The New Shields

[Golvellius]

Ll, people don't understand :( :cry:

 

 

 

no matter how popular you are, you [bleep] up your maths buddy.

 

 

 

think it over.

 

You don't know the "maths" pal.

 

You don't know Jagex's combat calculations.

 

You don't know how attack and equipment are weighted in determining a hit or a miss or what that damage will be.

 

You don't know if +20 in equipment stats will buy you some extra misses by your opponent which could have saved you more hitpoints than the measly amount that were shaved off by the shield.

 

You don't know anything, you just run your mouth like fool calling everybody else one...

[pulli23]

Ll, people don't understand :( :cry:

 

 

 

no matter how popular you are, you [bleep] up your maths buddy.

 

 

 

think it over.

 

You don't know the "maths" pal.

 

You don't know Jagex's combat calculations.

 

You don't know how attack and equipment are weighted in determining a hit or a miss or what that damage will be.

 

You don't know if +20 in equipment stats will buy you some extra misses by your opponent which could have saved you more hitpoints than the measly amount that were shaved off by the shield.

 

You don't know anything, you just run your mouth like fool calling everybody else one...

 

 

 

What would you say if I say: I DO?

[craven_range]

[hide=Myweponsg00d]

I think what 3 hit u is saying is that since the combat system is so random relying on the shield is stupid.

 

 

 

On average it will block 17% of damage but hits are not averaged.... You know what I mean???

 

 

 

So person A attacks person B and hits a 40. Person B is wearing the Elysian shield BUT it does not activate. On person A's next attack he hits a 4 and the shield does activate. It blocks 1 damage. So basically it blocked 1 out of 44 damage which isn't close to 17%.

 

 

 

Get what I mean?? If the combat system was set up so you had a minimum and a maximum hit (with in like 2 damage so from like 22-26 damage no matter what) then yes, this shield would be indisputably better but because you can't control when it triggers it may end up doing nothing.

 

 

 

I think that is what he is saying.

 

 

 

this proves it. most tip.it ers are stupid..

 

 

 

Are you saying that the "average damage" you take is directly between the max damage you will take and zero? I really don't think this is the case...When I'm at GWD I can take 30s from bandos when I'm tanking, but that doesn't mean that on average, each attack does 15 damage to me (including minions and everything). You take way more low numbers and zeros from the minis than you do their high 20s. This gets even more clear when you go to DKs. The spins hit tons of zeros for minutes then score a 8 out of nowhere. Calling the "average hit" the midpoint between zero and the max hit is definitely wrong in most situations. Also, it depends on whether or not there is a chance that the prevention effect can be "applied" to zero hits

 

 

 

Just curious how you're getting your number, as that would be a lot more helpful to post than just a blatant insult at our intelligence without any numbers or calculations to back your words up. Anyone can just say that the other person is an idiot and not give a reason.

[/hide]

 

 

 

Are you serious? Do i really have to explain maths to you?

 

Where did i state that average is half way between the max and the minimum?

 

 

 

 

 

Just curious how you're getting your number, as that would be a lot more helpful to post than just a blatant insult at our intelligence without any numbers or calculations to back your words up.

 

 

 

It blocks damage 70% of the time, and when it does, the damage inflicted is reduced by 25%.

 

Did you ever study maths?

 

This is simple probability,

 

 

 

25% damage reduction is dependant on the damage reduction activating

 

It activates 70% of the time, therefore, on average, 17.5% of damage would be avoided.

 

 

 

It's simply one probability multiplied by another, if you cannot grasp that then don't even try argue a point..

 

 

 

You cannot claim a formula by just picking a few numbers out of your head and saying LOOK!! its closer to 7!! That provides no proof, that's fools math.

 

Here, i'll pick some random numbers for you, 5 , 5 , 5 , 5 , 5

 

Now prove they weren't random. You can't. If your going to come here with a fools attitude of trying to prove me wrong then you have failed miserably.

