Quick napkin math tells me after 900 All Res.

the best most effective ratio is 10:1 ... so 10 armor for 1 ar.

06/11/2013 08:48 AMPosted by fabbyhunterthe best most effective ratio is 10:1 ... so 10 armor for 1 ar.

no no...I'm looking for Diminishing Returns values.

I think this is it: http://gaming.stackexchange.com/questions/69584/how-is-resistance-percentage-calculated

It looks like after 900 All Res Diminishing Returns tank hard.

However, if the player can afford the gear, the more the merrier of course.

For mitigation, even though I have 1k all resists and 3.8k armor, adding 80 all resists is still better than adding 350 armor. If d3up.com is correct, then 10:1 armor to AR is bull!@#$ given the available gear options.

But for me, adding life% or 100 VIT is better than both for EHP.

+350 Armor 28,188.5

+80 Resist All 34,340.92

+100 Vitality 41,650.74

+12% Life 52,944.04

d3up.com will help.

For mitigation, even though I have 1k all resists and 3.8k armor, adding 80 all resists is still better than adding 350 armor. If d3up.com is correct, then 10:1 armor to AR is bull!@#$.

But for me, adding life% or 100 VIT is better than both for EHP.

10:1 armor/AR is not bull !@#$. It is theoretically correct. But what was messed up is the max value of a single affix roll. For all res, it can roll upto 80. But for armor it can only roll 397 max, not to mention that certain weapons can roll all res but not armor.

Blz's development team was probably right in the begining in designing the affix because armors/gears usually come with default armor. This holds true for shoulders/armor/pants so the highest possible value of armor to all res is probably 10:1. But they probably forgot that amuelt/rings/weapons don't come with armor.

If people continue to state "10:1" armor to all resists, this will be confusing because it doesn't match the available gearing options, as you said.

That said, there is a few points to consider - if you are running FA than you can get close to the ratio with something like 800 AR and 4000 Armor. Also, if you are running with SH and GF than you will get another 200-300 AR on a consistent basis. The bigger the 'gap' from the 10:1 ration the more effective it will be to add Armor. For most WD's a 5:1-6:1 ratio is a good guideline.

We don't have skills that can buff it %-wise like the other 4 classes. A barbie crying impunity is the only way you will get a % increase to your all res stat.

I run gruesome feast/soul harvest 100% of the time unless ubering. The all res boost from thousands of additional int can easily put you in the diminishing return zone when maxed on gf/sh.

Focusing on hp has somewhat of the opposite affect because of the multiplying affect of Vit and %life. High hp goes well with the our skillset and tendencies. Blood ritual, grave injustice and pet hp scale with your max life. Also, we are more likely to have a pick up radius, bonus to globe item, and run with a 0dog WD.

I've thought about going all Hp neglecting allres and armor(I don't use the horrify armor although it is a very strong buff). But then I realized if I have like 300k hp and minimal allres/armor, then globes/potions/loh/ls would do much less considering how much hp I would have to recover when taking hits. Vit/%life is the best defensive stat for the WD in my opinion but balance wins out at the end of the day.

I added some dex to get my dodge rate up to 25% for CoB channeling. Relying on chance is kinda sketchy but it fits the build.

Allres should not be emphasized or considered the "goto" defensive stat when looking to add ehp to a WD. It comes standard on pox/marrow/visage of giyua and with all res on shoulders you should be nearing an accepting amount of all res for high mp play. (granted you are stacking plenty of int)

AR and armor have the exact same effect on damage reduction. AR is inherently stronger than armor for a wd (due to the limits on item rolls), so why is armor better? Armor is a cheaper alternative (and probably better value too), but a wd looking for high damage mitigation needs both.

Impking, your post brings up some very interesting ideas. I also feel that vit/life% are better stats because they synergize with our skills. I always run with GI/GF, and they benefit more from a larger health pool than from higher damage mitigation.

However, if the player can afford the gear, the more the merrier of course.

I thought the fact that either RA or Armor had diminishing returns was a myth. People just looked at the flat reduction % and saw that it shrank and assumed it was diminishing. But when actually doing the math, in fact it was linear. I thought what WAS true was that you get to a point in Resist All or Vitality that stacking one gets you more EHP since the other is so high (not including Armor since that one is limited by what can roll.)

I could certainly be wrong here, but I thought if you had say, 1000 Resist All on a WD, and got to 1300 Resist All with Gruesome Feast, that that 300 Resist All got you just as much damage reduction as the rest did, but in gearing it might make more sense to stack some Vitality or Armor if you are typically getting 300 Resist All from Gruesome Feast (say a 0Dog WD who has full GF stack most of the time) simply for the previous comment about them adding more to EHP at that level. But not because it actually reduced damage less effectively.

I dunno I could certainly be wrong, but I ran a few numbers through and it seemed to indicate this (both on d3up, and just doing some damage calculations.) Not that I came up with that myself, I thought I read that somewhere early on.

Edit:

This old post was one I think I read:

http://us.battle.net/d3/en/forum/topic/5149150485

going from 80% to 90% is like taking half damage and

going from 90% to 95% is like taking half damage

So, if looking at overall mitigation, you "only" gained 5%, but you still took half damage.

Edit:

This old post was one I think I read:

good thread...very informative

Above is a simple table I made showing how much dmg reduction you get for each additional 50 All resist while at 4000 armor.

While there are diminishing returns, it is never strong enough to make a +350 armor roll better than a +80 AR roll.

06/13/2013 07:09 AMPosted by BDFhttp://postimg.org/image/snd9f3sk7/

Thanks...so if all else equal, going from 700 All Res to 950 only provides 1% less damage taken. The cost for ALL Res gear from 700 to 950 is insane and IMO not worth it.

800 All Res is easier to achieve and fits a better median I suppose. I'll be happy with 800-900 as end result then.

06/13/2013 07:18 AMPosted by IPawnUhttp://postimg.org/image/snd9f3sk7/

Thanks...so if all else equal, going from 700 All Res to 950 only provides 1% less damage taken. The cost for ALL Res gear from 700 to 950 is insane and IMO not worth it.

800 All Res is easier to achieve and fits a better median I suppose. I'll be happy with 800-900 as end result then.

You're kinda reading that incorrectly.

If you get nailed with a 200k unmitigated hit:

At 700AR you take 25714 dmg

At 950AR you take 20571 dmg

You reduce the dmg you take by %20 by going from 700AR to 950AR

06/13/2013 07:33 AMPosted by BDF

Thanks...so if all else equal, going from 700 All Res to 950 only provides 1% less damage taken. The cost for ALL Res gear from 700 to 950 is insane and IMO not worth it.

800 All Res is easier to achieve and fits a better median I suppose. I'll be happy with 800-900 as end result then.

You're kinda reading that incorrectly.

If you get nailed with a 200k unmitigated hit:

At 700AR you take 25714 dmg

At 950AR you take 20571 dmg

You reduce the dmg you take by %20 by going from 700AR to 950AR

ohooooo...well since you put it that way, it's f'ing huge!!