Originally by: SharpMango

---

um. times two over what? over zero?
huh.....you're confusing me.

---

Originally by: Tarminic

---

Because even when EVE sucks, it sucks less than every other MMO out there.

---

Originally by: P'uck

---

You're a DUMBASS - bold italic underline at the VERY LEAST.

---

Originally by: CCP Wrangler

---

Second, a gentile is a non jewish person

---

Originally by: Akita T

---

Originally by: SharpMango

---

um. times two over what? over zero?
huh.....you're confusing me.

---

0% resists comes out as x1 hardening (i.e. "normal damage taken")
1/(1-0)=1... Duuh ?

---

Originally by: BiggestT

---

the wyvern is the single hottest cap ship in existence.

---

Originally by: Benco97

---

The current system is much better, sorry.

---

Originally by: Benco97

---

The current system is much better, sorry.

---

Originally by: Jana Clant

---

This! Your proposal confuses me. When someone says they have 75% explosive resistance I immediately know their tank will absorb 75% of the damage and let 25% through. Now a 4x hardening factor, what the heck is that supposed to mean? (besides the obvious sexual innuendo)

---

Originally by: Akita T

---

would have previously been listed as "resists are now 25%/62.5%/55%/40%"... afterwards, it would just be listed as "hardening is now x1.33333/x2.66666/x2.22222/x1.66666"

---

Originally by: Akita T

---

4 times more tank than base/raw tank on that particular resist, of course.
What else ?

---

Originally by: Akita T

---

Sure, you can TRY TO mentally calculate that 87.89124% resists means 1/(1-0.8789124) = (aprox) 8.25848394 times more tank than base on that particular now-87.89124%-resist.
But wouldn't it be THAT much simpler to just have it DISPLAY as x8.25848 in the showinfo instead ?

---

Originally by: deadmaus

---

Because by the time we had calmed Plague down after he heard BoB were back in the vicinity it was too late to do anything

Originally by: Armoured C

---

the resist are fine so in short nooooooo

in long nooooooooo...[a disturbing amount of O's]

---

Originally by: Akita T

---

Edited by: Akita T on 21/09/2008 16:00:31
Sure, you can TRY TO mentally calculate that 87.89124% resists means 1/(1-0.8789124) = (aprox) 8.25848394 times more tank than base on that particular now-87.89124%-resist.
But wouldn't it be THAT much simpler to just have it DISPLAY as x8.25848 in the showinfo instead ?

---

Originally by: Akita T

---

Sure, you can TRY TO mentally calculate that 87.89124% resists means 1/(1-0.8789124) = (aprox) 8.25848394 times more tank than base on that particular now-87.89124%-resist.
But wouldn't it be THAT much simpler to just have it DISPLAY as x8.25848 in the showinfo instead ?

---

Originally by: Akita T

---

Sheesh, the hostility on ANY display change, even if it's one that simplifies your life

---

Originally by: Akita T

---

Sheesh, the hostility on ANY display change, even if it's one that simplifies your life

---

Originally by: CCP Wrangler

---

Not it isn't, people should be encouraged to get out in low sec space, but never forced to do so.

---

Originally by: Dantes Revenge

---

So let's see. Base resist of 30%, add a x2 hardener makes it 60% so now I've lost 5% over the existing fit.

---

Quote:

---

Now try the OP's idea with 21% or even 37% amplifiers.

---

Originally by: Suboran

---

whats to hard to understand about a straight up percentage?

---

Originally by: CCP Atropos

---

I pod people because there's money to be made in selling tears.

---

Originally by: Tippia

---

Originally by: Suboran

---

whats to hard to understand about a straight up percentage?

---

Nothing. As I understand it, it's more about the combination calculations:

What do you get if you combine a 50%, a 33%, a 40% and a 17% resist?
What do you get if you combine a x2, a x1.5, a x1.66 and a x1.2 capacity mod?

In both cases, you get the same result. What Akita is asking is which of the two ways is easier to calculate and/or visualise.

---

Originally by: Suboran

---

whats to hard to understand about a straight up percentage?

---

Originally by: soldieroffortune 258

---

"Eve is about making yourself richer while making the other guy poorer"

---

Originally by: soldieroffortune 258

---

**soldieroffortune walks into thread, see's math in the first post, and walks out***

---

Originally by: Eskalin

---

if you don't get it GTFO for you to suggest that the devs dumb down the game any more for those who just don't "get" it makes me frigin livid there was a learning curve on the game what you are suggesting leads to hand holding and that's like balls touching gay

---

Originally by: Saint Lazarus

---

No no it simplifies everything.....or so we're told, and here I was not even realising the current system was confusing people

---

• The pet rock


• Jump To Conclusions board

Originally by: Avernus

---

One of these days, the realization that MASS is no longer significant will catch up with you.

Quote:

---

"resists 0%/50%/40%/20%"
you would list them as "hardening x1/x2/x1.66666/x1.25".

Adding an Invul Field I (25% to all resists == x1.33333 hardening to all resists)

"resists are now 25%/62.5%/55%/40%"
it would just be listed as "hardening is now x1.33333/x2.66666/x2.22222/x1.66666".

---

Originally by: Ezekiel Sulastin

---

And what exactly does knowing what multiplier more than the base tank tell you? If you're so worried about that, go plug it into Excel - the rest of us will concern ourselves with statistics that impact our combat abilities, such as how much damage actually gets through.

---

Originally by: Eternal Fury

---

Edited by: Eternal Fury on 21/09/2008 20:43:33
OR......


The OP could just download EFT and drop in the mods he wants to use and see the actual resists.

Less math = Good.

What's 50% of 100? 50% Resists.

What's 50 % of the remainder.. 75% Resists.

What's 50 % of the remainder.. = 87.5% Resists.

Why is this so hard.. No brackets, no overs/unders, no fractions, just simple math.

And if you can't do the math, theres EFT.

---

Originally by: Saint Lazarus

---

Originally by: soldieroffortune 258

---

**soldieroffortune walks into thread, see's math in the first post, and walks out***

---

No no it simplifies everything.....or so we're told, and here I was not even realising the current system was confusing people

---

Originally by: Strill

---

Edited by: Strill on 21/09/2008 23:20:21

Originally by: Saint Lazarus

---

Originally by: soldieroffortune 258

---

**soldieroffortune walks into thread, see's math in the first post, and walks out***

---

No no it simplifies everything.....or so we're told, and here I was not even realising the current system was confusing people

---

Alright, if it's not confusing, tell me, how much better is 93% resists than 86%?

