AC softcap and low level hardcap discussion

[DeathsSilkyMist]

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

My data does not show that. It raises that question. I realize how pedantic this sounds, but an experiment cannot result in a conclusion that it was not attempting to answer. I agree that at this point we need to find the softcaps, but my experiment does not answer that question, it raises that question. Not exactly a rigorous source, but here's a comic addressing a similar topic: https://xkcd.com/882/

Any speculation on results before I analyze the parse I did with and without Bladecoat?

Data is data. Your data supports the softcap theory.

No speculations right now. I haven't done much spell AC testing.

[bcbrown]

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

Data is data. Your data supports the softcap theory.

No speculations right now. I haven't done much spell AC testing.

My data supports the softcap hypothesis. A theory has been confirmed by experiments done to test the hypothesis. But we're not going to resolve that philosophical difference in this thread so I'll try not to keep harping on it too much [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

With bladecoat (37 ac on wiki):
988 hits
41.155 dmg/hit

Without bladecoat (wearing crystal chitin gauntlets and gladiator's chain leggings):
826 hits
43.393 dmg/hit

Looks like it's worth further investigation!

[DeathsSilkyMist]

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

My data supports the softcap hypothesis. A theory has been confirmed by experiments done to test the hypothesis. But we're not going to resolve that philosophical difference in this thread so I'll try not to keep harping on it too much [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

With bladecoat (37 ac on wiki):
988 hits
41.155 dmg/hit

Without bladecoat (wearing crystal chitin gauntlets and gladiator's chain leggings):
826 hits
43.393 dmg/hit

Looks like it's worth further investigation!

Haynar, the programmer who worked on this, said there was a softcap. The softcap is indeed a theory confirmed by Haynars own experiments[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.] We are simply reconfirming the theory.

The squelch point hypothesis has yet to be confirmed.

I agree, more inestigation is needed on spell AC.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

Posting my 3 initial tests to find the softcap. They are all against Shiel Glimmerspindle, 1000 hits each:

=========================
100 AC Test, No Item in Secondary Slot
=========================

DV, Count
19, 121
22, 33
25, 33
28, 39
32, 36
35, 46
38, 31
42, 35
45, 38
48, 38
52, 44
55, 41
58, 35
62, 38
65, 36
68, 30
72, 36
75, 42
78, 31
82, 217

Total Damage = 53149

=========================
150 AC Test, No Item in Secondary Slot
=========================

DV, Count
19, 216
22, 35
25, 39
28, 38
32, 30
35, 40
38, 36
42, 34
45, 30
48, 44
52, 32
55, 49
58, 40
62, 37
65, 43
68, 39
72, 37
75, 43
78, 32
82, 106

Total Damage = 47028

=========================
200 AC Test, No Item in Secondary Slot
=========================

DV, Count
19, 289
22, 41
25, 41
28, 33
32, 32
35, 43
38, 43
42, 38
45, 40
48, 33
52, 38
55, 38
58, 37
62, 39
65, 33
68, 39
72, 41
75, 41
78, 34
82, 27

Total Damage = 41805

So far this suggests the softcap is not between 100 AC and 200 AC. The damage difference between 100 AC and 150 AC is similar enough to 150 AC and 200 AC.

My 363 AC tests Show that the damage I took at 363 AC without a shield was 39236.

Going from 100 AC to 200 AC reduced my damage by 11346.

Going from 200 AC to 363 AC reduced my damage by 2569.

There is almost certainly a softcap somewhere between 200 AC and 363 AC. I'll try to pinpoint it when I run the next few tests.