|
Hi everyone,
I was recently explained on these forums how, since armor determines a multiplier that reduces *all* incoming damage, so you can interpret it as increasing your "effective number of hit points" (EHP). I think this is really nice, because it allows you to compare the utility of armor on an item, to the utility of vitality.
I'll start with my conclusion: one can approximate how many points of armor provide equal utility as one point in vitality by
(50*lvl + armor)/vit.
This formula expresses that armor and vitality should be in some kind of balance: in the extreme case, if you have a gazillion armor and hardly any vit, you need a lot of points of armor to equal one point in vit. And vice versa. Handy rule of thumb when comparing two pieces of equipment! I think the rule is useful because it's so simple, works for all classes, and is actually a pretty decent approximation.
For example, my wizard is level 41 and has 788 armor and 523 vitality, so for me one point in vit is equally useful as 5.33 points in armor. I'll explain my reasoning below, this is a bit technical.
But first a disclaimer: the formula above is a rule of thumb only, it does not take into account effects such as
- wizard force armor being more effective the less life you have
- health globes, flat health regeneration, flat life steal and so on (e.g., regenerate +X life / second) being more effective if you have relatively less life
- If you have +% life from a skill or items (this makes getting +vit items relatively more effective)
So, the formula is a rule of thumb only, and not the final word. Use judgement!
Your number of effective hit points is
EHP = [HP] / [damage multiplier from armor] = [(lvl-25)*vit] * [1+armor / 50 mlvl],
where your HP = (lvl-25)*vit (provided your level is >=35, source: google for diablo 3 lists), and mlvl is the monster level. For simplicity, let's assume that the level of the monsters you fight is equal to your own level. Then
EHP = (lvl-25)vit(1+armor/50lvl)
One point of armor increases the EHP by
d(EHP)/d(armor) = (lvl-25)vit/50lvl
and one point of vit increases the EHP by
d(EHP)/d(vit) = (lvl-25)(1+armor/50lvl)
Divide to get the utility of the latter vs the first:
[ (lvl-25)(1+armor/50lvl) ] / [ (lvl-25)vit/50lvl ],
which reduces to the formula I gave above.
|
I'm a bit confused, will this work for Barbarians with their passive abitlity
+ doesnt armor only affect physical damage ? in which case health is more valuable ?
|
On May 26 2012 15:39 Nore wrote:
I'm a bit confused, will this work for Barbarians with their passive abitlity
+ doesnt armor only affect physical damage ? in which case health is more valuable ?
I think armor is a damage reduction across the board. Though obviously resistances will vary the amount of damage reduced.
|
I kinda wish there was an easy tool like Eve-fit for this lol.
|
On May 26 2012 15:39 Nore wrote:
I'm a bit confused, will this work for Barbarians with their passive abitlity
+ doesnt armor only affect physical damage ? in which case health is more valuable ?
You mean nerves of steel? Yeah, the formula tells you (a) roughly what the equivalent vit boost would be, and (b) how you should weigh vit vs armor after you get the passive.
Strangely, armor affects everything, like life. That is the reason why you can really balance the two.
|
I think generally mitigation is better than amount of health because of healing effects
|
This is wrong because it doesn't include the other forms of damage reduction like resistances or dodge. Its like only comparing crit chance and crit +dmg when trying to maximize dps. Secondly some skills favor one over the other like barb has %life restored which favored vita over armor.
|
On May 26 2012 16:08 Blix wrote:
I think generally mitigation is better than amount of health because of healing effects
I'm just talking about the relationship armor-health
|
On May 26 2012 16:13 xavra41 wrote:
This is wrong because it doesn't include the other forms of damage reduction like resistances or dodge. Its like only comparing crit chance and crit +dmg when trying to maximize dps. Secondly some skills favor one over the other like barb has %life restored which favored vita over armor.
Since damage reduction from armor is a flat multiplier that is applied to everything and works independently of all other forms of damage reduction, you *can* treat it separately. Of course, in an actual build you do have to worry how to balance life and armor vs all other forms of defense, an issue that my formula says nothing about. I only look how to deal with the life-armor balance.
