Launcher Update
Get the Desktop App for Battle.net Now
 All your games in 1 place
 Log in once
 Automatic game updates

You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
In all seriousness though, damage reduction has diminishing returns for armor and resistance, but effective HP does not. Same thing as in WoW because they are literally the same formula. Armor % Reduction Effective HP This shows that for V=1, 10 armor will give 20% effective HP. This is true at 50 armor. This is true at fifty million armor. In fact, it is both evident and true that effective HP will increase at a value equal to A/(A+50V) for all values of armor. This also holds for resistances because resistances follow the same form r/(r+5v). If you want to talk about true diminishing returns, talk about the interplay between armor and resistances. It is factual by simple equation that +1 resist all = 10 armor = +10 intelligence. Because of the multiplicative interplay of these quantities, you are best served mitigationwise to have resistances equal to one tenth of your armor value. If you have more than 10% of your armor as resistances, you should stack more armor. If you have less, you should stack more resistances. You can extend the same logic to dodge chance technically (that it is optimal to have the same dodge% as your armor reduction and resistance values), but dodge is less reliable than solid resistance and armor for obvious reasons. TL;DR: Armor and Resistance increase your effective HP linearly, not with diminishing returns. 50 armor at 0 armor is worth as much as 50 armor at 500 armor. It is most effective to keep your resist all at 10% of your armor (IE 5000 armor, 500 resist all), if you have more than 10:1 armor to resist it is more effective to stack resists, if you have less it is more effective to stack armor. 

I hope they dont remove dodge like in League of legeneds Ill be screwed, always a lucky dodge save my !@#.
Oh and thanks for the info !! helped me a LOT!
Edited by c0cktel#1126 on 24/05/2012 14:21 BST


they really need to add diminishing returns to stuns to avoid total stunlocks.
Edited by dragon#2783 on 24/05/2012 14:23 BST


Math looks wrong.
Armor increasing in 10's, effective HP increasing in .2's. However, damage reduction shows decreasing returns for the increase in armor. Thus this should be reflected in a decreasing effective HP return. 

In other words as expected, DRs are so that the relative value of +X Armour or Resists when it comes to your increase in lifetime expectancy is always the same, not the raw reduction / resist gained from it (since that'd grow exponentially stronger).


Haha, because you don't want dimishing returns you give us a value (effective HP) which hides the dimishing effect and leads people think its absolutle regardless when it comes when to the point adding amor make sense or not because your "effective healt" always increase the same amount.
How stupid people think... Take out the complicate stuff to have an argument when making stupid builds/item selections. Just to say it again (because in LoL people were that blind too) You can make this calculation even with far higher dimishing effects (10 armor=99 damage prevention) and 20 armor=99,0001 prevention, and so on and people still would think its regardless to add 1 armor on 0 or on 10. Its just they have no clue that your increase of 0,2 doesn't mean it has the same effect on adding 10 armor on 0 or 100. Its relative the the value before and this ratio is decreasing! So your increase of 10 armor from 0 to 10 adds 20% (ratio 1,2 to base 1) but your increase from 100 to 110 only adds 6,6666% (ratio 3,2 to base 3)
Edited by Calmon#2796 on 24/05/2012 15:01 BST


But Effective Health is the end result of defensive stats. It is the final  and tbh only real  argument whether or how effective defensive stats are. 

Haha, because you don't want dimishing returns you give us a value (effective HP) which hides the dimishing effect and leads people think its the same effect? No its not. People think its regardless of adding X armor when you're at 0 or you're on 100 but its not. They don't realize effective health is a abstract complex they will never understand but should use it for their calculations? The dimishing effect is not gone! Realize it and the question yourself if you KNOW there is a dimishing why should I make a construct which may let people lead to think there is no?
Edited by Calmon#2796 on 24/05/2012 15:09 BST


The effective HP is based entirely on the amount of damage dealt and isn't a static figure. The only thing that can be said is that with a damage reduction of 16.66667% is equivalent to an effective HP increase of 16.66667% of the damage being dealt to you.
So if damage reduction is decreasing in effectiveness, so would the effective hp. 

I think you dont know what effective HP means. Its the final caclulation of how much dmg you can take before dieing. If your effective HP is 1 000 000 ,you can take 1 000 000 pure damage and then you will die. Also you fail to see that for example if you have 80% dmg reduction ,if you take another 5% (just 5%) you take 1/4 less dmg than before with is ALOT. If you have 90% reduction and add "just" another 5% ,you make urself live 2 times longer than without this 5%. So if your effective hp is 100k HP on 90% reduction ,ur effective hp on 95% is 200k HP ,and thats gigantic difference. 

armor and resistance reduction is dimnishing eg. you need allways twice as much Armor
to cut remaining dmg by 1/2 you can never reach 100%. and: effective HP is linear AS IT SHOULD BE. 

The effective HP is based entirely on the amount of damage dealt and isn't a static figure. The only thing that can be said is that with a damage reduction of 16.66667% is equivalent to an effective HP increase of 16.66667% of the damage being dealt to you. And what you get out of it when you know your "effect health" increase on a same amount when you add the same armor? How should this help? People think +10 Armor increase is the same on 0 or on 100 because of that! They argue because their "effective health" increase on the same value but they don't see that "effective health" is just based on a mathematical construct to make dimishing effects linear. 

Then they're idiots. Armor increasing results in diminishing returns on damage reduction, the OP said that effective HP increases at a set rate with each increase of 10 armor, however it wouldn't. Effective HP would increase in respect to damage reduction, not to armor increasing. 

