Is Flagellant's "Gain 7 Charges when you are Hit by an Enemy" flask mod OP?
" I wrote that Gladiator version is better against big hits (under the constraints of the perspective). This is simply true and qualitative argumentation (which is what you are doing here) doesnt change that. Continuation of the simple example above: The size of the hits is 80% of life. The Pathfinder version is dead after the second hit. The Gladiator version only takes an expected 32% of life damage (and also recovers some). And if you do the "real math" about chance to survive that: Pathfinder 100% dead. Gladiator 4% dead, 96% alive. So no - this simplistic math perspective shown above does correlate significantly with a better perspective which considers deviation from average which you appear to be implying. " This is your subjective opinion. " Of course its "incorrect". I clearly stated that its simplistic. Feel free to show the correct math if you want. " No, I dont have to do that. I deliberately kept it simple and made a qualitative statement instead - that the Pathfinder version is more reliable. This was not an attempt to fully represent what happens in the game. If you want to do so: Show your math. " That is obvious. What I disagree with is your implication that the perspective I used is useless. It correlates significantly with chance to survive - see simple example above. For hits greater than 100% life you obviously should cap them at 100% though. It makes no sense to not do that - you will just get less useful results if you dont. No wonder it's lost, it's in the middle of the jungle!
|
![]() |
Final Post because you are stuck in your analysis and I don't think Ill be able to change your mind (or correct your line of thinking)...
1. Math is, by definition, not subjective. At least if you are applying it correctly. In this case, you CANNOT gain any useful information about DAMAGE numbers from looking at BLOCK. Block is avoidance. Avoidance, by definition, has no correlation to damage taken. It deals with HITS taken. This is the first variable 2. You have also added into the equation "recovery effects" which are neither avoidance or mitigation. This is another variable. 3. Your analysis of "expected life damage" is simply an incorrect analysis, because you are predicting DAMAGE which you cannot do when dealing with BLOCK. A better analysis would be: Pathfinder can survive 2 hits, whereas Gladiator can AVOID 6 extra hits. Nothing to do with life pool, expected damage, etc. The numbers you are assigning are completely arbitrary and not actually functional in the argument you are trying to make. 4. All of this argument is the classic POE damage avoidance/mitigation misunderstandings that have floated around these forums for YEARS. Your math "seems" like it makes sense, but that is because you are conflating avoidance with mitigation. It is not a subjective issue, it is an incorrect comparison. Look, overall I understand the point you are trying to make. But nothing you are saying, and nothing in your math is giving you ANY information on the SIZE of a hit, or life % expectancy. You are arbitrarily assigning numbers that are not defended by the mechanics you are describing. ***Main point: block does not take into account damage numbers, therefore you cannot infer life% or life expectancy from block. You are comparing apples to oranges to strawberries: mitigation, recovery, and avoidance. One variable cannot be used to compare to another entirely different variable. Last edited by jsuslak313#7615 on Jan 31, 2022, 8:27:14 PM
|
![]() |
Heres the best way I know to SHOW you the difference:
Set their blocks equal to each other. Pathfinder 80% block, 30% life recovery on block Gladiator 80% block, 5% life recovery on block Each takes a succession of hits worth 80% of their life pool. Both die in 2 per 10 hits on average **life recovery plays absolutely no role NOW if you want to look at the life recovery, you can start to play with damage numbers. Each takes a succession of hits worth 60% of their life pool. Pathfinder survives 1 more hit than Gladiator because of the life recovery. **this holds true even if we completely ignore block as a mechanic Notice that hit damage ONLY matters when you are ONLY looking at life recovery. The amount of block doesn't matter when you talk about the AMOUNT of damage. The amount of HITS does. Two different variables, two different equations for actual life expectancy. Now you CAN utilize BOTH mechanics at the same time to describe how Gladiator can theoretically survive longer if it reaches a certain block threshold above the Pathfinder, but you have to remember that avoidance = absence of damage. It gives you no information on the theoretical "tankiness" (ability to take MORE damage at once) of a character. Last edited by jsuslak313#7615 on Jan 31, 2022, 8:38:22 PM
|
![]() |
I'm on a roll now haha: Here's another example.