---

Originally by: Strill

---

Edited by: Strill on 21/09/2008 23:03:00

Originally by: Ezekiel Sulastin

---

And what exactly does knowing what multiplier more than the base tank tell you? If you're so worried about that, go plug it into Excel - the rest of us will concern ourselves with statistics that impact our combat abilities, such as how much damage actually gets through.

---

It tells you how much EHP you actually have. Currently a resist percentage tells you nothing and is extremely unintuitive. For example, let's say I have the choice between 80% resists and 82% resists. I'm inclined to think that it's just a puny 2% resists and ignore it when reality it's an improvement of 11%!!

If we were to use the multiplier display it would be very clear that the 80% resists give you 5x hardening, while the 82% resists give you 5.55x hardening.

---

Originally by: Strill

---

Edited by: Strill on 21/09/2008 23:13:30

Originally by: Eternal Fury

---

Edited by: Eternal Fury on 21/09/2008 20:43:33
OR......


The OP could just download EFT and drop in the mods he wants to use and see the actual resists.

Less math = Good.

What's 50% of 100? 50% Resists.

What's 50 % of the remainder.. 75% Resists.

What's 50 % of the remainder.. = 87.5% Resists.

Why is this so hard.. No brackets, no overs/unders, no fractions, just simple math.

And if you can't do the math, theres EFT.

---

Exactly! Akita's setup would make it simpler.

Instead of having to do all those remainders and come up with 87.5% resists, then have no idea how much survivability 87.5% resists actually gives, you could just do:

What's 2 times 1? 2
What's 2 times 2? 4
What's 2 times 4? 8

There, not only can you tell that your tank will be 8 times as effective, but you don't have to keep subtracting your current resists from 100 to get remainders. You just multiply everything out.

---

Originally by: Dr Wellesley

---

Originally by: Strill

---

Edited by: Strill on 21/09/2008 23:20:21

Originally by: Saint Lazarus

---

Originally by: soldieroffortune 258

---

**soldieroffortune walks into thread, see's math in the first post, and walks out***

---

No no it simplifies everything.....or so we're told, and here I was not even realising the current system was confusing people

---

Alright, if it's not confusing, tell me, how much better is 93% resists than 86%?

---

Twice as good, as 7 (100-93) is half of 14 (100-86).

---

Originally by: Strill

---

Originally by: Dr Wellesley

---

Originally by: Strill

---

Edited by: Strill on 21/09/2008 23:20:21

Originally by: Saint Lazarus

---

Originally by: soldieroffortune 258

---

**soldieroffortune walks into thread, see's math in the first post, and walks out***

---

No no it simplifies everything.....or so we're told, and here I was not even realising the current system was confusing people

---

Alright, if it's not confusing, tell me, how much better is 93% resists than 86%?

---

Twice as good, as 7 (100-93) is half of 14 (100-86).

---

But you had to do 4 operations to get that. Under Akita's system, instead of 93% you would see 14x hardening, and instead of 86% you would see 7x hardening. It would be clear from a glance that one is twice as good as another, and you wouldn't have to go through all that math.

---

Originally by: Eternal Fury

---

Originally by: Strill

---

Originally by: Dr Wellesley

---

Originally by: Strill

---

Edited by: Strill on 21/09/2008 23:20:21

Originally by: Saint Lazarus

---

Originally by: soldieroffortune 258

---

**soldieroffortune walks into thread, see's math in the first post, and walks out***

---

No no it simplifies everything.....or so we're told, and here I was not even realising the current system was confusing people

---

Alright, if it's not confusing, tell me, how much better is 93% resists than 86%?

---

Twice as good, as 7 (100-93) is half of 14 (100-86).

---

But you had to do 4 operations to get that. Under Akita's system, instead of 93% you would see 14x hardening, and instead of 86% you would see 7x hardening. It would be clear from a glance that one is twice as good as another, and you wouldn't have to go through all that math.

---

What math is there to go through?

Is not 93% Resists higher then 86% resists?

---

Quote:

---

Yes 14 is higher then 7, but haveing to back track to find the % so we can figure out what the actual damage resistance IS, is the reason why this setup won't be adopted.

People want the exact %, not a scale. Scales are fine. But exact numbers are better. simpler. Easier.

---

Originally by: Vabjekf

---

Originally by: Strill

---

Edited by: Strill on 21/09/2008 23:03:00

Originally by: Ezekiel Sulastin

---

And what exactly does knowing what multiplier more than the base tank tell you? If you're so worried about that, go plug it into Excel - the rest of us will concern ourselves with statistics that impact our combat abilities, such as how much damage actually gets through.

---

It tells you how much EHP you actually have. Currently a resist percentage tells you nothing and is extremely unintuitive. For example, let's say I have the choice between 80% resists and 82% resists. I'm inclined to think that it's just a puny 2% resists and ignore it when reality it's an improvement of 11%!!

If we were to use the multiplier display it would be very clear that the 80% resists give you 5x hardening, while the 82% resists give you 5.55x hardening.

---

So you are saying that +.55 will seem bigger than +2% to a person who is unable to comprehend numbers?

The current way you calculate resists is easy, you just take the +% off of the remaining %. Its simple. if i have 48% resist, then i have 52% 'not resist', i then add a +30% resist module, and 30% of 52 is 15.6, so i add that to my resist, 63.6% now~ hurray!

That seems much easier than calculating it your way, but maybe im just stupid and cant do it your way as easily.

---

Originally by: Strill

---

Originally by: Vabjekf

---

Originally by: Strill

---

Edited by: Strill on 21/09/2008 23:03:00

Originally by: Ezekiel Sulastin

---

And what exactly does knowing what multiplier more than the base tank tell you? If you're so worried about that, go plug it into Excel - the rest of us will concern ourselves with statistics that impact our combat abilities, such as how much damage actually gets through.

---

It tells you how much EHP you actually have. Currently a resist percentage tells you nothing and is extremely unintuitive. For example, let's say I have the choice between 80% resists and 82% resists. I'm inclined to think that it's just a puny 2% resists and ignore it when reality it's an improvement of 11%!!

