An Endurance Analysis (in General)

QBsutekh137 February 6 2005 2:16 PM EST

I decided to mess around and try to figure out a little more about endurance today.

We don't know whether Protection is "endurance-like" or completely separate, so right now there are really only two ways to have endurance on a character: ToJ and ToE. I decided to go up against each in a controlled fashion to see how much damage reduction endurance offers.

First off, I found a nice, plump, unarmored team I could fire arrows into. That turned out to be team Jangja. This would give me a full (base) damage number to work from. Here are the results of that:

101 hits, total damage of 974,281, or 9646 damage per shot

(in case it matters later, my pertinent numbers at the time as far as damage goes: STR = 30,006, Weapon = Compound Bow, Weapon x = 5x33, Archery factor = 1.00, Ammo = 8x5 arrows).

I then went up against the third-largest ToJ in the game, a level 142,920 tattoo on The Nunnery. Took a long time to get my data (little sucker was hard to hit), but I eventually came up with the following numbers:

100 hits, total damage of 291,609, or 2916 damage per shot

Then, calculating damage reduction:

(9646 - 2916)/9646 = 0.6977, or about 70%

I then went up against the largest ToE in the game, which happened to be on a very small character (Jesova Ho) at the time. The tattoo was level 48,270 when I took my shots. Here are those numbers (fewer shots because I didn't want to waste BA):

20 hits, total damage of 59,899, or 2995 damage per shot

Damage reduction calculation in this case:

(9646 - 2995)/9646 = 0.6895, or about 69%

All targets had no armor, and nothing else (as far as I could tell) that would result in damage reduction.

So, in summary:

Level 142,920 ToJ yields 70% damage reduction (against physical attack)
Level 48,270 ToE yields 69% damage reduction (against physical attack)

These tattoos offer about the same level of damage reduction against physical attack. I do not know if magic damage would see the same reduction, and I am not going to try to test (things die too quickly, and I am not going to work in the 10 and 20 percent reduction in MM ranged effectiveness when attacking these opponents). I also do not know if endurance is simply a reduction factor applied to damage leftover after armor is figured in, or if it is a far more elaborate reducer based on attacker STR, weapon damage, DD level, etc. I would assume it is a simple reduction factor, as anything else seems overly complex (especially since different calculations would have to be used on physical vs. magical damage). If it is NOT a simple reduction factor, then this whole analysis is basically useless by itself. I would have to do it all again in a month or two and try to compare damage inputs (STR, x, ammo) then and now. (I can tell you that this lazy Osiran is probably not going to bother. *smile*)

I don't really have a point, but do have some observations. I think the endurance on the ToJ is over-trained. ToJs already have great advantages over the ToE: I have no problem with the ToE being a MASSIVE damage reducer. It should be, because that is the only purpose it serves. Also, it eats the tattoo slot for a character, and it does NOT provide a familiar. But even at three times the level, I do not think a ToJ should provide similar damage reduction. Seventy percent is quite substantial, especially for a familiar that trains its own HP and can be a receptacle for additional ablative shield hit points. Especially as a supporter item, this level of growth seems excessive. Other than the DBs and TSA, I don't recall any supporter item being upgradable, much less this effective at high levels. There is no reason to think that the usefulness of ToJs as a shield will decline, especially for teams who invest heavily in AS. A ToJ should have to be at least an order of magnitude bigger than a ToE to offer similar reduction (in my opinion). Maybe the curves are intersecting here and from there the ToE will absolutely dominate. But they are already at 70% reduction. I will check this out again once we get ToJs at the 400-500K level and see if the damage reduction has improved much. Maybe 70% is about where their endurance-training curve levels off and gets harder to grow.

I understand the ToE does have another pseudo-advantage: since it is not a familiar, it can be very useful for a single-minion team with massive hit points, protecting its master's hit points instead of its own. But in the world of Ablative Shield, it is too easy to give a ToJ a similarly massive dose of HP and have its endurance turn it into an incredible shield. I know Dispel Magic can combat AS, but that is not my point here.

