#29 - 2014-03-11 22:50:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Hasikan Miallok
If I remember it correctly the stack works like this:

- ship based resists including bonuses per ship skill level -> NO stacking penalty with anything
- resist rigs and all resist modules for the same damage type -> stacking penalty across all rigs and modules
- RAH and Damage control -> stacking penalty with each other but nothing else
Val'Dore
PlanetCorp InterStellar
#30 - 2014-03-12 00:00:38 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
Val'Dore wrote:
Benny Ohu wrote:
Steve Ronuken wrote:
Celeste Benal wrote:
Resist modules are not stacking penalized. However, resists added to a certain damage type are reduced by the current resist percentage. Otherwise, it would be hilariously easy to get resists beyond 100% on tech 2 and 3 ships.

So adding a 30% bonus on top of a 25% resist will get you .30*(1-.25)+.30 = .525 = 52.5% resist, not 55%.

Also, inb4 moved to ships and modules.


Resists are penalized, unless they're explicitly stated not to. Like the damage control module.

although the mod description says 'penalty', i think resist mods are really more like diminishing returns, rather than the stacking penalty mechanic? the damage control is just additive to the resist rather than multiplicative?


There is the native penalty involved that this thread covered and the arbitrary penalty added to curb multiplier stacking. Wasn't really needed for resists, but they did it anyway.

Resists are double penalized, nothing else gets that treatment.


Resists aren't "double penalised".


Okay, they are subject to two stacking penalties. Still a knit picker, I see.

Star Jump Drive A new way to traverse the galaxy.

I invented Tiericide
ISD Ezwal
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
ISD Alliance
#31 - 2014-03-12 00:06:50 UTC
This thread has been moved to Ships & Modules.

I have also removed a rule breaking post.
The rules:
5. Trolling is prohibited.

Trolling is a defined as a post that is deliberately designed for the purpose of angering and insulting other players in an attempt to incite retaliation or an emotional response. Posts of this nature are disruptive, often abusive and do not contribute to the sense of community that CCP promote.

ISD Ezwal Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)
Zhilia Mann
Tide Way Out Productions
#32 - 2014-03-12 01:27:38 UTC
Val'Dore wrote:
Okay, they are subject to two stacking penalties. Still a knit picker, I see.


No they aren't. They're subject to one stacking penalty just like everything else. The fact that they are calculated multiplicatively has nothing at all to do with stacking penalties.
Tauranon
Weeesearch
CAStabouts
#33 - 2014-03-12 03:14:17 UTC
Val'Dore wrote:


Okay, they are subject to two stacking penalties. Still a knit picker, I see.


here is a helpful hint. The difference between 50% resistance and 55% resistance is 10% less damage taken, 10% more maximum damage perma tanked and 10% longer time to die if not repaired.
Jacob Holland
Weyland-Vulcan Industries
#34 - 2014-03-12 08:51:40 UTC
Rei Kuroki wrote:
Thanks for all the answers, so that was whats going on :O

EVE math is really confusing at some parts :S

The key with resists is that Resistances are only the "customer facing" statistic... The real system is apparently known as Resonance.
A 0% resistance is actually a 100% Resonance, a (theoretical) 100% resistance would be a 0% Resonance and the scale continues to 200% Resonance (which would display as -100% resistance but which actually means double damage). The resist mods change the resonance - a 30% resist mod reduces your ship's resonance with a specific damage type by 30% of its current value.
So if you have a ship with an EM Resonance of 100% (0% EM resist) and you slap on a T1 hardener (50% resist bonus) its resonance is reduced by 50% of its initial value (100 x 50% = 50), the Resonance becomes 50% (your ship takes half the EM damage it normally would) and this is then displayed by the client as a 50% resistance.
If you have a ship with a 60% Kinetic Resonance (40% kinetic resist) and you slap on a T1 Invuln (25% resist bonus) the Resonance is reduced by 25% (60 x 25% = 15), becoming 45% Resonance (displayed in the client as 55% resist).