If we were to use the multiplier display it would be very clear that the 80% resists give you 5x hardening, while the 82% resists give you 5.55x hardening.

---

So you are saying that +.55 will seem bigger than +2% to a person who is unable to comprehend numbers?

The current way you calculate resists is easy, you just take the +% off of the remaining %. Its simple. if i have 48% resist, then i have 52% 'not resist', i then add a +30% resist module, and 30% of 52 is 15.6, so i add that to my resist, 63.6% now~ hurray!

That seems much easier than calculating it your way, but maybe im just stupid and cant do it your way as easily.

---

You really think it's simpler to think about "not resists", and go through all that rigmarole multiplying percentages by their not resists, then adding them all together when you could just do one multiplication?

So for your example, Under Akita's system it would work like this:

You have 1.92x hardening, and you add a 1.429x hardener. You now have 2.74x hardening.

One multiplication problem, and on top of that, it's clear from a glance how much of a benefit you got from the hardener. Is it really worth it having to do all that math to compare two resists when you could be doing it without even having to think about it?

---

Originally by: Strill

---

Edited by: Strill on 21/09/2008 23:20:21

Originally by: Saint Lazarus

---

Originally by: soldieroffortune 258

---

**soldieroffortune walks into thread, see's math in the first post, and walks out***

---

No no it simplifies everything.....or so we're told, and here I was not even realising the current system was confusing people

---

Alright, if it's not confusing, tell me, how much better is 93% resists than 86%?

---

Originally by: Saint Lazarus

---

Originally by: Strill

---

Edited by: Strill on 21/09/2008 23:20:21

Originally by: Saint Lazarus

---

Originally by: soldieroffortune 258

---

**soldieroffortune walks into thread, see's math in the first post, and walks out***

---

No no it simplifies everything.....or so we're told, and here I was not even realising the current system was confusing people

---

Alright, if it's not confusing, tell me, how much better is 93% resists than 86%?

---

Why the hell would I want to?



Answer that and I'll sign this loco idea

---

Originally by: Dheorl

---

Originally by: Akita T

---

yawn

---

I never knew it was possible to stretch your ego THAT much in 1 post

---

Originally by: Vabjekf

---

Originally by: Strill

---

Originally by: Vabjekf

---

Originally by: Strill

---

Edited by: Strill on 21/09/2008 23:03:00

Originally by: Ezekiel Sulastin

---

And what exactly does knowing what multiplier more than the base tank tell you? If you're so worried about that, go plug it into Excel - the rest of us will concern ourselves with statistics that impact our combat abilities, such as how much damage actually gets through.

---

It tells you how much EHP you actually have. Currently a resist percentage tells you nothing and is extremely unintuitive. For example, let's say I have the choice between 80% resists and 82% resists. I'm inclined to think that it's just a puny 2% resists and ignore it when reality it's an improvement of 11%!!

If we were to use the multiplier display it would be very clear that the 80% resists give you 5x hardening, while the 82% resists give you 5.55x hardening.

---

So you are saying that +.55 will seem bigger than +2% to a person who is unable to comprehend numbers?

The current way you calculate resists is easy, you just take the +% off of the remaining %. Its simple. if i have 48% resist, then i have 52% 'not resist', i then add a +30% resist module, and 30% of 52 is 15.6, so i add that to my resist, 63.6% now~ hurray!

That seems much easier than calculating it your way, but maybe im just stupid and cant do it your way as easily.

---

You really think it's simpler to think about "not resists", and go through all that rigmarole multiplying percentages by their not resists, then adding them all together when you could just do one multiplication?

So for your example, Under Akita's system it would work like this:

You have 1.92x hardening, and you add a 1.429x hardener. You now have 2.74x hardening.

One multiplication problem, and on top of that, it's clear from a glance how much of a benefit you got from the hardener. Is it really worth it having to do all that math to compare two resists when you could be doing it without even having to think about it?

---

I dont think its really that much math.

Also under your system you have to do more thinking to get practical estimates. If im getting hit for X damage fighting a certain enemy, and i equip modules that cuts its damage types down by 30%, i know for sure i am getting hit for 30% less damage than i was just before i equipped the module.

The only time you would need to get a calculator out is to try and get an exact number on the damage mitigation you are getting relative to 0% resists. In that case you will probably be using a fitting tool or have a calculator out anyway to calculate things like cap and everything else.

So, to summarize, percents are easier to understand when you are just fitting a few modules in station. And percents are best to get exact measurements when you are working with a fitting tool and a calculator and running simulations of things.

---

Originally by: Saint Lazarus

---

Originally by: Strill

---

Edited by: Strill on 21/09/2008 23:20:21

Originally by: Saint Lazarus

---

Originally by: soldieroffortune 258

---

**soldieroffortune walks into thread, see's math in the first post, and walks out***

---

No no it simplifies everything.....or so we're told, and here I was not even realising the current system was confusing people

---

Alright, if it's not confusing, tell me, how much better is 93% resists than 86%?

---

Why the hell would I want to?



Answer that and I'll sign this loco idea

---

Originally by: Strill

---

Originally by: Saint Lazarus

---

Originally by: Strill

---

Edited by: Strill on 21/09/2008 23:20:21

Originally by: Saint Lazarus

---

Originally by: soldieroffortune 258

---

**soldieroffortune walks into thread, see's math in the first post, and walks out***

---

No no it simplifies everything.....or so we're told, and here I was not even realising the current system was confusing people

---

Alright, if it's not confusing, tell me, how much better is 93% resists than 86%?

---

Why the hell would I want to?



Answer that and I'll sign this loco idea

---

So you can tell what the hell your stats are giving you! If you don't know what any of your items do, how the heck can you play the game?

---

Originally by: Tortun Nahme

---

I demand resists be displayed in Binary for ultimate simplicity!

---

Originally by: Saint Lazarus

---

90 is a bigger number than 80, and at a glance I can guesstimate how much more effective it is, easy, simple, no BS, lovely job

---

Quote:

---

I know what 90% resis is, I know what 80% resis is, the exact % difference between them interests me as much as quantum physics, whats so hard about that to grasp? you can work out complex math equations yet cant seem to understand that most people dont give a shit?

---

Originally by: Strill

---

Stuff

---

Originally by: Strill

---

The "exact difference" between two percentages can be huge. You're saying don't care whether your battleship has 5 hp or 5,000 hp?

