11/30/2012 06:55 AMso what is the TL;DR? Armor is better but more expensive and difficult to get?
Posted by SamIAm
No, but kind of. Armor isn't harder to get, the TL;DR is that AR is ALWAYS better. I also mentioned toward the bottom "It's better to compare piece by piece", which masterjay seems to be ignoring. I'm WELL aware that armor is much cheaper than AR, that's because it's worse.
In the opening post, I gave an example of armor/resistance that's FAR scewed toward AR, about where many of us are, and showed that 300 armor or so is only worth 45 AR. 45 AR is not that costly. 400 armor is around 60 AR, and this is deffinately getting comprable to AR, but MOST pieces can't roll that high for armor.
The MAIN thing, the BIGGEST point that I'm gonna have to just laugh at that Masterjay is using, is that I should be looking for strength on my WD gear. Strength is SO far and away worse than AR, it's laughable. Searching for more than 150 strength on ANY piece of gear is going to increase the cost a fair amount since Barb gear is always more expensive (everyone runs a barb). 150 Strength is worth about 22 AR. 22AR. Yeah, that's worth looking for on a piece. Don't get me wrong, strength isn't bad to have, I do consider it if it's free, but being 1.5 times better than int for mitigation isn't gonna make me look for it since it's 100% worse for damage and still **** for mitigation.
So, as I said before, the TL;DR is simple. "It's better to compare piece by piece." Multiply armor/strength by .15 (divide by 10, then add half of it to itself) and now compare the piece to AR on other pieces. If it's better in your price range with similar other stats, grab that armor/strength piece! If it's not, go for AR, who cares about balance?