Directory:

1. Effective life theory

Two. "Diminishing returns on armor"

Three. Armor and life understanding of the value of data

Iv. Scalecrackerthe old rules

Friday. Scalecrackernew rules

1. Effective life theory

First, it is necessary to clarify the effective theory of life, This is the whole basis of Posts. We know that the lives of each role have the maximum values are, when you bear more than you hurt when the ceiling of life, would die. In fact, if you figure there is 10000HP, eat a 10000 original injury when the physical attack, then you will fall?

Am sure you will not die, because you have armor, you are late for the actual harm and not 10000. At the role of armor, you bear to hurt the original injury is part of the armor you can help, go to bear than the upper limit of your life more physical harm. In other words, consider a role in the ability to bear physical harm (in this case did not say anti-strike capability are neglected here because the attack has been around the block defense situation), in addition to considering the value of their lives, we must also consider the value of its armor.

If you have 10000HP, 50% minus the armor injury, then you will be able to bear the physical injury 20000. At this time, we can import a concept: effective life. The so-called effective life, this means considering the armor minus injured under the premise of a role can withstand a maximum number of physical harm. Its mathematical formulation is: the actual effective life = HP / (1 - armor minus the percentage of injury). A role in the study of physical attacks on affordability, it should be an effective life from the point of view.

Two. "Diminishing returns on armor"

All along, there is an argument: because the percentage of armor and armor-free value is not directly proportional to, but at Armor upgrade the value of a linear process, injury-free percentage of armor upgrade becomes slow, such as the role of a raise from 1000 2000 A, will be able to avoid injury from 8.65% to 15.93%, from 10000 A to 11000 A, the avoidance of injury only from 48.64% to 51.03%, the same increase in 1000 are A, the former was 7.28 percent injury-free upgrade, which received only 2.39 percent injury-free upgrade.

In short, that is to say, with the armor upgrade and increase access to free contour armor effects are diminishing, more generally, is the armor gains are diminishing. This is the so-called diminishing returns on armor.

Tried to go gleaned Argument "armor diminishing returns" is wrong, prove that also varied ways, and finally the conclusions are "descending on the" error, armor gains are linear, never descending. Such as endemic to say is: you armor at low-income section of what implications does it have to upgrade, such as from 0% to 20%, 2W injury smashing down is reduced to 16000 from 20000, there is a big difference? And from 60% to 80% is different, it is the difference between 8000 and 4000.

Well, this demonstration seems very right, my example here is not to go out to refute him, but give an example to see how our predecessors are negative "regressive theory" only.

Three. Armor and life understanding of the value of data

Previous discussions on this issue, most of them are by first getting a special value, then compare the argumentation approach to examine this issue. But here, I want to go from formula analyze this problem.

First of all, we look at a group of the formula at this stage:

Damage Reduction% = Armor / (Armor + Armor factor)

Armor factor = ((85 * Armor Level) +400)

Armor Level = Level + 4.5 * Person (Person Level -59)

Suffer harm at the role of = 70, the source of injury to the role of = 70 under the premise of the above formula can be substituted into a formula:

Damage Reduction% = Armor / (Armor +10557.5)

Convenience in order to describe, using ac to express armor value, k = 10557.5, hp express the value of the original life

Is: Damage Reduction% = ac / (ac + k)

Effective life = hp / (1 - harm reduction%)

Finally organize a: effective life = hp * (ac + k) / k = hp + hp * ac / k

Still take the example cited above, the ac from 1K to 2K's ac, injury-free by 8.65% to 15.93%, and are subject to injury reduced to 91.35 percent from 84.07 percent, effective life to 109.5% from 118.9%, an absolute upgrade are 9.4%, 8.58% are relatively upgrade.

Ac from 10K to 11K of the ac, the avoidance of injury from 48.64% to 51.03%, and are subject to injury reduced to 51.63 percent from 48.97 percent, effective lives up to 193.7 percent from 204.2 percent, 10.5 percent are definitely enhance the relative upgrading are 5.42 %.

At this point, we can consider absolute upgrade is fixed, but relatively upgrade are diminishing. Yes, you in relation to the original foundation, the armor gains are diminishing! Easy, according to an example, that is, from 1 to 2, you are a steady growth in the one, but you can also be said that an increase of one-fold, from 100 to 101, you have a steady increase of one, you can also say yes an increase of 1.01 times the earnings situation of armor is the reason.