---

Originally by: Strill

---

If that's the case then prepare to get slaughtered in pvp.

---

Originally by: Saint Lazarus

---

I know what 90% resis is, I know what 80% resis is, the exact % difference between them interests me as much as quantum physics, whats so hard about that to grasp? you can work out complex math equations yet cant seem to understand that most people dont give a shit?
90 is a bigger number than 80, and at a glance I can guesstimate how much more effective it is, easy, simple, no BS, lovely job

---

Originally by: Saint Lazarus

---

Originally by: Strill

---

The "exact difference" between two percentages can be huge. You're saying don't care whether your battleship has 5 hp or 5,000 hp?

---

......just , make some more wild exaggerataions why dont you

---

Originally by: Ris Dnalor

---

*sigh*

This isn't complex.

go learn about tracking and optimal/falloff ranges and how they affect your hit ratio... then again, if you have problems with the simple resists, that would likely make your head explode and you should probably stick to missiles ;)

this is Eve, not wow.

enjoy the ride.

---

Originally by: Saint Lazarus

---

Originally by: Strill

---

Stuff

---

Yes you CAN guesstimate its easy! its a concept most people grasp instantly, they may not be able to do the math on it but they know that the higher the % the bigger the difference the % difference makes.

---

Originally by: Akita T

---

Wouldn't it be THAT much easier to have them displayed as "x5.984 -vs- x4.914" or "x16.051 -vs- x11.376" ?

For the resists, you actually have to do a substraction and a division just to see how much better is is.

---

Originally by: Ris Dnalor

---

*sigh*
This isn't complex.
go learn about tracking and optimal/falloff ranges and how they affect your hit ratio... then again, if you have problems with the simple resists, that would likely make your head explode and you should probably stick to missiles ;)
this is Eve, not wow.
enjoy the ride.

---

Originally by: Saint Lazarus

---

Originally by: Akita T

---

Wouldn't it be THAT much easier to have them displayed as "x5.984 -vs- x4.914" or "x16.051 -vs- x11.376" ?

---

Honestly...just no, a straight up % is just easier to read and understand at a glance

---

Originally by: Saint Lazarus

---

they dislike your system as much as you seemingly dislike the current one

---

Originally by: Ris Dnalor

---

Edited by: Ris Dnalor on 22/09/2008 02:55:14
Personally I like the current method. It gives people who can do a little basic math in their head an advantage over those who cannot ( or more likely those who do not want to) . It rewards people for practicing and becoming better with math. Methinks that's a good thing. Especially for kids that play the game. I suppose it's just a different way of thinking about it. A games level of required thought is not and should not be inversely proportional to it's level of rewarded fun. I do understand where you are coming from, but I disagree with it as I believe it encourages and rewards mental laziness. There's enough in the world today encouraging that already.

tralala
Ris Dnalor

---

Originally by: Strill

---

Edited by: Strill on 22/09/2008 02:57:08
This is not a subjective preference. The only way to compare two hp/resist pairs is to do a bunch of stupid math. I'm figuring the people who oppose this don't even know about the stupid math and have been going on wrong ideas the whole time. So ironically the very people this idea would help the most are the ones who oppose it.

---

Originally by: Akita T

---

Originally by: Ris Dnalor

---

*sigh*
This isn't complex.
go learn about tracking and optimal/falloff ranges and how they affect your hit ratio... then again, if you have problems with the simple resists, that would likely make your head explode and you should probably stick to missiles ;)
this is Eve, not wow.
enjoy the ride.

---

Did you just wisecrack at me or at new players in general ?
I'll let you know that I AM one of the two people who actually tested the damage multiplier part of the turret tracking formula.
AND I STILL FIND IT UGLY to have to do these very same calculations in my head, on paper, on the in-game calculator just to see EXACTLY how much better I can tank on a particular resist, when there's absolutely NO NEED to have this specific, hard-to-picture display type when replacing it with a much more intuitive one wouldn't do anything except remove the need to do some superfluous math.

That, and TRY to explain to the several people a day just exactly how resists work.
You know, all those people who go "50% base plus 50% hardener, I should get 100% resists, why don't I?".
If the numbers listed would be "x2 base and x2 hardener", they'd have to be pretty stupid NOT to assume the obvious result would be "x4".

---

Originally by: Ris Dnalor

---

Originally by: Strill

---

Edited by: Strill on 22/09/2008 02:57:08
This is not a subjective preference. The only way to compare two hp/resist pairs is to do a bunch of stupid math. I'm figuring the people who oppose this don't even know about the stupid math and have been going on wrong ideas the whole time. So ironically the very people this idea would help the most are the ones who oppose it.

---

well it's not really a bunch of math. You just have to get your head wrapped around it and grok fully, then it becomes rather an automatic process in your brain.

---

Originally by: Strill

---

Originally by: Ris Dnalor

---

Edited by: Ris Dnalor on 22/09/2008 02:55:14
Personally I like the current method. It gives people who can do a little basic math in their head an advantage over those who cannot ( or more likely those who do not want to) . It rewards people for practicing and becoming better with math. Methinks that's a good thing. Especially for kids that play the game. I suppose it's just a different way of thinking about it. A games level of required thought is not and should not be inversely proportional to it's level of rewarded fun. I do understand where you are coming from, but I disagree with it as I believe it encourages and rewards mental laziness. There's enough in the world today encouraging that already.

tralala
Ris Dnalor

---

So why don't we put all the numbers in binary so everyone has to convert between binary and decimal whenever they try to do anything? That way the people who are willing to think will be rewarded.

---

Originally by: Nova Fox

---

what you suggested wouldnt make much more sense either, you could have it broken down as a tooltip or something but noo your going out of your way to make us learn things your way.

---

Originally by: Strill

---

Originally by: Nova Fox

---

what you suggested wouldnt make much more sense either, you could have it broken down as a tooltip or something but noo your going out of your way to make us learn things your way.

---

It's not "his way" versus "your way". The way he described is the ONLY way to compare two hp/resistance pairs. i.e. YOU HAVE TO DO IT ALREADY. He's proposing that it be simplified so you don't have to do it.

---

Originally by: Ris Dnalor

---

there is already a system in place. The system works. It's not broken.