You are also right that some modifiers that are not accounted for in my formula change the balance armor/life in favour of one or the other, I edited the OP.
|
On May 26 2012 16:13 shoop wrote:Show nested quote +On May 26 2012 16:08 Blix wrote:
I think generally mitigation is better than amount of health because of healing effects I'm just talking about the relationship armor-health
I know what you are talking about, but you can't simplify it like that. For example, i rather have 1k hps with 90% damage reduction than 10k hps, because in the first case i can heal a 9k hit with picking up 900 health and in the second case i need 9k health to heal up again. Thus, mitigation makes healing more effective. It is also very class-build specific.
|
On May 26 2012 16:42 shoop wrote:Show nested quote +On May 26 2012 16:13 xavra41 wrote:
This is wrong because it doesn't include the other forms of damage reduction like resistances or dodge. Its like only comparing crit chance and crit +dmg when trying to maximize dps. Secondly some skills favor one over the other like barb has %life restored which favored vita over armor. Since damage reduction from armor is a flat multiplier that is applied to everything and works independently of all other forms of damage reduction, you *can* treat it separately. Of course, in an actual build you do have to worry how to balance life and armor vs all other forms of defense, an issue that my formula says nothing about. I only look how to deal with the life-armor balance. You are also right that some modifiers that are not accounted for in my formula change the balance armor/life in favour of one or the other: % life restored - does not change armor/vitality balance flat bonus to life (health globes / +X life/sec regen and so on) - these are in favour of getting armor rather than life ... there are probably others, the formula is a rule of thumb only and not the final word.
You *can* treat anything separately but you doing so wont yield anything useful. defense has diminishing returns so the opportunity cost of theo ther forms of defense cannot be ignored. %life favors vita cuz 10% life of 100 is 10 but of 200 is 20.
|
Here's another way to think about it:
30 armor gives +1% EHP and 3 resistance gives +1% EHP.
However, because there are multiple ways of reducing incoming damage (armor, resistance, dodge, innate ability, passives, abilities), and they are all multiplied with eachother, the full and correct way of thinking about it is:
30 armor will always give +1% of your total effective health pool including resistance, dodge, etc, BUT NOT including armor itself. So adding 30 armor will add 1% of your total effective health pool as if your armor value was 0.
Example: You have 28000 hp, 3000 armor, 150 resistance, and 25% dodge. Your effective health pool is 112000. If you want to calculate this you just have to divide 28000 by (1/2)*(2/3)*(3/4). Anyway, adding 300 armor to this will not give you +10% of 112000, but will give you +10% of your EHP as if your armor was 0. In this case 0 armor would make your EHP 28000 divided by ((2/3) * (3/4)) = 56000. 10% of this is 5600. Adding 300 armor will give you 5600 EHP. Adding 30 resistance, however, will give you 7467 EHP, which is 10% of the EHP dodge and armor gives you.
In other words, it's extremely important to balance all your values.
|
Lalalaland34502 Posts
I don't mean to sound rude but is there a tl;dr version for those like me that are too groggy to comprehend numbers atm?
|
In response to some of your comments, it's true that there are many factors that potentially influence of the balance between vit and armor. These mostly favour armor, but some swing the balance in favour of getting more vit.. The formula doesn't take such effects into account. Depending on your situation,the rule may be too crude because of this, but I maintain that in many cases it will be pretty accurate.
Of course, all forms of defense need to be balanced, but for most forms the optimal balance is situational, whereas armor/vit is a relatively simple relationship, so I think it useful to single them out..
I thought armor provides diminishing returns as well, and but I was corrected : in terms of EHP this is not the case.
|
On May 26 2012 18:19 Firebolt145 wrote:
I don't mean to sound rude but is there a tl;dr version for those like me that are too groggy to comprehend numbers atm?
Just read the op until the word 'technical ' :-)
|
Do you know what the relation of Armor vs All Resistances should be in order to maximize effectiveness?
|
Lalalaland34502 Posts
On May 26 2012 18:36 shoop wrote:Show nested quote +On May 26 2012 18:19 Firebolt145 wrote:
I don't mean to sound rude but is there a tl;dr version for those like me that are too groggy to comprehend numbers atm? Just read the op until the word 'technical ' :-)
I did, was hoping for a simple rule like '1 point of vit = 5 armor' or similar. Read through it a second time now that I'm slightly more awake and realised it's a lot more complicated than that, oh well.
|
On May 26 2012 18:42 Shikyo wrote:
Do you know what the relation of Armor vs All Resistances should be in order to maximize effectiveness?
Scroll up a bit and read my post.
|
|
|
I think this is really nice, because it allows you to compare the utility of armor on an item, to the utility of vitality
It doesn't do that.
If you want to compare the utility of armor vs health you need to consider healing effects and talents as well.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