[pbpenguin5]

[hide=Myweponsg00d]

I think what 3 hit u is saying is that since the combat system is so random relying on the shield is stupid.

 

 

 

On average it will block 17% of damage but hits are not averaged.... You know what I mean???

 

 

 

So person A attacks person B and hits a 40. Person B is wearing the Elysian shield BUT it does not activate. On person A's next attack he hits a 4 and the shield does activate. It blocks 1 damage. So basically it blocked 1 out of 44 damage which isn't close to 17%.

 

 

 

Get what I mean?? If the combat system was set up so you had a minimum and a maximum hit (with in like 2 damage so from like 22-26 damage no matter what) then yes, this shield would be indisputably better but because you can't control when it triggers it may end up doing nothing.

 

 

 

I think that is what he is saying.

 

 

 

this proves it. most tip.it ers are stupid..

 

 

 

Are you saying that the "average damage" you take is directly between the max damage you will take and zero? I really don't think this is the case...When I'm at GWD I can take 30s from bandos when I'm tanking, but that doesn't mean that on average, each attack does 15 damage to me (including minions and everything). You take way more low numbers and zeros from the minis than you do their high 20s. This gets even more clear when you go to DKs. The spins hit tons of zeros for minutes then score a 8 out of nowhere. Calling the "average hit" the midpoint between zero and the max hit is definitely wrong in most situations. Also, it depends on whether or not there is a chance that the prevention effect can be "applied" to zero hits

 

 

 

Just curious how you're getting your number, as that would be a lot more helpful to post than just a blatant insult at our intelligence without any numbers or calculations to back your words up. Anyone can just say that the other person is an idiot and not give a reason.

[/hide]

 

 

 

Are you serious? Do i really have to explain maths to you?

 

Where did i state that average is half way between the max and the minimum?

 

 

 

 

 

Just curious how you're getting your number, as that would be a lot more helpful to post than just a blatant insult at our intelligence without any numbers or calculations to back your words up.

 

 

 

It blocks damage 70% of the time, and when it does, the damage inflicted is reduced by 25%.

 

Did you ever study maths?

 

This is simple probability,

 

 

 

25% damage reduction is dependant on the damage reduction activating

 

It activates 70% of the time, therefore, on average, 17.5% of damage would be avoided.

 

 

 

It's simply one probability multiplied by another, if you cannot grasp that then don't even try argue a point..

 

 

 

You cannot claim a formula by just picking a few numbers out of your head and saying LOOK!! its closer to 7!! That provides no proof, that's fools math.

 

Here, i'll pick some random numbers for you, 5 , 5 , 5 , 5 , 5

 

Now prove they weren't random. You can't. If your going to come here with a fools attitude of trying to prove me wrong then you have failed miserably.

 

 

 

I agree with you, i understood the 17.5% the first time...

 

Let's just all be friends and agree the new shields own :

[z0diark]

Personally I like the look of the arcane and spectral shields :D

 

 

 

As to whether the the DFS is better than the other two, I think we will only know once someone has actually tested them both to see how much damage is taken over a long period of time.

 

 

 

Does anybody know whether these items can be lent out?

[pbpenguin5]

Personally I like the look of the arcane and spectral shields :D

 

 

 

As to whether the the DFS is better than the other two, I think we will only know once someone has actually tested them both to see how much damage is taken over a long period of time.

 

 

 

Does anybody know whether these items can be lent out?

 

 

 

My guess is yes, they have no restrictions like the changing properties of the DFS or degrading.

[BBC3]

Ll, people don't understand :( :cry:

 

 

 

no matter how popular you are, you [bleep] up your maths buddy.

 

 

 

think it over.

 

You don't know the "maths" pal.

 

You don't know Jagex's combat calculations.

 

You don't know how attack and equipment are weighted in determining a hit or a miss or what that damage will be.

 

You don't know if +20 in equipment stats will buy you some extra misses by your opponent which could have saved you more hitpoints than the measly amount that were shaved off by the shield.