---

Quote:

---

To take time to make changes to that system would mean not changing something else, that actually is broken.

---

Quote:

---

It's not a lot of math. In fact it's very minimal.

---

Originally by: Strill

---

Originally by: Ris Dnalor

---

Originally by: Strill

---

Edited by: Strill on 22/09/2008 02:57:08
This is not a subjective preference. The only way to compare two hp/resist pairs is to do a bunch of stupid math. I'm figuring the people who oppose this don't even know about the stupid math and have been going on wrong ideas the whole time. So ironically the very people this idea would help the most are the ones who oppose it.

---

well it's not really a bunch of math. You just have to get your head wrapped around it and grok fully, then it becomes rather an automatic process in your brain.

---

Oh I see, so you can do the following math problem in your head:

HP: 750
Resists: 55/55/55/55

HP: 1000
Resists: 40/40/40/40

750 * 1/ (1 - 0.55) = 1666.67
1000* 1/ (1 - 0.40) = 1666.67

Oh whaddya know they're both the same. Could you tell that from the beginning? I certainly couldn't. And I don't think you should have to be a math savant to be able to make convenient comparisons.

---

Originally by: Akita T

---

Edited by: Akita T on 22/09/2008 02:59:54

Originally by: Saint Lazarus

---

Originally by: Akita T

---

Wouldn't it be THAT much easier to have them displayed as "x5.984 -vs- x4.914" or "x16.051 -vs- x11.376" ?

---

Honestly...just no, a straight up % is just easier to read and understand at a glance

---

So you're HONESTLY telling me that 93.77% vs 91.21% is EASIER TO "SEE" than x16.051 vs x11.376 ?!?
Come on... seriously ? You can't really be serious about that, can you ?
How's "percent of damage NOT inflicted" easier to visualise than "how much more can I tank" ?

---

Originally by: Saint Lazarus

---

I seriously dont see how "how much more I can tank" is easier to visualise, I think its backwards when you consider the final % value on a fitted ship is what matters most

---

Originally by: Ris Dnalor

---

Originally by: Strill

---

Originally by: Ris Dnalor

---

Originally by: Strill

---

Edited by: Strill on 22/09/2008 02:57:08
This is not a subjective preference. The only way to compare two hp/resist pairs is to do a bunch of stupid math. I'm figuring the people who oppose this don't even know about the stupid math and have been going on wrong ideas the whole time. So ironically the very people this idea would help the most are the ones who oppose it.

---

well it's not really a bunch of math. You just have to get your head wrapped around it and grok fully, then it becomes rather an automatic process in your brain.

---

Oh I see, so you can do the following math problem in your head:

HP: 750
Resists: 55/55/55/55

HP: 1000
Resists: 40/40/40/40

750 * 1/ (1 - 0.55) = 1666.67
1000* 1/ (1 - 0.40) = 1666.67

Oh whaddya know they're both the same. Could you tell that from the beginning? I certainly couldn't. And I don't think you should have to be a math savant to be able to make convenient comparisons.

---

Quote:

---

No, I didn't know about that at the beginning.

---

---

Originally by: Faife

---

bring back THAC(0) tbh...

---

Originally by: Strill

---

I meant could you tell what the outcome of that math problem would be just by a passive observation. You said that you could just by "grokking" it.

The rest of your post is irrelevant. .... It's about the game solving a math problem for you so you don't have to. Nothing else.

---

Quote:

---

So you're HONESTLY telling me that 93.77% vs 91.21% is EASIER TO "SEE" than x16.051 vs x11.376 ?!?

---

Originally by: Steve Hawkings

---

your explanation was more confusing than how it is now afaic.

---

Originally by: Vabjekf

---

So what do you do when some newbie comes in asking what that x15.21386257 means

---

Quote:

---

Kinetic Resist 95% (50%50%20%)

---

Originally by: Ris Dnalor

---

Originally by: Strill

---

I meant could you tell what the outcome of that math problem would be just by a passive observation. You said that you could just by "grokking" it.

The rest of your post is irrelevant. .... It's about the game solving a math problem for you so you don't have to. Nothing else.

---

Well the rest on my post speaks to a theme that is pervasive throughout eve, so while it is not directly relevant to this specific issue, understanding it will help you to understand why people would resist your idea.

Personally I find the current system very satisfying, and would not find your method any easier. I find your method to be more clunky and more arbitrary than the current one. I also accept that I will not change your mind by posting here. If you read why I and the others who disagree with your method have written here, it could help you to understand why your idea is meeting resistance. It will be up to you whether or not you want to understand. My guess is that you will not, as that would require some mental processing, which you seem to want to avoid. I cannot wish you well on your quest to make this change, but I do wish you well in your journeys through eve.

fly free,
Ris Dnalor

---

Originally by: Nova Fox

---

how about this

Quote:

---

Kinetic Resist 95% (50%50%20%)

---

when you mouse over any of the non white colors it will tell you where its getting those nubmers from in this case blue ship, red modules/rigs, green skills ( you cant get it form skills anways just using it for example)

---

Originally by: Vabjekf

---

But xNUMBERs.. xWHAT? What is x?

---

Originally by: Strill

---

Originally by: Nova Fox

---

how about this

Quote:

---

Kinetic Resist 95% (50%50%20%)

---

when you mouse over any of the non white colors it will tell you where its getting those nubmers from in this case blue ship, red modules/rigs, green skills ( you cant get it form skills anways just using it for example)

---

But that still wouldn't tell you anything. You would have no idea that 95% means you can tank 20x kinetic damage you could with 0% resists.

---

Originally by: Ris Dnalor

---

No, I don't find your method easier to understand. Nor do I find it easier to explain. I think it is harder to relate to what is actually going on than the current percentage method. Perhaps it IS easier for you to explain your method. I am confident that if you put the amount of effort into using the current system that you have into devising a new one, you would have less trouble explaining it. I have no problem figuring the resists with the current method. I have had no problem with it for many years. I don't like your proposed idea. I'm simply trying to do you the courtesy of telling you why I don't like it. Obviously you aren't interested in the whys and wheretofores so I shall desist.