No the point is this:
If I am at 0 mitigation, let's say I take 4s to die. I add 20% mitigation, I live 25% longer (taking 20% less damage than before). If I add another 20% mitigation additively (i.e.: no diminishing returns), I'm now at 40% mitigation, but instead of living another 25% longer, I now live 66% longer than at the start. If I add another 20% mitigation without diminishing returns, I now live 150% longer than at the start, taking 60% less total damage. If you just look at the increases, 25% > 41% > 84%. As you can see, they keep rising. Percentually speaking I always live 25% longer than the last step, however that last step keeps going up, hence the total gain increases. Now, if we were to include diminishing returns, we shift the subject to focus on the problematic part of before, my total lifetime gained. Each step is to add 25% lifetime. Add 20% mitigation from 0%, 25% lifetime gained. To achieve the next 25% lifetime increase, I add 15% mitigation, 20% of the remaining damage still taken. To achieve the next 25% lifetime increase, I add 12% mitigation, 20% of the remaining damage taken. And so on. And once translated into item stats, this means X Armour needs to translate into the same increase to lifetime expectancy independent of how much mitigation I already have. Meaning the more I have, the less %mitigation it gives. 

What? A linear increase in armour results in a diminshed increase in damage reduction which results in a linear increase in EHP. Rather than: A linear increase in armour results in a linear increase in damage reduction which results in an exponential increase in EHP. 

100 HP. 20% Damage Reduction. 80HP. Equivalent HP to displace this, 120 HP. Increase of 20% assuming the damage hit was your maximum HP.
Wrong? 100 HP. 10% DR, 90 HP. 110 HP. 10% Increase. Wrong? Seems I'm not as good at math as I remember.
Edited by DracoDenesti#2487 on 24/05/2012 15:41 BST


It doesn't work like that, Draco.
If you take 100 damage, and you mitigate 10, then you took only 90% of the damage, which means you gained a ((1/0,9) = 1,11...) increase to your lifetime. In other words, you live 11,11% longer, as a result of 10% mitigation. Or in yet other words, 10% mitigation caused you to avoid 10 damage, which effectively is the same as having 11,11 HP more to begin with instead of the mitigation (before healing is factored in). Hence the whole DR debate, if you were to focus only on the %mitigation% you increase the equivalent health exponentially. Say you're already at 80% mitigation, you take only 20 of 100 damage. You add another 10% mitigation, you half your damage taken (20 > 10), doubling your effective health from 500HP to 1000HP. And to balance that, that 10% mitigation needs to cost twice as much in itemstats as the entire armour before it summed up (to mirror the effect it has on your health). 

Just use this thought experiment.
You have a character with 10 000 HP. Your character has 0 armour. The calculation for EHP for your character is 10 000 / (1DR) 1 armour is worth 0.01 DR so: 1 armour > DR = 0.01 2 armour > DR = 0.02 3 armour > ... and so on. Watch what happens to the EHP value as armour goes up. 

Senseless discussions again. You guys will never understand it. Again: Effective Health says nothing you need to make your decisions! It hides the dimishing effect and let people believe its regardless when you add armor. It always has the same effect. Its not regardless! This exact the problem. Let explain: You are at 100 armor and 0 Resistance (all) Incoming Damage you need to prevent is 500 physical damage and 500 magic damage. Now you need to decide to buy an item which gives you 100 armor or 100 resistance. You: Oh wait I will calculate effective health here! Me: Why? You need to prevent most damage and because armor and resistance both are dimishing. With 50/50 damage you should go clearly for resistance. Dimishing means its more effective on start and decrease with higher values! You: Noob! Its regardless where you add something for effective health both give you the same amount. Me: Ok, if you think so... You: Sure, its the same! with 100 armor I have 3 effective health. My Resistance is 0 so at 1! Regardless where I add something my effective health will always get increased by 2! Me: Well thats fine, but how can effective health help in any decision if it adds exact the same? Feels like regardless what you buy you're always fine? You: Think so yes! Me: Ok lets check, I buy 100 Resi and you 100 Armor You: Yep Me: Ok you have 200 Armor, 0 Resistance and so get 500 Magic Damage which strikes you full and you prevent 400 physical damage (200 Armor = 80% Damage Reduction) out of the 500 = 100 damage In sum this is 600 damage! Lets check me: I've 100 Armor, 100 Resistance which means I prevent 66% Damage on both = 333 damage comes through in sum I think I won clearly! You: wtf! That's not correct! Its because the damage was 50% of something I don't have! Me: And? You: Thats not ok! Effective health only works for 1 damage sort. Me: Really? You: I show you lets say I'm at 100 armor and have 3 effective health! For each 50 Armor I can add 1 effective health! So I can always add 50 armor and always get 1 effective health. Its liniear not dimishing! With 3 effective health you will survive exact 3 damage and every 50 armor let you prevent 1 damage more. So with 150 Armor I survive 4 damage! Is easy to understand, right? Me: Wait a second... its wrong calculation! When adding armor from 100 to 150 you added 50%, you need to add the same 50% to the damage to show me that is has the same effect! So your damage should be 4,5 and not 4! You: What? Why? Me: Because otherwise you show me that increasing armor increase your effective health on a fix amount but you also show me that the reduction of damage isn't linear. I got more damage. Its self explaining because armor has this dimishing effects. So every armor is less worth. You: Well but I still get effective health on same amount :) Me: Lucky you. Hope you can use that for anything :) 
Threats of violence. We take these seriously and will alert the proper authorities.
Posts containing personal information about other players. This includes physical addresses, email addresses, phone numbers, and inappropriate photos and/or videos.
Harassing or discriminatory language. This will not be tolerated.