AC softcap and low level hardcap discussion

[DeathsSilkyMist]

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

I appreciate and accept the sincere apology. If you were thrown off and confused by what I said, you could have pointed to those quotes and asked me for clarification. Hopefully my explanation helped. Here's a link with further (academic) discussion: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Preregistration_(science). Again, I'm not saying you should follow all those formalisms, just that spending a minute to articulate a precise prediction helps with experiment design and helps convince people like me if the experiment matches the prediction.


Excellent experiment design! I look forward to seeing the results.

It would be nice if you explain why you didn't think my previous posts showed what I was expecting. Was it simply formatting?

https://www.project1999.com/forums/s...2&postcount=61

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

A. There is a 45 AC softcap, 20% diminishing returns after the softcap, and no worn AC clamp. The player has 400 worn AC, and no shield. 45 Uncapped AC + 355 softcapped AC * 0.2 diminishing returns = 116 worn AC that is used in combat.

B. There is a 45 AC softcap, 20% diminishing returns after the softcap, and a 55 worn AC clamp. The player has 400 worn AC, and no shield. First the 400 worn AC gets clamped to 55. 45 Uncapped AC + 10 softcapped AC * 0.2 = 47 worn AC that is used in combat.

C. There is a 45 AC softcap, 20% diminishing returns after the softcap, and a 55 worn AC clamp. The player has 400 worn AC, and 12 of that AC is from the shield. First the 400 worn AC gets clamped to 55. Then the softcap gets increased. We don't know how much a shield increases softcap but lets say the softcap goes up by 5. 50 Uncapped AC + 5 softcapped AC * 0.2 = 51 worn AC that is used in combat.

Also, I was confused about this part of your post:

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

For example, I was looking at the ratio of min-hit to max-hit, while you seem to be more interested in total damage or damage per hit.

I made it clear I was looking at min/max hits by explaining the D20 function:

https://www.project1999.com/forums/s...16&postcount=5

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

To answer your question about min and max values:

1. The game has a Roll D20 function with two inputs. I will call these inputs "Wrath" (attacker) and "Mitigation" (defender). The code confusingly calls them "offense" (attacker) and "defense" (defender), but these inputs are more than simply the attacker's offense skill and the defender's defense skill.

2. The D20 roll is weighted based on the ratio of the attacker's Wrath to the defender's Mitigation. An unweighted D20 has an average roll of 10.5.

3. If the attacker's Wrath is 50 and the defender's Mitigation is 100, the D20 has a weighted average roll of ~6.5. This is when you see the cluster of rolls at the minimum damage value.

4. If the attacker's Wrath is 100 and the defender's Mitigation is 50, the D20 has a weighted average of ~14.5. This is when you see the cluster of rolls at the maximum damage value.

5. If the attacker's Wrath is 50 and the defender's Mitigation is 50, the D20 has the unweighted average of ~10.5. This is when you see a roughly equal amount of rolls at the minimum and maximum damage values.

The 23 AC test is a scenario where my Mitigation is roughly equal to the Skeleton's Wrath. This is why the number of minimum hits and maximum hits are about the same. The Skeleton's Wrath is slightly higher, which is why there are a few more maximum hits compared to minimum hits.

The 55 AC test and 178 AC test are scenarios where my Mitigation is significantly higher than the Skeleton's Wrath, which is why you see the cluster of rolls at the minimum damage value.

If my AC wasn't hardcapped, you would see an increase in how many damage values were at the minimum damage value.

My damage calculator shows the same pattern. It doesn't have the AC hardcap or softcap built in, so more AC will increase how many damage values were at the minimum damage value.

I include total damage because it is the easiest value for the average reader to look at. It's a good way to differentiate data sets at a glance, before digging into the hit count data.

It can also make it a bit easier to see the difference in two data sets that don't have a large difference, like the last datasets I posted:

https://www.project1999.com/forums/s...8&postcount=68