::The Forum::
Bugs and Issues

I have been tracking armor listings in the Store. I noticed that a Ruined AblativeNet was 682 AR (armor rating). That is better than the Damaged, Defective and alsmost as good as the Used variants. It is also better than a Damaged ForceField I saw at 681 AR.

I'm not sure if this is normal, but with that much randomness it would be almost impossible to gauge the capabilities of player bots in your weight class based off of their profile. The old 2 prefix system at least gave you the material and armor type to guesstimate with.

Also something just feels wrong when Ruined versions can be better than Used variants.

The problem is that as they get that far up in rating.... the +/- 15% flex I apply, becomes much more and causes overlap. I will investigate.

I should maybe flex by a # rather than a %.

Maybe just have the +/- % drop 1% each armor type

15% Shielding
14% Frame
13% Plates
12% Exoskeleton
11% DuroMesh
10% Reflector
9% AblativeNet
8% ForceField

Did I forget any?

Hmm...

The armor values were being flexed by +/- 10%. I've changed this to +/- 5%. Let me know if this looks a bit better. I don't want too much overlap.

I'm definitely seeing less overlap: between quality levels and between armor types. Now I don't see lower quality tier be as good as 2 tiers better.

I also noticed that only the best quality tiers of an armor type are on par with the worst tiers of the next better armor type. This means that if you see an opponent with a better armor type than you, chances are now much better that they flat out beat you in armor.

Armor types fall in approximate range categories of
Shielding: 1-100
Frame: 100-200
Plates: 200-300
Exoskeleton: 300-450
DuroMesh: 400-550
Reflector: 500-650
AblativeNet: 600-750
ForceField: 700-900

That is pretty much good enough for gauging opponents based on their profile info.

Good! I will close this for now.