As a final note, why do all of the performance curves in the game seem to ramp up so quickly? As I stated earlier, I am completely on board with the ToE reaching amazing levels of damage reduction. But does it have to hit 69% already at only level 48K? Almost daily we see posts with folks complaining about how huge tattoos are propelling newbies to the upper score ranks in a matter of days. Part of that is because these growth curves are weighted so heavily on the low end. I know we aren't all in this game to reach 2 million PR. But a LOT of people are. Why not make the growth be slower at the lower and intermediate points and then have it level off? Comparing the ToE's 69% damage reduction to pure AC in CB1 (using the canonical 0.21% reduction per AC point) means that it would have required an AC (equipment plus Protection) of 329 to attain 70% reduction. That would take a while to attain from scratch -- a long while. Now we can do it with a measly 48K level tattoo? Let the sky be the limit -- just don't shoot us all there within the first 2 months of playing.

[FireBreathing]Chicken February 6 2005 2:27 PM EST

I don't think we know enough about Endurance to judge just yet. For all we know, it 70% may just be a cap for a linear reduction of damage. Hit it with different arrows and see if there is a trend.

[FireBreathing]Chicken February 6 2005 2:27 PM EST

Good info though.

Goon February 6 2005 3:03 PM EST

Yeah, thanks alot for the info, you have obviously put alot of effort into this. I appreciate it.

Arorrr February 6 2005 3:13 PM EST

Tat is new. Jon isn't finish tweaking them yet, seeing how long he figured out the ToJ bug and the Tat exp bug. Your analysis is pretty good. I have to agree with you. It's all in Jon mind. He's the only who can say one way or another.

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] February 6 2005 3:31 PM EST

I think the level of endurance would be around 1/6th the level of the tattoo (a ToJ trains 6 stats, nearly all equally), so in this case the ToJ's Endurance would be around 23,820.

Personally (although I have no data to back this up) I think Endurance works like AMF but for all damage. Compare the level of Endurance to the Damage taken, and reduce it by X. 70% could be an upper cap if Endurance level is greater (or much greater) than damage done. Try hitting a ToE of a level around you average damage, and see what difference that makes.


MrC [DodgingTheEvilForgeFees] February 6 2005 3:37 PM EST

A couple notes on this,

1: My ToE gets at least 50% damage reduction, probably closer to the 69% mentioned, I think those numbers are fairly accurate.

2: ToJs have one purpose for the majority of characters, they are a meat shield, their HP is average at best, they don't have the DX to dodge anything, so they have endurance.

3: Next time you're going to give me the chance to be attacked 100 times by a character that I can beat just so you can test something, let me know before I loan out my tat, I want the free EXP ;)

4: One theory on Endurance is that it's an AMF, of course it doesn't return damage but it blocks depending on your Endurance level and your opponent's ST/Damage/NW/DD/Whatever, I'd be interested to see if someone with a smaller character wants to do some testing on these.

QBsutekh137 February 6 2005 4:06 PM EST

If you had been wearing it Chuck, I would have found a different target. *smile*

I didn't even think about a 70% cap...that makes a great deal of sense, and would explain the very similar results.

I just can't see Endurance being a comparative thing, like AMF. Imagine the damage inputs when it comes to physical attacks: STR, weapon, and ammo (in the case of ranged). How would you make a ratio of all that? Do you really think Jon is building that all in? Against DD level, yeah, dead simple. But it is the physical damage that would be hard to make a ratio for, as there is no single number that represents the "level" of a physical attack. Just my two cents...

Chicken, good idea on the arrows, but if the damage reduction ends up being 70% again, we still won't know whether it is a cap or just the damage reduction factor. But maybe it will be different. I will save up some BA and jack up some arrows and we will see.

