E9n9 Bless

[chrispedersen]

Multiple times now, I have had an E9N9 Anusara blessed apparently get no prot bonus, while he regenerates normally.

Is this known behaviour?

Examining further, a palan 12. After bless, 15. Again normal regen.
How does this work... e9 = +4 prot - and it works ok for niefle.
Berserk +2.......???

[vfb]

Yep. The E4 bless adds +4 to body armor and helms (and misc armor like bracers).

Since the Anusara just has a shield, he does not get +4 anywhere.

Try a Kala-Mukha, he'll get +4 on the helm, +4 on the body.

Palankashas get +4 on the body only.

[chrispedersen]

Originally Posted by vfb

Yep. The E4 bless adds +4 to body armor and helms (and misc armor like bracers).

Since the Anusara just has a shield, he does not get +4 anywhere.

Try a Kala-Mukha, he'll get +4 on the helm, +4 on the body.

Palankashas get +4 on the body only.

yeah.. you're right of course on the anusara. Should have remember that... But I still don't understand the palanksha.. Hmm..

Prot = BaseProt + ArmorProt * (1 - BaseProt/40).

It starts out as 5 Base and 10 Armor
soo Berserk adds to base prot, or

7 + 14 * (1-7/40) = 18.

AHHH I got it

The formula is actually wrong. The correct formula is:

Prot = (BaseProt + ArmorProt) * (1-BaseProt/40).

So, interestingly, the higher the base protection the less usefull an earth bless.

[vfb]

Palankashas have base 5 protection. The earth bless does not add to that.

They also have a Cuirass, which is 10 protection. So, if you click on the 'Protection 12', you see:

Base 5
Protection 12

Head 5
Body 15 (5+10)


An E9 blessed Palankasha is going to show:

Base 5
Protection 15 (or is it 14?)

Head 5
Body 19 (5 + 10 + 4)

I don't know the formula for getting Protection from Head and Body, but it's just an average with more weight on the body.

[Endoperez]

He counted the +2 to base prot from regeneration as well.

[vfb]

Endo, I was considering the situation before they berserk. Or are you talking about Chris's calc? Sorry, I was going from memory in my numbers above, so they are off.

In any case, a Gibbor is only base protection 2, but loses one mystery protection point when donning armor. At base 5, the Palankasha loses 1 on armor, and also only gains +3 on armor pieces from an E9 bless.

Chris, your formula looks pretty good. Where did you get it from?

[chrispedersen]

Originally Posted by vfb

Endo, I was considering the situation before they berserk. Or are you talking about Chris's calc? Sorry, I was going from memory in my numbers above, so they are off.

In any case, a Gibbor is only base protection 2, but loses one mystery protection point when donning armor. At base 5, the Palankasha loses 1 on armor, and also only gains +3 on armor pieces from an E9 bless.

Chris, your formula looks pretty good. Where did you get it from?

Well I scoured back archives using keywords berserk and prot as I remembered there was something about it. Then I played around a bit, since the formula didn't seem to give demonstrable results.. but it seems to work now. At least on the 5-10 results I have tried.

[Amorphous]

I am probably just misunderstanding something, but this:

Prot = (BaseProt + ArmorProt) * (1-BaseProt/40)

cannot be the correct formula.

It would mean that an entity without armour would have a protection lower than its base protection as long as that base protection was 7 or more. A Cyclops with 10 levels of earth magic would have a base protection of 30, but a total protection of only 8.

[Jazzepi]

Originally Posted by Amorphous

I am probably just misunderstanding something, but this:

cannot be the correct formula.

It would mean that an entity without armour would have a protection lower than its base protection as long as that base protection was 7 or more. A Cyclops with 10 levels of earth magic would have a base protection of 30, but a total protection of only 8.

I'm pretty sure that total protection includes a "legging" slot for armor when being calculated that doesn't see any real use in the actual game.

Jazzepi

[Endoperez]

I was talking about Chris's calculations. It looked like you were answering to his post.