= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Relsqui comments on Swords and Armor: A Game Theory Thought Experiment - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (68)
That's true; despite having the same damage per minute, the red swords stats are harmed more by armour damage reduction (since if x<y, (x-a)y < x(y-a)).
It should be noted that the Armour Damage stat only affects a Sword's Damage stat, while Dodge is global: Mitigated Damage per minute = (Sword Damage + Armour Damage) * Speed * (1-Dodge)
But the blue sword is harmed more by dodging, because it has fewer chances in a minute to do any damage at all. If we were looking at just dodge, and not damage absorption, the red one would do more damage in (100-dodge)% of a minute's worth of attacks.
Does the absorption factor outweigh that, then? :)
No sword is harmed more or less by dodging than any other sword, under the stated assumption that hit points are large enough that the results are effectively always equal to their expectations.
That reasoning didn't get the point across to me at all, but I sat down to do the math and see how it worked out for myself and you're right. Never mind. :)
I omitted my reasoning. I'm glad you found it for yourself :)