 

You don't know anything, you just run your mouth like fool calling everybody else one...

 

 

 

 

 

did you have a nice time typing that to impress 3 hit u?

 

 

 

i do know the maths, a caveman knows the maths.

 

its common sense and experience.

 

 

 

30% of damage removed always with pray points.

 

or 70% chance of reducing damage by 25%.

 

or +10 slash def +7 crush def -3 stab def.

 

 

 

if you play the same game i do and we 1v1 in duel arena, same stats and armor, you with dfs me with either of those two shields, you would have a slim chance of winning.

[Squisher_33]

while it might be decent for melee but just bad since u cant have gs with it, whip is still decent, however with range im linking this, divine shield and rune c bow would be great for tanks

[brando13a]

Whoever said that the probability of damage reduction really only accounts for 7% of damage. well. Uhm. yes and no.

 

 

 

You've correctly stated one possible case in a set of 10 data points.

 

 

 

Flip a coin 3 times, if it lands on heads all 3 times, you win a million dollars. thats a 12.5% chance of getting a million dollars.

 

 

 

each coin has a 50/50 chance of heads, therefore 1/2*1/2*1/2=1/8=12.5%

 

 

 

the cases against you include a 7/8 chance of getting a tail.

 

 

 

All you've done effectively is shown that if your luck sucks for some reason- which can happen, you may not get the average benifit of the shields effect.

 

 

 

Conversely, you could be hit for 60, 60, 60, 60, 60, 60, 60, 0, 0, 0. and each of those 60's manage to land when the damage redux happened aswell, thus saving you a grand total of: 105 damage.

 

 

 

Now its hard to compare that to DFS, BUT, I'd assume that defence points, the extra 20 in some areas of the shields, doesnt account for as much as you think. 20 extra stab defence (dont know if its actually 20 in stab) probably doesnt make that big of a difference in dodging, the only reason people go for it, is because there's nothing with better visible bonuses.

 

 

 

we dont know the formulas, so no one can say on either side how anything works in any way. All theories are null and void due to lack of credible information past educated guesses, hunches, and blatantly slanted comparisons.

 

 

 

 

 

So yes, there is a chance that your shield will activate damage reduction on low hits, fact is, it still activated, saving you food. there is an equal chance that your dfs will have bad luck and you'll be hit for 60's with no chance of saving extra hp.

 

 

 

 

 

So before you try to slant something, just remember than in probability, there are sets of cases, and with the numbers and coding involed in this game, good luck calculating the number of cases in which you will top out or be sold short. all in all, within the cases lies an average on which the calculation of the percentile reduction and effect activation is drawn, inversely.

 

 

 

trying to say that a stroke of bad luck rewrites the average is like using a godsword for one hit to determine its average damage.

 

 

 

gf mate.

[BBC3]

Whoever said that the probability of damage reduction really only accounts for 7% of damage. well. Uhm. yes and no.

 

 

 

You've correctly stated one possible case in a set of 10 data points.

 

 

 

Flip a coin 3 times, if it lands on heads all 3 times, you win a million dollars. thats a 12.5% chance of getting a million dollars.

 

 

 

each coin has a 50/50 chance of heads, therefore 1/2*1/2*1/2=1/8=12.5%

 

 

 

the cases against you include a 7/8 chance of getting a tail.

 

 

 

All you've done effectively is shown that if your luck sucks for some reason- which can happen, you may not get the average benifit of the shields effect.

 

 

 

Conversely, you could be hit for 60, 60, 60, 60, 60, 60, 60, 0, 0, 0. and each of those 60's manage to land when the damage redux happened aswell, thus saving you a grand total of: 105 damage.

 

 

 

Now its hard to compare that to DFS, BUT, I'd assume that defence points, the extra 20 in some areas of the shields, doesnt account for as much as you think. 20 extra stab defence (dont know if its actually 20 in stab) probably doesnt make that big of a difference in dodging, the only reason people go for it, is because there's nothing with better visible bonuses.

