It's because I'm stupid and added the version number to both the folder and the zip file. If you go to your addons directory and rename "MitigationValue v1 00" to "MitigationValue" it should work properly. Otherwise, I uploaded a new file with the correct folder name. Once they've approved it minion should do it correctly.

Made another dumb mistake that won't hurt anything, but you'll suddenly see an addon called "ReadMe" in your list because I used the standard Windows name of ReadMe.txt, and the game sees any .txt file as an addon file.

I renamed the readme file to ReadMe.rtf and uploaded yet again. Any rich text reader can read it, but it's really just a plain text file any regular notepad-style reader can understand also. Assuming people even read readme files these days.

I haven't gotten my activation email for TF yet, so I can't post over there. However, you made a mistake in one of the formulae:
A = L*M-100
becomes
M = (A+100)/L
not
M = (A-100)/L

A = Armor from sheet
M = Mitigation percentage
L = Level of character

But the softcap and hardcaps are:
A1600 = L50*M30+100
A2600 = L50*M50+100

So I assume you meant:
A = L*M+100

Which gives the formula you posted on TF:
M = (A-100)/L

Now, the weird part about this formula, is it implies that characters have a negative base armor rating -- that is, a naked character takes *more* damage than the creature does naturally. A level 2 character actually takes double damage with no armor, while a level 50 only takes 2% extra damage, and a VR12 only takes about 1.6% more.

This isn't inherently wrong, but it does mean the calculations start getting messy. If a creature hits you for 200 damage while you're naked, and you have a -20% damage reduction, that means:
200 = actualDamage * (100% - (-20%)) = aD * 1.2
aD = 200 / 1.2 ≈ 167

In general (oD = Observed Damage):
aD = oD / (1 - (-100%/L)) = oD / (1 + 1/L)

The 100% is because the formula above should be:
M = (A-100)%/L
or
M = (A-100)/(L*100)
for complete accuracy.

So, I redid my damage charts to fit this new function, comparing oD at each armor level to the calculated aD for the given level. oRed is the observed reduction, cRed is calculated reduction. RedN is the new formula, RedO is the formula currently in the addon.

There are weird outliers at 1775 and 1822 armor in both cases, which I've been attributing to bad data. I was trying to keep track of 4 armor buffs while people kept killing my spiders and I was having to wait for respawns, so it's possible I just fat-fingered the data or read numbers from the wrong part of the combat log. It's also possible that's valid data and merits attention. Other than the outliers, my formula is consistently closer than yours at level 40.

My level 7 data is a bit thin, but here's the same info:
This time both formulae are off by a considerable margin, but mine is again consistently closer.

I did some algebra (the horrors!) and re-configured my formula to use the same variables as yours:
M = 4/13 * A/(30*L+100)

or to save a division:
M = 4*A/(390*L+1300)

Not sure if it helps, but doing more algebra, the 50% reduction is at:
A = (30*L+100)*13/8

And the 30% reduction is at:
A = (30*L+100)*39/40

At level 50, my 50% reduction is at exactly 2600 (that was the basis for my math), and the softcap of 1600 gives about 30.769% reduction.

I'm not saying my math is right, just that it seems to fit my data pretty well. It's quite possible I'm making some bad assumptions, or completely mucking up the algebra, or that I just took bad data.

It's also worth noting that rounding errors in the game's damage calculation are causing low-level characters to seem further off than they should, especially with small attacks. Something that hits for 10 or 20 damage is almost always going to be mitigated to something pretty far from the approximation, so I had to wait around and stand in the red cone to get high enough damage to make any sense. The level 40 test above had a naked damage of 126 on a light attack, while the level 7 test had a naked damage of 61 on a special attack -- heavy attacks were 33 and light attacks were 11, and the percentages get pretty weird on the light attack.

Another thought I have, which I haven't even started working out the math for: a properly set up parabola should be able to hit y(0) = 0, y(softcap) = 0.3, y(hardcap) = 0.5. If it works, it might give a more accurate prediction of what's happening.

Yeah, you're right, I meant to type "- (-20%)". As for the 20% extra damage for the outliers, I don't think so. First, most of the data I know I was facing the enemy, because I wanted to see which attacks were doing which damage amounts. So if anything, those outliers are *extra* damage, so I would need to multiply by 5/6 to get original damage, which makes them even farther from accurate.

