Talk:Steel Fiber/@comment-11753608-20130924131437

Briz, thank you for working on this. That looks better. There is a reason that publishing companies don't make books with different fonts on every line - it is impossible to read.

So, here is the issue we have been going around on and the only problem that you have reinserted in your edit above. "Damage mitigation" is typically thought of as the amount damage is reduced by. But the caclulation provided above actually results in the damage % that passes through armor, not how much is negated. Now, my point has been despite this typical reading of the word, the problem is that your equation is actually the correct one and the one that shows up in all of the calculations. And this has been my point - that for simplicity's sake we should be using those values rather than % reduction because that is what is actually used in the calcs. And in the end, they are both mitigation it simply is different sides of the same coin.

Example:  What is the difference between the following?

Damage * %passthrough

Damage - (100 - %reduction)

Damage - (Damage * % reduction)

Answer - mathematically speaking, not a damn thing. They all result in... let's say it together... THE MITIGATED DAMAGE VALUE.

The difference is that he ONLY one that shows up in the calcs is Damage * %passthrough so writing it any other way simply makes the calculation process more complicated.

By inverting the values to % reduction (as shown in the table above that I spent about 30 minutes correcting but Kivarra reverted) you require the user to simply reinvert it before they can do any calculations.

Thus, what is actually this in the calculation formulas:

Final Damage = Damage * 100 / (100 + Armor)

Becomes this cluster fuck of an equation:

Final Damage = Damage * (100 - (100 - 100 / (100 + Armor))

..............  holy shit........

It does not take a mathematical genius to figure out that the 100 - 's in this equation cancel each other out and what do you get? Oh yeah....

Final Damage = Damag e* 100 / (100 + Armor)

.....

Is anyone getting this yet?

The point is "mitigation" is that part of the equation that results in the reduced damage value after armor.  As long as we are clear about how we are listing the percentages people will understand what we are saying. For me, it makes about 98379823745937890384 times more sense to list the values that are actually used in the damage calculations.

There. I have done my best to make my case. Whatever you all decide it should remain consistent on this page at the very least - you can't list that equation and then list the inverted values in the table - that will just confuse the shit out of people. But if you decide to do % reduced here, I will literally jump through the ether and kick you in the balls if you do it to the pages I took about 3 months editing in other places on the wiki. Seriously. I will buy a plane ticket and kick you in the nuts. hard.