 

 

 

we dont know the formulas, so no one can say on either side how anything works in any way. All theories are null and void due to lack of credible information past educated guesses, hunches, and blatantly slanted comparisons.

 

 

 

 

 

So yes, there is a chance that your shield will activate damage reduction on low hits, fact is, it still activated, saving you food. there is an equal chance that your dfs will have bad luck and you'll be hit for 60's with no chance of saving extra hp.

 

 

 

 

 

So before you try to slant something, just remember than in probability, there are sets of cases, and with the numbers and coding involed in this game, good luck calculating the number of cases in which you will top out or be sold short. all in all, within the cases lies an average on which the calculation of the percentile reduction and effect activation is drawn, inversely.

 

 

 

trying to say that a stroke of bad luck rewrites the average is like using a godsword for one hit to determine its average damage.

 

 

 

gf mate.

 

 

 

dfs gives extra +10 slash +7 crush and -3 stab.

 

 

 

edit: pretty much everything you said makes sense.

[brando13a]

well then that only strengthens the argument for the new shields.. I highly doubt 10 extra defences will amount anywhere near the defensive power in the new shields.

 

 

 

*note* dfs still reigns supreme as the ultimate versatility shield, and one of the only truly offensive shields in the game (mainly thanks to its fire breath function)

[pbpenguin5]

we dont know the formulas, so no one can say on either side how anything works in any way. All theories are null and void due to lack of credible information past educated guesses, hunches, and blatantly slanted comparisons.

 

gf mate.

 

 

 

 

 

Absolute perfection. =D>

 

 

 

This should be in the debate section.

 

 

 

And if money is an issue (which it is for 97% of us) then we are all buying a DFS when it hits rock bottom unless the drop percentage is high on the new stuff and they fall to a reasonable price.

 

 

 

~penguin

[Myweponsg00d]

 

Are you serious? Do i really have to explain maths to you?

 

Where did i state that average is half way between the max and the minimum?

 

 

 

It blocks damage 70% of the time, and when it does, the damage inflicted is reduced by 25%.

 

Did you ever study maths?

 

This is simple probability,

 

 

 

25% damage reduction is dependant on the damage reduction activating

 

It activates 70% of the time, therefore, on average, 17.5% of damage would be avoided.

 

 

 

It's simply one probability multiplied by another, if you cannot grasp that then don't even try argue a point..

 

 

 

You cannot claim a formula by just picking a few numbers out of your head and saying LOOK!! its closer to 7!! That provides no proof, that's fools math.

 

Here, i'll pick some random numbers for you, 5 , 5 , 5 , 5 , 5

 

Now prove they weren't random. You can't. If your going to come here with a fools attitude of trying to prove me wrong then you have failed miserably.

 

 

 

But, if you are in a situation where you are likely to be hit many low numbers, peppered by a few high numbers then the shield isn't always going to have an average prevention of 17.5% Nowhere did I say that it can NEVER prevent 17.5%, and it quite possibly could prevent MORE than 17.5% of the total damage if it activated on 7 30s and then 3 1s. That would be very near to preventing the full 25% of your total damage taken.

 

 

 

The fact is that in most GWD situations and those similar to it, you will be taking several 20-30 damages, but there are going to be a far greater number of low numbers, meaning that the lower numbers are then more likely to get blocked than the higher numbers. If each and every damage we took was a true random number between zero and some certain max damage then statistically speaking the shield would perform as an overall 17.5% damage reducer. But, when you take LOADS of low damage, peppered here and there by occasional high damages, the effect is more likely to be applied to a low number, thus meaning that your TOTAL reduced damage for the trip should end up under 17.5%

 

 

 

You talk all about the probability of the ABILITY itself, somehow thinking you can completely ignore how probable it is for you to take certain damages. 17.5% of TOTAL damage taken over a period of time will NOT be prevented if the ability has a large liklihood of activating when you take a small damage. What REALLY depends on the judgement of this shield is if the ability has the chance of "Activating" on a zero damage hit.