Up from the formula, the effective life = hp + hp * ac / k, can be seen, this is a linear equation, when the ac upgrade, it is effective in increasing the stability of the absolute value of life.

For example, when you stop a, the effective life you up 5K (assumption), the effective increase of 10 percent of life, when you stop a(if it can be any), you would no longer effective life stability Up to 5K, the effective life may be increased only 8 percent of the.

Let's look at another situation: When the ac steady according to a multiple of N increases, how to look at the situation. Effective life '= hp + hp * ac * N / k, that N is increasing in multiples of ac, we can see that the effective life' compared with the original effective life, and did not increase N-fold, but a less than N multiples.

So, in fact, "diminishing returns on armor" and "armor gains always linear," in fact not who is right, they are just from a different angle to look at this math problem, with the armor upgrade arithmetic, effective life corresponding increase in arithmetic; and armor geometric increase, effective life and should not geometric increase, but lags behind the ratio.
Iv. Scalecrackerthe old rules

Armor question relative earnings, we also have a revenue problem Scalecracker, at P4, I first discuss some of the old rules Scalecrackerproblems.

Emerged from Scalecrackerloaded, the people on the basis of its properties to start a lot of research, and finally received by the general public to identify a series of basic conclusion:

1. Scalecrackerpiled higher, the greater the earnings, lower Scalecrackerno need to heap.

2. Scalecrackerof Pouilly / low A BOSS great influence Scalecrackerloaded + fighters must break 5 / 5 stars thieves broke + FM, will easily Pouilly nude

3. A goal of high-loaded Scalecrackerhas very little meaning, did not break broken as equal, but also for their own losses mounted Scalecrackera lot of property, more harm than good

4. Scalecrackerhave Capping target armor can not be used after cut

5. ... Thought to add ...

So, it is clear that U.S. out of a Conclusion: Scalecrackercapped at before, and its earnings are increasing. As a matter of fact, I go at the first in-depth study of "armor gains are linear" This opinion, I immediately think of Scalecracker, I want to, Say now that the proceeds are linear armor (of course understand that it is now Can not such a simple explanation of this issue), then how will Scalecrackerearnings are increasing, it is an armor Scalecrackercompletely opposite growth computing them, why is not it linear? Then I try to go take a look at this from the formula Scalecrackerproperty (the old), how exactly is the case?

Target injury-free = ac / (ac + k)

Actual DPS = original DPS * (1 - the avoidance of injury) = original DPS * k / (ac + k)

Based Scalecracker= X, the actual DPS = original DPS * k / (ac + kX)

Can see that type Zhongyuan DPS k ac are constants, since the variables X, the dependent variable for the actual DPS, when X stable by numerical must upgrade, the actual DPS is the inverse function showed growth, up more and more quickly, which Scalecrackeris increasing returns to explain the math. (This is from the perspective of DPS)

We will look at why a target of high Scalecrackerlittle effect, while a goal of low impact is obvious.

Effective life = hp + hp * ac / k

When the number of X's Scalecrackerrole: effective life = hp + hp * (ac-X) / k = (hp + hp * ac / k)-hp * X / k

We can see, no matter how many goals there is AC, the role should be Scalecrackerare fixed, from the formula point of view, regardless of any objective, non-discriminatory manner Scalecrackerare in many cases the objectives of stability in a period of effective life. This seems to us there is contradiction Scalecrackerthe Know: The increment of them are Scalecrackertarget the lower A, Scalecrackermore obvious, how it will be stable? In fact, this is just from a different angle to look at this math problem brought about by the difference.

A assumes that a 20K and a 5K goal A goal of a B, same 70, with 1W lives have been many cases are the same for a 5K.

 Scalecrackerbefore then, A is the effective life-28943, B the effective life is 14,736

 Scalecrackerafter, A's effective life is 24208, B was nudity, effective life for 10000

Things are very uncertain, and a value for different objectives, at the same Scalecrackerunder the effective life were many cases are the same, the example above, there have been many cases 4736. However, the significance of its role by not the case: A has been many cases only the original effective life of about 1 / 7, but B has been many cases the effective life of the original accounting for the 1 / 3. If A and B same 1000 DPS sustained attempt to attack, then at the same Scalecrackerunder the influence, A survival time is reduced to 29 seconds from 24 seconds, B survival time is reduced to 15 seconds from 10 seconds, we are all the same short 5 second life, the significance in the battle not the case.

