...she endeavors to circumvent the mass of my inquiries and reverts to obloquies rather than be amicable...
I circumvented nothing. I addressed all your points and your only response was to ignore them and engage in condescension with terms like deary and girly while failing to address any of my counterpoints other than to repeat the same empty arguments.
Let me spell it out for you since you're still not getting it. If you're testing for a damage difference of 77% (642 x .12) versus 80% (667 x .12) by removing one piece of armor based on delivery of 100 points of damage and you disregard a result of 23 points as irrelevant, your methodology is invalid on its face as that is in fact 77% physical damage resistance which can be interpreted as a data point that supports the notion that you just lost 25 points in actual armor rating necessary for the damage cap even though your displayed armor rating is 567.
Again in terms simple enough for you to understand, if you set the damage to 400 with the same 10 point variance your only dealing with a 1.3% variance in either direction for difference of damage of 3 points which will then actually provide meaningful results. It's the very definition of simple-minded, i.e. unsophisticated, to choose 100 points because you don't want to use larger numbers to yield more accurate and meaningful results simply to avoid having to do the math to figure out the percentage of damage blocked, with total disregard to the fact that relying on such a small amount of damage with such a relatively large variance won't produce meaningful results in most cases. I didn't jump to any conclusions. I simply made an observation about your approach to analyzing the situation.
...but what complicated mess your making out of this isn't "common" at all. If it was, would you and I be the only people involved in this discussion?
This is a complete failure in logic. The number of people involved in a discussion is completely irrelevant to what is or isn't a common sense understanding. That too is a matter of common sense. The fact that you find extremely basic arithmetic to be an anathema doesn't make it's use, which is integral to understanding the mechanics of armor rating, a "complcated mess". You are the first person on these forums who has ever taken that position. Doing basic arithmetic doesn't confuse most players, particularly when they're led through the steps as you've been.
The bottom line is that if you want to get an accurate in depth understanding of how the game mechanics work you can't ignore the mathematical expression of those mechanics. Some players don't want to or can't do the math so they simply accept what's ultimately conveyed at face value but you're the first I've encountered that is so intellectually dishonest that you would attempt to claim it's not necessary when confronted with the actual mechanics of an aspect of the game.
I've provided you with all you need to confirm what the article actually says but you apparently prefer to wallow in ignorance to coddle your ego. Even so I'll break it out into baby steps for you since you're not getting it. If you can get over your ego and ever decide to return from your journey of self-denial you can go into the game and verify the facts in the article:
1. Set your health to 2000 by targeting yourself and using the "set av health 2000" command
2. Wear
any four pieces of armor and use "setav damageresist 567";
3. Set the game difficulty to Master to double incoming damage;
4. Quicksave your game;
5. Spawn a Giant using the "player.placeatme 00023aae 1";
6. Read the damage from each left handed attack with the "getavinfo health" command (since you don't like doing math you can also add Potions of Ultimate Healing into your inventory to take in between hits so you don't have to subtract the damage reading from the prior one to get a data point by using "player.addinventory 39be5 [# of potions you want here]";
7. Reload as many times as you need to get a few dozen data points for a meaningful average;
8. Repeat steps 1-7 but with one less piece of armor and repeat that 2 more times so you have reliable average damage for 4, 3, 2, and 1 piece of armor.
You'll find more damage is getting through each time. This is how we crunched the numbers long before the CK was released and it's easy enough for any player with the PC version to do this. I don't really care if you do it or not but you've been wrong about the mechanics of armor rating from your very first post on the subject matter and the people who rely on this forum for accurate information deserve to know that even if it wounds your ego to be called out on it.
lol >