MrC [DodgingTheEvilForgeFees] February 6 2005 5:09 PM EST

Ok, I'll actually do the maths on this. Attacking True Torch a 10k PR character, my AC was and is at 0, all damage he dealt for what it counts was in the first round of ranged.

Without My 48,920 ToE
20 hits. Total Damage 49,800. Average Damage 2,490.
With my 48,920 ToE
20 hits. Total Damage 14,263. Average Damage 713.

That was about 70% reduction.
I guess it's not like AMF, um, yay for me I guess, my tat's better than I thought. =)

/me goes off to do something else before my head explodes from looking at all of these numbers.

Cossadinha February 6 2005 5:14 PM EST

Very good thread. Im improving my little LToE slowly and like you said its effective with a single tank. Hes level 6k +- still.

QBsutekh137 February 6 2005 6:07 PM EST

Chuckles, maybe I am missing does that show it is a straight damage reducer? You just did an on/off test. Still shows that 70% might be a cap, might just be your current reduction factor, or reduction might be based on something else.

All these numbers, no answers. *smile* That's why we love CB, right? Um, right?

MrC [DodgingTheEvilForgeFees] February 6 2005 6:10 PM EST

Heh, yeah, the cap is still a possibility.

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] February 6 2005 6:10 PM EST

Hmmm I still think it might be level of Endurance (tattoo...) versus actual damage taken. With MrC's example, the damage being dealt was far below the level of his Endurance, so reaches (an assumed) 70% cap.

If no one can post a reduction of above 70%, let's assume that a 70% cap exists! ;)

I highly doubt Endurance gives a 70% reduction of all damage taken (with the exception of Decay) across the board. It's level will play a part somehow...

[FireBreathing]Chicken February 6 2005 10:01 PM EST

I'm still inclined to stick with my linear damage reduction with 70% cap theory.

Starseed^Lure February 7 2005 6:57 AM EST

The Jig doesn't have one, but two damage reducing abilities against physical attacks. The first is endurance and the second is strength. Taken from the help section

"ST - Strength. A stronger Minion will deal more damage to opponents and resist (physical) damage better himself".

That is why the Jig seems to have a damage reduction similar to the ToE when pitted against your bow.

Other than that, very well put. I'm sure tatoos will see a few changes in the future.

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] February 7 2005 7:04 AM EST

If the Strength reduction follows the same mechanics as it did in CB1 (which I suspect), this gives only a little damage reduction. Endurance far outweighs any Strength the Jig may have.

[EG] Almuric February 7 2005 10:04 AM EST

Off-topic: Does anyone beside me think that Chet is actually Sutekh?

Todd February 7 2005 10:09 AM EST

Chet is Sutkeh.

Welcome to CB2 :)


QBsutekh137 February 7 2005 10:24 AM EST

Good gravy, and right off the bat, Todd mis-spells it. *smile*

Call me Chet folks, please. New game, new start, new guy.

Sutekh/Sutkeh/Sut/Sute/Sutehk/TehSuk is dead.

If you want a more consistent name to call me, you could call me Joe, but I won't respond to that here in the imaginary world. *smile*

Starseed/Gentleman, does the STR damage reduction even apply to ranged? I know it requires a melee weapon being equipped to work in melee, so was thinking it does not even apply (or only applies very little) in ranged?

But a good point... I thought about that for a second and then hoped that it wouldn't be enough of a factor to affect my (somewhat useless anyway) data.

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] February 7 2005 1:49 PM EST

Good point... I assumed that if you were capable of using a melee weapon(No UC, No DD Spell, Melee weapon equipped), you would get the Strength reduction, even versus ranged attacks.

Maybe it only applies to melee attacks period.


Can't remember the changelog post from CB1 and too lazy to log back on to hunt for it...
This thread is closed to new posts. However, you are welcome to reference it from a new thread; link this with the html <a href="/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=001Bt2">An Endurance Analysis</a>