Talk:Armor/@comment-72.201.246.173-20130914051510/@comment-72.186.113.208-20130921083315

But did they use the reciprocal to actually get the useful value, or did they use the same faulty logic everyone seems to and look at the diminishing return of higher ranks?

For a simple example, compare a .5% increase from 99% reduction, to a 5% increase from 1% reduction. The window-licking way tould be to think 5% is 10 times as much as .5%; but the .5% would reduce all damage by half, while the 5% would only change it from 99% damage to 94%. You would need to have it increase reduction by around 49% to get the same effect.

So take the given value and subtract it from 100, and use that for your actual comparisons.Just useing reduction difference itself is just flat out incorrect in determining anything, really. Other than failing school systems.

Or to personalize it, you need to divide your build's total health by the actual amount of damage left-over after reduction, and compare those for a useful number. For ease a 1k health build would have an effective 3400 health with 70.59% reduct. Max it to 75.9% reduct and your effective health would be 4149 health. Alot more noticeable when thought is used.

Bottom line is dumb people have thoughts, it's just they are dumb thoughts. Ignore them, for they are turkeys.