If I multiply them by 1.2, there's about the same error, just in the opposite direction (note that all my %diff numbers were absolute value). If I multiply both of them by 1.1 they suddenly get in line which both of our formulae, but I'm not sure that means anything. I could just as easily use 10/9 or use some kind of regression fitting to find the best fit to each curve, but that doesn't mean it should be that way.



To find the percentage difference, I used the data I posted in the other thread, plus some I apparently didn't post. I didn't use the level 37 zombie or the level 6 DK data in the previous post (note that Display % here is using the old formula from the TF page, not my formula).


Under my formula, 0 armor is 0 reduction, so I just calculated:
reduction = 1 - damageTaken / unmitigatedDamage

Where unmitigatedDamage is the damage at zero armor.

For your formula, 0 armor is negative reduction, so I used the damage at 0 armor, calculated the negative reduction at that level, and calculated the original damage from the enemy as shown in my previous comment. Then, I used the same reduction formula as on mine, except unmitigatedDamage is from aD = oD / (1 + 1/L), instead of just using oD.

As an example, I'll calculate the 2050 armor value for L40 Sorc vs L39 Spider. First, I got naked and let him hit me to see what his regular attack was doing. It's 126 damage per hit. Then I put on all my armor and appropriate buffs and let him hit me again. It's 64 damage per hit.

Under my algorithm, the assumption is that 126 is the base damage from the spider, so if we divide 64/126 we get the percent of damage remaining after mitigation, and if we do 1-64/126 we get the percentage mitigated. In this case, 49.2%.

Under your algorithm, oD is 126 and L is 40, so we calculate aD = 126/(1+1/40) which is about 122.9. Then, we can use the same formula as in my algorithm to get 1-64/122.9 is 47.9%.

Now, if we equip exactly 100 armor, the spider should do 123 damage if your formula is correct, which would give the original damage more directly. However, it's a lot easier to equip 0 armor than finding the exact pieces to equip 100 armor, so I used the 0 armor values (plus I already had them).

As for how I did my tests: I found some level 39 spiders (I wanted level 40, but didn't find any), then I used various methods to achieve different armor levels (equip different armor sets, switch to shield, add various combinations of buffs), then I stood there and let the spider hit me. I would have my stat screen open, watching to make sure my buffs didn't drop before he hit me, and if it was close I repeated that set of buffs until it was obvious he had hit me well before the buffs fell off. Repeat for the L37 zombie, and the two DK tests.

I'm using T's Combat Stats for my damage information, with everything piped to a single Combat tab so I don't have zone chat and so forth interfering. Unfortunately, my buffs and debuffs aren't showing in the log, so I can't just look for the instant x, y, and z buffs were active and check the next incoming damage. Also, the log doesn't specify crits, enemy ability names, etc., so it can be tricky making sure I'm comparing the correct values, but I try to get several consistent damage values before using them, as well as visually correlating attack animations to damage values.

Edit:
There is definitely not a negative reduction at zero armor. I found a level 22 ogre in Stormhaven (near Shinji's Scarp by the Wind Keep wayshrine), and let him pound on my level 40 Sorc and level 7 DK, both at 0 armor. In both cases, the ogre did 104 damage for a light attack, and 208 damage for a heavy attack, and the death recap screen confirmed these values on both characters. At those values the difference between -2.5% and -14.3% are well above the threshold for rounding errors.

Edit to the Edit:
I went back on my DK with a bunch of armor equipped. He has 240 spell resist regardless of equipment, so that shouldn't affect anything, and the difference between 0 armor and 255+ armor was getting hit for 104 damage vs 60-72 damage (I was using ransack and spiked armor, and wasn't looking at exact values -- just wanted to confirm that armor did decrease the damage, and it wasn't somehow a magical fist attack).

Also of note: T's Combat Stats *does* report critical hits. I just never saw one before, so I didn't realize it. The ogre critically hit me for 96 damage, but I'm not sure what armor rating I was at when he hit me.

I made a slight update to the addon at the request of several users. The labels will now cap at 50% even though your rating could be higher.

Because the formula isn't known to be completely accurate, you might still get some use out of a slightly higher rating, but it shouldn't be much. Version 1.00 is still listed under archives if you'd rather use it to display values over 50%.

Version 1.02 adds an options menu so you can change the display as you like. One option toggles between capped and uncapped values, and the second option toggles display of excess value separately, as suggested by JadeKnightblazer.

The third image under "pictures" shows the different possibilities. You probably don't want to show excess separately without having the primary value capped, but you can do it if you choose.