Ris

---

Originally by: Nova Fox

---

Originally by: Strill

---

Originally by: Nova Fox

---

how about this

Quote:

---

Kinetic Resist 95% (50%50%20%)

---

when you mouse over any of the non white colors it will tell you where its getting those nubmers from in this case blue ship, red modules/rigs, green skills ( you cant get it form skills anways just using it for example)

---

But that still wouldn't tell you anything. You would have no idea that 95% means you can tank 20x kinetic damage you could with 0% resists.

---

what is there not to get about 95% of all incomming damage of that type will be blocked?

---

Quote:

---

95% doesn't tell you how much damage you can tank. And that's the only important number.

---

Originally by: Ris Dnalor

---

Perhaps it IS easier for you to explain your method. I am confident that if you put the amount of effort into using the current system that you have into devising a new one, you would have less trouble explaining it.

---

Originally by: Nova Fox

---

Quote:

---

95% doesn't tell you how much damage you can tank. And that's the only important number.

---

so multipling 1.95 is beyond you?

---

Originally by: Nova Fox

---

effective hp isnt an important number to me at all

---

Originally by: Nova Fox

---

effective hp isnt an important number to me at all, none of these numbers reall mean jack when people are less unpredictable and they are going to screw you over anyways.

---

Originally by: Nova Fox

---

Idiots repeat experiments in hopes for success even though the previous experiment with the same conditions and values are unganged had resulted in failure.

---

Originally by: Strill

---

Edited by: Strill on 22/09/2008 04:24:41

Originally by: Nova Fox

---

effective hp isnt an important number to me at all, none of these numbers reall mean jack when people are less unpredictable and they are going to screw you over anyways.

---

So you don't care how much health your ship has... That's not a winning strategy.

---

Originally by: Nova Fox

---

Idiots repeat experiments in hopes for success even though the previous experiment with the same conditions and values are unganged had resulted in failure.

---

Originally by: Akita T

---

Originally by: Ris Dnalor

---

Perhaps it IS easier for you to explain your method. I am confident that if you put the amount of effort into using the current system that you have into devising a new one, you would have less trouble explaining it.

---

Yeah ? HOW MANY times have YOU explained the resists system to newbies ? How many times did YOU have a /facepalm moment while doing that ? How many times had YOU have to basically resort to explaining it to them EXACTLY like I just did in the OP (as a "hardening factor") so they can finally grasp it ?
I'm guessing... hmm... not much, or not at all.
Because otherwise you wouldn't be objecting at all.

---

Originally by: Nova Fox

---

Originally by: Strill

---

Edited by: Strill on 22/09/2008 04:24:41

Originally by: Nova Fox

---

effective hp isnt an important number to me at all, none of these numbers reall mean jack when people are less unpredictable and they are going to screw you over anyways.

---

So you don't care how much health your ship has... That's not a winning strategy.

---

Relying on that number alone isnt going to win any battles period.

---

Originally by: Vabjekf

---

Originally by: Akita T

---

Originally by: Ris Dnalor

---

Perhaps it IS easier for you to explain your method. I am confident that if you put the amount of effort into using the current system that you have into devising a new one, you would have less trouble explaining it.

---

Yeah ? HOW MANY times have YOU explained the resists system to newbies ? How many times did YOU have a /facepalm moment while doing that ? How many times had YOU have to basically resort to explaining it to them EXACTLY like I just did in the OP (as a "hardening factor") so they can finally grasp it ?
I'm guessing... hmm... not much, or not at all.
Because otherwise you wouldn't be objecting at all.

---

Are you saying you have actually had to convert the current system into a totally new one just to explain how the current system works?

I always find it as easy as saying "if you have 50% resist, and add another 50% from a hardener, you go up to 75% resist, because the hardener has cut in half the distance between where you were and 100%" That gets the point across immediately and makes it blatantly obvious the way that resists are calculated, using nice big friendly easy to understand numbers.

---

Originally by: Ampoliros

---

Rather than be a purist, can't we do it both ways?
EM - 75% (x4 hardening)
Explosive - 60% (x2.5 hardening)
Kinetic - 40% (x1.66 hardening)

---

Originally by: Ampoliros

---

Rather than be a purist, can't we do it both ways? Eg:

Resistances:
EM - 75% (x3 hardening)
Explosive - 60% (x2.5 hardening)
Kinetic - 40% (x1.66 hardening)
etc...

with tooltips explaining the relationship between hardening and incoming damage tanked. I like the percentages, they're easy to wrap your mind around at first - while the hardening is something that's handy for on-the-fly calculations of EHP and tankable DPS. Improving the display of these numbers by adding something fairly simple doesn't hurt the game.

---

Originally by: Nova Fox

---

I never had the problem explaining resitances and stacking nerf to new players you make it sound like newbies are brick walls and more idiotic than they really are.

---

Originally by: Akita T

---

Originally by: Ampoliros

---

Rather than be a purist, can't we do it both ways?
EM - 75% (x4 hardening)
Explosive - 60% (x2.5 hardening)
Kinetic - 40% (x1.66 hardening)

---

That could work too... if only you could actually do that.

Sadly, what you'd have to do is you'd have to add 12 new stats to all ships (hardenings for 4 damage types on shield/armor/hull) to go along with the 12 already existing ones (resists).
OR you would need to add those 12 as placeholders in showinfo and dynamically calculate them TOO from actual resists.

But yeah... it could work too.

---

Originally by: Akita T

---

Originally by: Nova Fox

---

I never had the problem explaining resitances and stacking nerf to new players you make it sound like newbies are brick walls and more idiotic than they really are.

---

Really ? You weren't helping your own case either.

---

Originally by: Nova Fox

---

I taught my rookies to self teach so I dont have to go over ever single minute detail, seems to be quite effective in making pilots who are better at pvp than i am.

---

Originally by: Akita T

---

Originally by: Nova Fox

---

I taught my rookies to self teach so I dont have to go over ever single minute detail, seems to be quite effective in making pilots who are better at pvp than i am.

---

Ah, I see... so your aim is "sorting out the guys who can learn easily themselves from the ones that need help" (your personal goal), as opposed to "getting as many people to stick with the game as possible" (CCP's goal).
Gotcha'.

---

Originally by: Akita T

---

OP goes here

---

Originally by: Mustikki

---

Edited by: Mustikki on 22/09/2008 06:10:35
The current system is fine as it is. Introducing any other system will be just as hard, if not harder for illiterate people to understand. Having two systems side by side just doubles the hassle.
If you don't get it now, you won't get it ever no matter how it's introduced to you. Start with http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Percentage and don't skip anymore 5th grade math classes.