 

 

 

If you are in a situation where the max damage you can take is a 30, and the average damage you take per round of combat is a 15, then the shield will perform statistically at 17.5% However if you have a low average damage per round of combat, the shield will under perform. From all my monster hunting experience, I am fairly positive that I would be correct in saying that in a place like GWD, depending on the boss, you can find situations like these where you take mainly low damages, complimented by far less frequent high damages. And I'll restate this one last time: these occasional high damages (20s-30s) greatly increase the total damage. Because they are, in fact, infrequent, that means they have a lower chance of being prevented and the more frequent low damages have a higher chance of being prevented.

 

 

 

Is it not true that the % of damage prevented is "total damage prevented" divided by "total damage that would have been applied if there was no prevention effect"? When you get hit a rare high number, the denominator of the ratio will always jump up high. However, because it is a rare damage, there is a good chance that the "total damage prevented" will not increase because there is a good chance it will not be prevented.

 

 

 

If you still disagree with me, let me ask you this: If I have a computer program that has a 70% chance of spitting out a "Yes" answer(with a 30% chance of it saying No), and I want to make it give me 10 answers, then on the first 7 answers it gives me a "yes", what will the statistical probability be that any of the three remaining answers will say "Yes"?

 

 

 

That'll let me know if you disagree because of some specific way you are thinking about RS or if you truly don't have any idea what the numbers really mean when you talk about factoring what chance you have to take certain damage. But this probably won't be read in full anyway. Its only simple math.

[brando13a]

You're overcomplicating things largely. You cant prove that the likelyhood of being hit for a 30 is is any greater than being hit for 10, or 15 or 20.

 

 

 

The fact is, the shield will perform its stated effect, in addition to giving already superb defences, and a prayer bonus. 25% off of a hit of 4, still saves you 1 hp. 25% off of 30, saves you 7.5 hp.

 

 

 

Why complain when all the shield does is save you hp? and pretty reliably too. on those rare hits of 30+ you still have a 70% chance of a damage reduction. vs having rare hits of 30+ and just taking the 30+ no questions asked.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[hide=]as for your requested probabilty question:

 

 

 

P(Y^7)= 0.0824 adjusted 8.24%

 

P(Y^10)= 0.0282 adjusted 2.82%

 

 

 

the probablity that 3 yes' will appear given a 70% likelyhood is:

 

 

 

P(Y^3)=0.343 34.3%

 

 

 

so you have a 34.3% chance of getting 3 yes'. (you're question did state that the first 7 were already drawn, therefore the probability will start a new set for the remaining 3 chances.)[/hide]

[firagadean]

The amount of low hits compared to high hits means nothing. If you get hit by 7 3s than a 30, the 30 will still have a 70% chance of doing 3/4 of the damage it would have done without the shields effect.

 

 

 

And the question, the probability that ANY of the remaining answers will be "yes" is 97.3%

 

If the program has already spat out "yes" seven times it can still spit out more of them.

[craven_range]

Simulating 100 *hits* of damage, between 0 and 30

 

I have assumed there is an equal chance to hit any number from 0 to 30

 

 

 

Results

 

Test one: 18.31% damage saved

 

Test two: 19.11% damage saved

 

Test three: 14.20% damage saved

 

Test four: 19.10% damage saved

 

Test five: 18.99% damage saved

 

 

 

AVERAGE: 17.94% damage saved

 

 

 

I can simulate as many tests and as many kills per test as you like, for now, i rest my case.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Test Two

 

1000 kills per test

 

Max damage taken 50, Minimum Taken 0

 

 

 

Test one 15.66

 

Test two 18.56

 

Test three 18.08

 

Test four 17.18

 

Test five 17.72

 

Test six 17.97

 

Test seven 20.24

 

Test eight 18.18

 

Test nine 17.59

 

Test ten 17.5

 

 

 

AVERAGE DAMAGE SAVED(%) 17.868%

[SwreeTak]

The shields are rather good, but they're overpriced.

