AF.....what does it really mean?

gotwqqd wrote: ↑

Wed 5 Aug 2020 12:37 PM

How will 1 AF (or 5 or 10 if there are breakpoints) really mean?
Making attacks miss?
Reducing damage?

IGN Boards
Log in
Home
Forums
New posts
What's new
AF vs. Melee Resists
Thread starterlegacyAccount Start dateAug 13, 2009
DAoC General
Not open for further replies.
legacyAccount
Old Account Original poster
Nov 10, 2011
4,475,035
1,657
Aug 13, 2009
#1
Can anyone link me to a previous post detailing how much exactly 1% melee resist equals to in AF?

Cheers!
legacyAccount
Old Account Original poster
Nov 10, 2011
4,475,035
1,657
Aug 13, 2009
#2
Some people tested it and claim that 10AF = 1% absorb. I very much doubt it's that simple, but if that's what their tests yielded, i can't really refute it. That's effective AF per armorpiece btw, the paperdoll AF doesn't really seem to mean anything. Adding +AF from items probably just adds on top of the AF you get per piece.
Lets say for example that you have an armorpiece with 50 effective AF and have +50 AF in your template, that would give you a total of 10% "bonus" absorb on that armorpiece (on top of the absorb from the armortype).


This is only speculation and i have nothing to support my claims, but that's sort of how i think it works.





Maybe it's time for mythic to give us the real formulas for these things? [face_tongue]
Vyxar
Arbiter Elegantiarum
Mar 13, 2002
11,506
0
Aug 13, 2009
#3
"Some people tested it and claim that 10AF = 1% absorb."

I think that claim was only tested/guesstimated to the extra 50 AF or something.

Cloth wearers have around 500 AF at level 50 and reinforced around 600 and chain/scale around 700 but they don't have 50% 60% and 70% absorb respectively...
legacyAccount
Old Account Original poster
Nov 10, 2011
4,475,035
1,657
Aug 13, 2009
#4
As I said, the paperdoll AF doesn't mean anything.
A rr5+ caster with 100% qual armor will get 51 effective AF from a piece of armor, that would equal 5.1% absorb. You can get up to 5% more from AF in your template too.



So lets say i have a 100%qual level 51 robe and +50 AF in my template. This would give me 10.1% absorb for hits on my torso.

Now lets say my pants only has 45 effective AF. I still get the +50 from my template, but i would still only have 9.5% absorb from hits on my legs.


It's not that simple though because as we all know, having a pair of level 20 pants hurts a lot more than the 3% absorb you would loose. My "formula" only aplies to AF varience from the quality of your armor.
legacyAccount
Old Account Original poster
Nov 10, 2011
4,475,035
1,657
Aug 13, 2009
#5
And again, i could be (and probably is) way off on this. I'd love to see either some real testing or a real, official formula posted on the subject [face_tongue]
legacyAccount
Old Account Original poster
Nov 10, 2011
4,475,035
1,657
Aug 14, 2009
#6
if i have time in a bit i will run some simple tests...as a heretic i have a bigger pool than most of AF to work with and see how large amounts of AF affect things
legacyAccount
Old Account Original poster
Nov 10, 2011
4,475,035
1,657
Aug 14, 2009
#7
it's hard to pinpoint when you have weapon variance...so i took damage means for each increment of AF i tested...and calculated the average damage mitigated from those....my swings sets were very small but i think i came relatively close to the average damage one could expect

anywho

with variance my numbers came out as such

damage swing test

going from 359 AF to 686 AF netted me a 40% damage reduction...1% for every 8 AF

going from 359 AF to 749 AF netted me a 45% damage reduction...1% for every 8.6 AF

going from 686 AF to 749 AF netted me a 8% damage reduction....1% for every 8 AF


if you calculate the % difference's of those numbers (ie (686-359)/686=48%...etc) you get 48%/52%/8.5% respectively

so i would be safe to assume (because this is where the numbers point to) that those % differences in AF values should probably be the actual damage reduction in their respective ranges (ie 359 to 686 should probably net a 48% damage reduction)....if there were no variance or if variance were narrowed down via a much larger swing test....

theoretical values

(686-359)/686=48% damage reduction...which comes out to 1% for every 6.8 AF

(749-359)/749= 52% damage reduction...which comes out to 1% for every 7.5 AF

(749-686)/749=8.5% damage reduction...which comes out to 1% for every 7.4 AF



so it seems that the small test indicates that you get 1% less damage per 7-9 AF

the theoretical % damage reduction is more in the order of 1% for every 6.5-8 AF