---

Originally by: Fink Angel

---

that my armour blocks out 95% of the damage, as compared to your proposal to state that my armour is 9.5 times harder than base

---

Originally by: Akita T

---

Actually, 20 times harder than base
See, even people who KNOW how things work make mistakes like that.

---

Originally by: Vabjekf

---

Edited by: Vabjekf on 22/09/2008 07:26:36
Effective hit points is a lousy way to look at a tank unless you are buffer tanking. Because effective hit points has to take into account the amount of regen/repair/boost you experience over time. But that amount is heavily defendant on how much time you have before you are exploded, and that amount depends on how much DPS the enemy is capable of doing over your ability to mitigate damage.

---

Originally by: Vabjekf

---

Edited by: Vabjekf on 22/09/2008 07:26:36
Effective hit points is a lousy way to look at a tank unless you are buffer tanking. Because effective hit points has to take into account the amount of regen/repair/boost you experience over time. But that amount is heavily defendant on how much time you have before you are exploded, and that amount depends on how much DPS the enemy is capable of doing over your ability to mitigate damage.

---

Originally by: Vabjekf

---

Going back to the 750hp 50%resist vs 1000hp 40%resist model, they come out to the same effective hit points, but the 50% resist is THE BETTER CHOICE. Making them numerically equivalent by providing a super-easy way to do a quick multiplication problem to find 'effective hit points' as a standard for tank strength will just be a way to misinform newbies, not help them.

---

Quote:

---

Since TIME is an important factor, we must stick with things that modify the forces which act over time to us. Namely again, DPS and hit points repaired per second. DPS is the enemies base DPS modified by your resists. Therefore resists are important information to have.

Then you judge a tank based on how much DPS it can absorb before it breaks.

---

Quote:

---

But again, damage in VS damage out seems much more easy to calculate to me when you can just lower the enemy DPS by resists, and then see if you can heal that amount or not, and if not how much DPS is getting past your restorative measures.

---

Quote:

---

This seems the only logical way to think about a tank, because an effective hit points model, if it wants to be accurate in any applicable way, will have to take into account the same 'variable' forces (manly enemy DPS) just to see how much extra hit points it gets from regen/boost/repair before it dies.

---

Originally by: Arkios Odymei

---

But if I say I have a hardening factor of x4, how much damage is being mitigated? Can you tell me at a glance? How about telling me how much less will be mitigated with a hardening factor of x8 vs x12.536? Sure it will be mitigating a factor of roughly 4 and a half less... but how much is that?

---

Originally by: Arkios Odymei

---

Another thing to keep in mind is that the "0-100%" display is a whole lot cleaner looking than "x1 through xInfinity". With percentages, you have an absolute minimum and an absolute maximum clearly defined. With x1 all the way to Infinity and anywhere in between, it just seems a bit more of an arbitrary number (even though technicaly it isnt).

---

Originally by: Ris Dnalor

---

The User Interface has been successfully in place for 5 years. I have been asked how it works by many people during those 5 years, but many more that I have known during that time have figured it out on their own. It's not difficult. You can wave your arms in the air and stamp your feet and shout to the heavens all you like about how crazy we all are for not seeing the infinite wisdom of your logic, but the problem lies with your inability or unwillingness to embrace and learn the system, not with the system itself. The current system works just fine. I can't even believe I'm still posting in this nonsense thread. Guess that just goes to show you I can be baited....

in any case, I'm done with this thread.

have fun in eve, or don't. It's a choice you know...

Ris

---

Originally by: Akita T

---

Originally by: Steve Hawkings

---

your explanation was more confusing than how it is now afaic.

---

"x6" hardening means you can tank 6 times more (compared to the x1 base, equivalent to a 0% resist), as simple as that.
How's that "confusing" ?

---

Originally by: Sturmwolke

---

However, if I'm shooting cruise missiles at an enemy and I discovered a hole in the tank, what sort figure should I shout out to my team as a guesstimate? His resist is about 75% for Thermal or his hardening is about ... umm .. how do I calculate that? Your scale factor just becomes a mess.

---

Originally by: Tippia

---

Originally by: Sturmwolke

---

However, if I'm shooting cruise missiles at an enemy and I discovered a hole in the tank, what sort figure should I shout out to my team as a guesstimate? His resist is about 75% for Thermal or his hardening is about ... umm .. how do I calculate that? Your scale factor just becomes a mess.

---

How much damage are you doing compared to how much you know your missiles put out. Expected DPH / actual DPH = hardening factor.

---

Originally by: Sturmwolke

---

Ahh .. Ms Tippia, failing to see the point as usual.
You've been good I take it? Here, have a cookie

---

Originally by: Strill

---

Edited by: Strill on 22/09/2008 08:21:28

Originally by: Arkios Odymei

---

But if I say I have a hardening factor of x4, how much damage is being mitigated? Can you tell me at a glance? How about telling me how much less will be mitigated with a hardening factor of x8 vs x12.536? Sure it will be mitigating a factor of roughly 4 and a half less... but how much is that?

---

But that's not something you need to know. You want to know how good your tank is compared to any other tank. The multiplier tells you that. If you want to know how much DPS you can tank, the multiplier tells you that too. There's no need to think of it in terms of resistances in the first place. It's just a needless complication.

---

Originally by: Strill

---

Originally by: Arkios Odymei

---

Another thing to keep in mind is that the "0-100%" display is a whole lot cleaner looking than "x1 through xInfinity". With percentages, you have an absolute minimum and an absolute maximum clearly defined. With x1 all the way to Infinity and anywhere in between, it just seems a bit more of an arbitrary number (even though technicaly it isnt).

---

But you see that's one of the problems. Resistance effectiveness goes from 1 to infinity, but it's obscured by the percentages. 100% resists means you have infinite tankability, even though 100 is a finite number. It's counterintuitive.

---

Originally by: Tippia

---

What in your question didn't I answer?
You wanted to know what to tell your friends and how to guesstimate it. I told you how.

If you can figure out that his thermal resist is in the region of 75% by shooting at him (I would presume that you do this by looking at the damage numbers that pop up on the screen), then you can use the exact same numbers to figure out that his thermal hardening is somewhere around x4.

---

• First, the sentence was meant rhetorically.