[Silver_Corner]

 

If you still disagree with me, let me ask you this: If I have a computer program that has a 70% chance of spitting out a "Yes" answer(with a 30% chance of it saying No), and I want to make it give me 10 answers, then on the first 7 answers it gives me a "yes", what will the statistical probability be that any of the three remaining answers will say "Yes"?

 

 

 

 

The last 3 flips would have the same chances as the other 7 flips. Each flip is a separate % and thus would not effect another flip. 7/10 is an AVERAGE, as doing thousands of flips would eventually average somewhere out close to 70% on yes and 30% on no.

 

 

 

But running a 10 hit trial, each % is specific, so if you ran 7 flips so far and got 7 yes, you would not have any greater odds to get no on the remaining 3. Its sort of hard to explain, but each flip is separate, and cannot be linked with one another.

 

 

 

Also, referring to the posts above, 2 things to consider.

 

 

 

#1) Some of you are just comparing the SPECIAL of the shield and comparing it to the FULL stats of the DFS. You forgot the include the shield already has some pretty good stats already.

 

 

 

#2) Unless you work at Jagex Ltd. NOBODY can claim to know how things are weighted in the hitting and damage equation for Runescape.

 

 

 

Using commong coding knowladge, we can assume the equations are something like below:

 

(accuracy equation) Attack level + weapon bonuses opponents defence level opponends defence bonuses based on weapon style used = Some %. This % is used to flip a coin, which either lands on hit or miss. If it lands on hit, go onto the next equation.

 

(Strength Equation) Str level + str bonus opponents defence level = some number. This number is put in a bracket in which you are assigned a number between 1-an assigned number (your max hit). The computer then randomly spits out a number in this number range.

 

 

 

We know the formula or at least part of it, but unless you work at Jagex, you cant claim to know how any of the factors above are weighed towars eachother.

 

 

 

That being said, because we dont know how how important defence points are compared to overall damage, WE CANNONT assume anything on which shield is better simply by pulling out numbers and %s. The ONLY way to determine which shield is more effect is to run a long term trial. And even then, it all depends on luck.

 

 

 

Honeslty, both shields are good, and both have their strengths. No shield is 100% superior to another. Each has its own specific uses. So its pointless to argue one shield is overall better than another.

[stealthchris117]

I have a question:

 

 

 

With the Divine shield, what happens if you run our of prayer?

 

 

 

Does it stop working completely?

 

Do you just get a 15% reduction?

 

Do you still get the full 30% and the prayer is removed from 0 so really it isn't removed at all?

 

 

 

I'm guessing the first option, but I have no idea, and don't have the shield to test it.

 

Please let me know what you think or if anyone knows for sure, that would be awesome

 

 

 

Sorry if this question was asked before, or if the answer is right in front of my face and I didn't see it.

[tintin113]

That's a good point Stealth and I have to say I didn't think about it. I suppose if it's half from nothing and half from pray and you don't have prayer it'd only take one half and not the other... however that would be logical and considering that this is RS that makes it uncertain. :roll:

[obfuscator]

im glad that people now have a viable alternative to the dfs :)

[ghjkl]

Viable alternative? lol? :lol:

 

More like the dfs is a viable alternative to this, being way cheaper and having decent stats.

[Yes_Its_Ross]

Another boss drop I can't afford. :P These are very nice items, but until they drop I doubt many people will risk buying them.

[Cha0sx]

How many high level items will they create?

 

 

 

If this trend continues the value of rares will be completely diminished, seeing as there's going to be so much stuff to buy with a real use in the future. GP is becoming even more valuable :P .

[BBC3]

Another boss drop I can't afford. :P These are very nice items, but until they drop I doubt many people will risk buying them.

 

 

 

you dont know rs very well do you?