That is why Pouilly seems more afraid of the reasons for the Scalecracker.

Similarly, the use of effective survival time of life ---- the theory to explain why Scalecrackerthe impact of DPS are incremental, we can complete a thorough explanation of "why armor proceeds always linear, but it is incremental revenue Scalecracker" this contradiction a. In fact, with the Scalecrackerincrease in property Scalecrackerare in a stable target to reduce the survival time and reduce the effective life goals.

An example of a simple, one start, you Scalecrackerof the regiment is not enough, give your 1000 Scalecrackerone person can only put BOSS survival time from 10 minutes down to nine minutes, then continue to give you 1000 Scalecrackerone person, you put 9 minutes pressure into eight minutes. Anyone who can look on the found, from 10 down to 9, from 9 down to 8, from the absolute time point of view, are compressed one minute, but the DPS upgrade is not the same.

Extreme points and then said that from 100 minutes down to 99 minutes, and from 2 minutes down to 1 minute of this comparison, not the same one you said? BOSS is to get a short-lived one minute, but the DPS gap is significantly different.

Friday. Scalecrackernew rules

3.0 big changes ScalecrackerNERF, from many cases the target armor fixed value on a goal many cases a certain percentage of armor.

First take a look at the new rules, how Scalecrackerrole:

Set X is the target percentage Scalecrackereffective life = hp + hp * ac (1-X) / k = (hp + hp * ac / k)-hp * ac * X / k

We can see that, even if the new rules, as Scalecrackerupgrading Scalecrackerstill many cases the objectives are part of the stability of the effective life, but it many cases the effective quantity of life and a basic value of the relevant objectives.

This concluded that, in PVE, we tentatively consider BOSS A values are almost right, the characteristics of Scalecrackerstill not changed, still more reactors are more fierce, but the starting point for a low (low number of specific, this is not The focus of this article), but can be expected in WLK, with Scalecrackerupgrading, it will definitely be back. In fact, BLZ also see this point, so they do not modify the basic formula Scalecrackeronly 3.10 at Scalecrackerwill enhance the effectiveness of 25%.

In fact, Scalecrackerfrom 2.4 to 3.1 this several times, that is, the same can ScalecrackerLevel for more or less the effect of Scalecrackerissue and it does not fundamentally change the algorithm Scalecrackerup. Scalecrackerabout some of the basic theory has not Change, Change only figure on the problem.

Medium in PVP, the situation is more complicated. For the high-A targets, Scalecrackerto the lives of many cases more effective, but also many cases a relatively low target a greater proportion of the effective life! Still above the two years, for example AB.

A are 20K of ac, have been many cases 50%, that is, 10K for ac

Into the effective life = (hp + hp * ac / k)-hp * ac * X / k

After computing the effective lives of the remaining 19,471 that is many cases the effective life of the decline in 9472 are 32.73%

Let's look at the role of B

B are 5K's ac, have been many cases 50%, that is 2.5K of ac

Into the effective life = (hp + hp * ac / k)-hp * ac * X / k

After computing the effective lives of the remaining 12,368 that is many cases the effective life of the 2368 drop is 16.07%

Come from a purely formula up to look at this issue, because the effective value of life is life and armor from the value of the common decisions, Scalecrackersolely on the basis of the percentage of value to the role of this factor in the armor on, but life should not affect the value of this factor, so a target inside the effective life, factors that accounted for more armor, it Scalecrackeraffected by the bigger factor in the lives of many more, it is the least impact from Scalecracker.

So that we understand, in terms of absolute or relative proportions of the point of view, the new version of Scalecrackerare able to target the high-A, causing more noticeable impact, and a goal of low impact is relatively small.

Note: The above discussion of the data used are applicable to the role of 70.

Damage Reduction% = Armor / (Armor + Armor factor)

Armor factor = ((85 * Armor Level) +400)

Armor Level = Level + 4.5 * Person (Person Level -59)

It is said that after 80, which has changed the formula 3.

But I have not found, it can not be analyzed.

If this formula is applied to three, then click the text in each derived formula is still available, just stop figure changed.

80 If the formula has changed, but not a big problem, analytical methods are the same, did not deal with the estimated number of degree of difficulty.