• Second, it is much easier to guesstimate a percentage over dividing the numbers to get a scale factor.

• Third, the scale factor itself isn't linear and why on earth must my imaginary teammates need to re-convert them to something intuitive and usable.

• Fourth, the base math is still based on percentages. Adding an extra layer for "new" player convenience is admirable, but I still haven't seen any reasonable arguments that tackles it from the attacker's perspective.

Originally by: Ris Dnalor

---

The current system works just fine. I can't even believe I'm still posting in this nonsense thread. Guess that just goes to show you I can be baited....
in any case, I'm done with this thread.

---

Originally by: Akita T

---

Do you notice how a SMALL easily viewable numerical increase in percentage of resists ends up making a HUGE visible difference in tanking power multiplier ?

---

Originally by: Skalet

---

why do we have to cater to stupid people?

---

Originally by: Crumplecorn

---

I prefer the % system because it is easier to visualise and more intuitively reflects the diminishing returns afforded by hardeners applied to already high resists.

---

Quote:

---

On the other hand, with the proposed system, we would instead have noobs who are convinced that hardeners get more effective the more you have, failing to understand that an 4x additive increase from 4x to 8x actually nets you less reduction in incoming DPS than a 2x additive increase from 2x to 4x.

---

Originally by: Tippia

---

---

Originally by: Crumplecorn

---

[good points]

It is also more useful for comparing resists. If I have a 2x resist, a 4x and an 8x, how much more of their damage are the latter nullifying? Twice as much, and then twice again, or four times between the 2x and the 8x, yes, but what does that actually mean? A multiplicative difference like this is inherently comparative - it doesn't make a statement about how effective each is, merely how effective they are compared to each other.

---

Originally by: Takon Orlani

---

Your idea is bad and you should feel bad.

---

Originally by: Crumplecorn

---

Additive changes matter because over time they become insignificant. Consider the extreme case where you have a 99% resist. Another 50% resist will make your tank twice as tough, but the amount of damage being done at that point is so insignificant anyway that in practice there would be better uses for that slot.

---

Quote:

---

Eventually the actual DPS an enemy will do will drop so low as to be significantly smaller than your sustainable repair rate, and thus will no longer matter.

---

Originally by: Tippia

---

Originally by: Crumplecorn

---

It is also more useful for comparing resists. If I have a 2x resist, a 4x and an 8x, how much more of their damage are the latter nullifying? Twice as much, and then twice again, or four times between the 2x and the 8x, yes, but what does that actually mean? A multiplicative difference like this is inherently comparative - it doesn't make a statement about how effective each is, merely how effective they are compared to each other.

---

True, but isn't that exactly what Akita is after, though ù an improved/intuitive way of comparing setups? I certainly understand and appreciate your description of using absolute numbers to weigh tankable DPS to actual DPS output (then again, I'm a mission runner so it's less of a concern for me ù insane overtanking is par for the course ) but I think the goals of that description differs slightly from what's being suggested here.

Multiplicative → enhances comparison between setups.
Additive → enhances comparison between damage output and damage "soak".
I also suspect that a multiplicative display would illustrate stacking penalties better as well.

àso would it be a bad idea to provide both?

---

Originally by: Jana Clant

---

Originally by: Benco97

---

The current system is much better, sorry.

---

This! Your proposal confuses me. When someone says they have 75% explosive resistance I immediately know their tank will absorb 75% of the damage and let 25% through. Now a 4x hardening factor, what the heck is that supposed to mean? (besides the obvious sexual innuendo)

---

Originally by: Aarin Wrath

---

Yeah same here, this proposal confused the heck out of me. The heck is a 4x hardening factor?
The current system is simple and makes perfect sense:
If you have 75% KIN resistance, then 25% will get through.
Sorry but this is a dumb / confusing idea.

---

Originally by: Akita T

---

Yeah, it's an absurd example, but only as a counter-example to an equally absurd example.

---

Originally by: Akita T

---

NOTHING ELSE MATTERS IN EVE !

---

Originally by: Crumplecorn

---

Originally by: Akita T

---

NOTHING ELSE MATTERS IN EVE !
-> You need to survive long enough to reduce the incoming DPS to or below tankable DPS treshold... wether it's killing several of the ships firing on you, one of the ships firing on you, or the ONLY one ship firing on you, the same logic applies.

---

Not even freeing up room in your setup for guns?
I'll concede that a scale measuring the usefulness of further tanking becomes irrelevant if you aren't going to fit anything other than a tank on your ship.

---

Originally by: Aarin Wrath

---

Originally by: Akita T

---

Quick, and without using a calculator, if you can repair 75 armor/second on average and your resists are 92.5%, how much damage per second can you tank on that resist ?
Now, same question, but the hardening factor is x13.333

---

75 units/sec *(100-92.5) = whatever. Done.

---

Originally by: Akita T

---

lots of yelling in caps

---

Originally by: Akita T

---

Ah, sorry, your sarcasm completely disarmed me, and I am now totally unable to respond to your total lack of an actual retort due to you hurting my delicate feelings !
Oh, woe is me, who should I contract my stuff to ?

---

Originally by: Tobias Sjodin

---

Can't we just let the dumb people get confused and go back to WoW?

---

Originally by: Akita T

---

But try to do that with 62.73/(1-0.8519) in your head and see how long it takes to even GET THE ORDER OF MAGNITUDE right on the first try WITHOUT a calculator.

---

Originally by: Aarin Wrath

---

I highly doubt it will do anything to convince me, or anyone else, of how good this idea is for EVE.

---

Originally by: Crumplecorn

---

Originally by: Akita T

---

But try to do that with 62.73/(1-0.8519) in your head and see how long it takes to even GET THE ORDER OF MAGNITUDE right on the first try WITHOUT a calculator.

---

You say this as if someone might actually get the order of magnitude wrong, or take more than a few seconds to answer.

---

Originally by: George Petsch

---

Nochricht: Dei schwarer StroinlSser trifftn Karli[Baatzis] und ruiniert erm so richtig de Dosn, 1343.7 schhodn, oida.

---

Originally by: Ethidium Bromide

---

your system indicates that resistances make your tank able to tank more (active) not take more (passive).

---

Quote:

---

resistances do not infulence the amount of damage you can tank, it is teh amount of damage you do not have to tank!

---