Personally I found Resonances clicked when I first read about them (I wish I could remember which Dev posted the full explanation) in a way resistances never had.
Old Phill
Doomheim
#35 - 2014-03-12 11:16:45 UTC
if resist mods didnt do this god that would be bad
hello godmode ship which has 100% resist everything
Val'Dore
PlanetCorp InterStellar
#36 - 2014-03-14 15:31:57 UTC
Zhilia Mann wrote:
Val'Dore wrote:
Okay, they are subject to two stacking penalties. Still a knit picker, I see.


No they aren't. They're subject to one stacking penalty just like everything else. The fact that they are calculated multiplicatively has nothing at all to do with stacking penalties.



Tauranon wrote:
Val'Dore wrote:


Okay, they are subject to two stacking penalties. Still a knit picker, I see.


here is a helpful hint. The difference between 50% resistance and 55% resistance is 10% less damage taken, 10% more maximum damage perma tanked and 10% longer time to die if not repaired.


You aren't telling me anything I haven't already known since 2004. When stacking penalties were introduced to stop the Gankageddon, resist mode were not OP, meaning had no need of being nerfed with the arbitrary penalty we all know and love today, because of the 'native' stacking penalty they have from being what they are.

Sure, virtually immune ships existed... well no, they didn't. Not in any meaningful way. Though it was fun to use a Geddon's 8 lows to type tank other Gankageddons. It served no practical purpose to do it normally.

Anyway, carry on with the picking of knits.

Star Jump Drive A new way to traverse the galaxy.

I invented Tiericide
Benny Ohu
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#37 - 2014-03-16 17:32:20 UTC
ok first of all it's 'nitpicking', not 'knit picking'
Tauranon
Weeesearch
CAStabouts
#38 - 2014-03-16 21:44:08 UTC
Val'Dore wrote:
Zhilia Mann wrote:
Val'Dore wrote:
Okay, they are subject to two stacking penalties. Still a knit picker, I see.


No they aren't. They're subject to one stacking penalty just like everything else. The fact that they are calculated multiplicatively has nothing at all to do with stacking penalties.



Tauranon wrote:
Val'Dore wrote:


Okay, they are subject to two stacking penalties. Still a knit picker, I see.


here is a helpful hint. The difference between 50% resistance and 55% resistance is 10% less damage taken, 10% more maximum damage perma tanked and 10% longer time to die if not repaired.


You aren't telling me anything I haven't already known since 2004. When stacking penalties were introduced to stop the Gankageddon, resist mode were not OP, meaning had no need of being nerfed with the arbitrary penalty we all know and love today, because of the 'native' stacking penalty they have from being what they are.



You should probably look up authority fallacy. Adding one to your false assertion, won't make your false assertion suddenly true.
Val'Dore
PlanetCorp InterStellar
#39 - 2014-03-18 02:08:47 UTC
Resist mods have a depreciating cumulative effect. You can Democrat it all you want, the result is each one does less than the previous one.

Star Jump Drive A new way to traverse the galaxy.

I invented Tiericide
Zor'katar
Matari Recreation
#40 - 2014-03-18 12:54:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Zor'katar
Val'Dore wrote:
Resist mods have a depreciating cumulative effect. You can Democrat it all you want, the result is each one does less than the previous one.

Only because you choose to look at it from the perspective of resist percent. Turn it around and look at it from the perspective of EHP. Take for sake of example a fictional ship with 0% base resist and 100HP. Now apply a 50% resist module to it. That doubles the EHP, a net gain of 100 EHP. Now apply a second hardener. If you ignore the actual stacking penalty for a moment, it will double your EHP again for a net gain of 200 EHP. So while you consider the multiplicative stacking to be a penalty because the second module "only" gives you an additional 25% increase to your resistance instead of 50%, the second module actually had a bigger impact on your EHP than the first.

(Note: Even if you don't ignore the actual stacking penalty in the formula, the second module still increases your EHP by more than the first. That's easily testable in PyFA, Osmium, EFT, etc.)
Previous page12