AC EQ vs HP EQ

I understand most of the dynamics regarding HP armor vs AC armor.

However, I am trying to figure out the fine line between them. Would it make better sense to have a piece of armor that provides -30 AC or a piece of armor that provides 40hp?

**So.. lets say 900 hp with -400 AC **

**
or**

**
-600 AC with 750 HP? **

**
**

This is just a Random example but I am trying to figure out ideally what would make better sense. I feel as if the AC would be ideal considering it reduces damage overall.. but nonetheless would love some feedback.

I always found that I prefer HP to ac, but then again I don't ever really do high dex races that are going to get 4-600 ac (outside of an avian bmg).

I always felt that 1200 hp with 350-400 ac was better than 800 hp with 600-700 ac personally.

I understand AC has diminishing returns. HP doesn't. If this is true, as your AC gets better, the improvement on return is less as opposed to HP. 1200hp is twice as much health as 600hp and lets you take twice the damage but having -1200ac isn't twice the benefit of having -600ac (if there ARE diminishing returns).

I don't know about the code as to what skills may factor in AC, if they do at all. I don't like code. Nasty stuff.

Dey

It depends what you're playing, also. As an invoker, I'd almost always pick hp over ac, as you want to be able to stay in the fight as long as possible at the start. As a cleric, I tend to go ac over hp, as the diminished damage you take over the long run is more worthwhile.

Even so, an ac of -400 or better is about the point where I stop worrying about getting more ac, and I'm focusing on other things when it comes to eq.

Even so' date=' an ac of -400 or better is about the point where I stop worrying about getting more ac, and I'm focusing on other things when it comes to eq.[/quote']

So is it fair to say that anything above -400 is pointless? Is that the breakpoint? Where anything above that won't make much of a difference?

I have no idea what the point of diminishing returns is. I just have always found -400 to be damned solid ac for a c/c, and the point where actively attempting to improve ac over other things stops feeling worthwhile. Similarly, I don't worry about improving my saves much once I get them to -50 or so. I have no idea how the code works for either, though.

If you're a caster, go with the brooches--hands down.

Or. . .better yet, use the coifs and charms and let me have the brooches.

I think both are important.

HP is vital because it protects you from every kind of harm and classes with only 1 defense MUST have HP.

AC in my experience will help a lot to make key skills miss, things like bash, dirt, haymaker, critical strike, throw etc... I notice more misses once ac is in the -500 or -600's. I have never seen -700 or more but I remember people complaining about some druid with ac nearing -1000 I think, apparently nothing landed on her.

Which you want depends on your race/class/cabal and your enemies.

My last invoker wanted you to get more AC gear.

Typically, AC is the one thing that comes anyway when I geared up. Saves/HP for casters/communers, and hitroll/saves for melee is what I typically would go for.

I think both are important.

HP is vital because it protects you from every kind of harm and classes with only 1 defense MUST have HP.

AC in my experience will help a lot to make key skills miss, things like bash, dirt, haymaker, critical strike, throw etc... I notice more misses once ac is in the -500 or -600's. I have never seen -700 or more but I remember people complaining about some druid with ac nearing -1000 I think, apparently nothing landed on her.

Which you want depends on your race/class/cabal and your enemies.

Faye, or at least thats who I remember fighting that must have had massive AC. Did very little damage to them and most skills missed.

Faye had around -1000 AC. Items modded by crusaders and enchanted by psi's and invokers.

If you have 1000 HP and your cure critical heals 50 HP, thats 5% with a cure.

If you have 500 HP and your cure critical heals 50 HP, that's 10% with a cure.

HP plays against you when you have to heal yourself, while AC plays against you only when you fight rangers, druids or invokers. It is a thin line to balance it.

Just a bit heads up - AC vs HP?, 5 years ago.

boggle

boggle again

I don't even know how to respond to that. How is a percent heal relevant at all to any of this? How is healing 10% of your hps > than healing 5% of your hps when you are healing 50hps regardless. . .

10% == 5% in this case. The same, no difference, no diminishing returns, no way for this that to work against you.

This isn't a diss or anything of the sort, i just kinda got boggled by that.

Didn't you hear? Foxx is the new Mya!

10% == 5% in this case. The same, no difference, no diminishing returns, no way for this that to work against you.

I can understand the confusion.

I will use a very very vague example:

Lets take the stats from sarcon's first post in the thread.

A cleric with 900 HP and -400 AC (Filth)

VS

A cleric with 750 HP and -600 AC (f0xx)

We put f0xx and Filth in the same scenario, lets say fighting Venmihr.

Due to having more AC, f0xx will suck somewhat less damage per round than Filth.

On the other hand, Filth will be able to stay in combat somewhat longer, due to having more initial HP. Once she starts healing back though, it will take her more heals to get back to 100%, wasting more mana and giving her attacker more chances to intercept her.

Also another thing - if you have 900 HP and -400 AC lets say you will lose 70 HP per round. That means you can survive 12.8 rounds without healing.

If you have 750 HP and -600 AC, lets say you will lose 60 HP per round, due to the higher AC. That means you can survive 12.5 rounds without healing.

It will take Filth 17 rounds to heal back from 50hp to 100%, while it will take f0xx 14 rounds to heal back from 50 hp to 100%.

A good analysis, Foxx. Another thing is that not only is it time the healer is gaining over the long run, it is mana retained from having to cast fewer heals during the course of a prolonged battle, putting less stress on your ability to cast at will during combat and maintain your buffs.

Hp is good, but I prefer ac, if playing a class that can easily and quickly heal themselves, as others have said, it does more then just damage reduction. I watched Suunmar, take hits/injures for damage. 10 rounds, say fighting a warrior dwielding that hits all 8 attacks, doing that sort of damage is taking what, around 10-15 hp per strike, 80-120 damage per round. That same warrior hitting you for mauls/devestates, is dropping, prolly 20-30 hp per strike, so 160-240 damage per round, which my math is prolly off on what noun does what range of damage, but thats just how I see it. 10 rounds first example (and I rarely see warriors dwielding whips hit -all- eight attacks, every round) they take 800-1200 hp from you. Second example, they've taken 1600-2400 hp in the same amount of rounds.

I'd find a tough mob, that hits hard, and fight them, vlad for example. If vlad is doing caps damage to me consistently, as a communer, I go for more ac. If I'm taking less then caps damage, I focus on plus mana gear, saves, hit/dam roll as needed, unless I'm playing a cleric, then I don't really focus on saves as much, just because of spell turning, only really have to worry about aoe spells, those are mostly afflictive in nature, so kinda narrows what sort of saves to go for.

Edit: It takes me forever to post tonight, what foxx said

edit 2: And pali

Edit 3: If you're a cleric/paladin/healer, cure crit is what, 20ish mana? If I have an item thats plus 20 mana, or plus 20 hp, I take the mana, because cure crit does translate to about 50 extra hp. I'd rather start with 20 less hp, and be able to heal 50 worth of damage.

It's a good idea to keep some of your trains to put into AC at 50 too.

Dey

It's a good idea to keep some of your trains to put into AC at 50 too.

Dey

smack

Hahahaha. That was funny...ahem.