Pathfinder has 30% recovery on hit, no block. Any hit that deals 30% or less of the Pathfinder health effectively deals zero damage. So lets set the hit damage at 30% Pathfinder takes 10 hits, yields 0% overall damage Gladiator has 80% block, 4% recovery on block. Gladiator takes 10 hits. Yields -28% at best and -60% life at worst overall. 8 hits of 0% with recovery, 1 hit of 30%, 1 hit of 30%. Depending on when you take the hits vs when you block, you get your net result. Take both hits in the beginning you lose 60% life but then you block 8 times and recover 32%. Take the hits at the end, and you recover 0% and take 60% damage. Do you see the discrepancy in damage taken in the block model? THIS is why your equation does not work and why you cannot simply average block chance with expected life Compare those results: pathfinder is more reliable AND better overall. Your analysis yields FALSE DATA. Therefore there is a mathematical error stemming from AVOIDANCE vs MITIGATION. Not subjective at all. Purely numerical Last edited by jsuslak313#7615 on Jan 31, 2022, 8:56:57 PM
|
![]() |
So the actual analysis between the two characters:
Pathfinder is better for smaller hits Gladiator is better for MEDIUM hits, within a small range Both are equal for sufficiently large hits. Since the majority of damage in mapping comes from SMALLER hits, pathfinder is actually the better defensive choice. It's rare that you would get sufficient consistent medium damage for the gladiator to outlast the pathfinder. More often than not, the game is either tons of small hits really really fast or one giant 1hko. Last edited by jsuslak313#7615 on Jan 31, 2022, 8:50:09 PM
|
![]() |
" I also dont think I will change my mind because I dont think I did anything wrong. " This is your big error. While math (sort of) isnt subjective. The choice of model is subjective. The issue is that typically reality is too complex with too many unknowns. Any model you choose is going to be incorrect. You just dont like the model I chose. (Or there is also the possibility you dont understand it.) " My point was to make a simple quantitative analysis as to which of the two is better versus incoming hits of size x. You writing words in CAPS doesnt change that. " Sure I can. Its called "Probability theory" in math. " What are you referring to? " Which numbers are you talking about here? " I dont have such misunderstandings. " Quantitative comparisons of different things are (see above about model building) inevitably "incorrect". That doesnt make them useless. " Not sure what you mean with "SIZE" because hit size is an input variable in my examples. And I deliberately didnt try to calculate life % expectancy due to math effort required. " Sure you can. Maybe there is a word misunderstanding here. I use "expected" as used in math - see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expected_value . " Sure you can - you just have to model it appropriately. And your implication that my model is useless in practice for bossing I also dont share. You may want to consider that real players have life potions and will use them appropriately. While this doesnt make my model fully correct due to this its a lot more useful for bossing than what you may be implying. No wonder it's lost, it's in the middle of the jungle!
|
![]() |
" Pathfinder has recovery on hit not on block. Or are you intentionally making up something else? " What do you mean with 2 per 10 hits on average here? Obviously life recovery does matter here. " No idea what you are trying to say. No wonder it's lost, it's in the middle of the jungle!
|
![]() |
" The outcome of this example is consistent with my results above. The implication is that my model may not be quite as useless as you claim? " I dont see any "FALSE" data. No wonder it's lost, it's in the middle of the jungle!
|
![]() |
" Where do you derive this from? Obviously Gladiator is better for large hits if he has more block%. No wonder it's lost, it's in the middle of the jungle!
|
![]() |
man you just aren't seeing it...it's fruitless. No idea how you can look at my examples and say they are the same as your analyses...You do you bro, I've said my piece.
Block chance is independent of damage amount, except in a certain set of circumstances utilizing OTHER variables. Block itself offers exactly ZERO information on damage because whether you have 10% block, 37% block, 90% block the DAMAGE is always 100% or 0%. It's all the OTHER crap around block that determine the ability to survive and WHAT you can survive. Saying a gladiator can survive bigger hits because they have higher block is just wrong. I shrug my shoulders and move on. |
![]() |