Curse

Lord Stormer · Aug 09, 2009, 11:02 PM // 23:02

I guess there are lots of conversations about this topic, but I don't know how up-to-date they are. So I'm planning to create an Imbagon (actually it's ready except for the insignias) and I was wondering which insignias to choose. I know that many of you will say things like "It's up to you" or "It doesn't really matter", but try to explain the pros and cons of both of these.

Thanks already

snaek · Aug 09, 2009, 11:11 PM // 23:11

i prefer centurions on chest+legs, survivors on head+hands+feet. the reason being the chest and legs have a higher % chance of being hit by non-armour ignoring damage, so you'll get a good balance of defense vs both types of damage.

aside from that, +armour ingisgnias are definitely worth it over survivors in pve. if you think about it, the imbagon provides "god-mode" through an armour bonus. the major threat in pve is generally non-armour ignoring damage; warriors can autoattack for 100+dmg and eles can nuke for 300+dmg a spell.

Lord Stormer · Aug 09, 2009, 11:31 PM // 23:31

Thanks for the answer. I think I'll do that same trick.

Necromas · Aug 11, 2009, 12:38 AM // 00:38

Just a note, the chance to hit a piece of armor is directly proportional to how much health a survivor rune would give on that armor (Every 5hp = 12.5% chance to hit that piece), so you could save a little money by only needing 1 survivor rune if you put it on the legs (assuming centurions are cheaper).

Reverend Dr · Aug 11, 2009, 06:47 AM // 06:47

As far as pvp is concerned right now, we are in a +armor meta, where getting more + armor from equipment is ideal. As such centurion's is an easy choice.

Marverick · Aug 11, 2009, 07:34 PM // 19:34

I'd have to disagree and say you'll want more health on an imbagon. More health will make monsters target you less and target other people (with +100 armor) more.

My Lipgloss is Cool · Aug 11, 2009, 08:01 PM // 20:01

Well, I know both armor and health are involved in mob's targeting ... Which is more powerful?

And either way, I think it would be easier on the monks to focus on one tank (the para) than dealing with a bunch of small packets of damage everywhere. Either way, it's an easy job, but I think the para 'tank' would be a bit easier.

MisterB · Aug 11, 2009, 08:12 PM // 20:12

I always run Centurion's, but I don't notice a significant change in targetting when I play Imbagon. Monsters just don't target Paragon often, and it's still easy to shake aggro.

Centurion's is basically +10 armor always, since Aggressive Refrain never goes down, and it helps to cut the loss of armor from Cracked Armor in half.

reaper with no name · Aug 13, 2009, 09:17 AM // 09:17

+40 armor is 50% less damage. So, +10 armor is 1/4 of 50%. That comes out to 12.5% less damage, and 12.5% more survivability.

If you have 530 hp (a superior rune of vigor and nothing else affecting your health), then +15 hp gives you 1/17.66 more survivability, which comes out to something like 5.88% more survivability.

Now, +hp has the benefit of protecting you from armor-ignoring damage (which +armor does not). However, +armor indirectly increases the effect of healing (less damage taken means less damage has to be healed).

So, in short, +armor is more powerful, so centurion's it's better unless you really want extra protection from armor-ignoring damage.

I had a similiar dilemna when deciding between a defense grip or health grip for my scythe.

evenfall · Aug 13, 2009, 10:31 AM // 10:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by reaper with no name

+40 armor is 50% less damage. So, +10 armor is 1/4 of 50%. That comes out to 12.5% less damage, and 12.5% more survivability.

+10 armor actually reduces damage by ~16%. The relationship is not linear.

Ccat · Aug 13, 2009, 10:47 AM // 10:47

I would have to say Survivors, without a doubt. If you're going to get spiked for hundreds of damage in tough places, at least let the healer have a chance to heal you, hence more health. It should also be noted that more health fights against degeneration, whereas armor is helpless against that kind of damage, as well as armor-ignoring damage. Health is your armor against hexes and shadow damage.

Xenomortis · Aug 13, 2009, 10:56 AM // 10:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by evenfall

+10 armor actually reduces damage by ~16%. The relationship is not linear.

As far as I can tell, every +10 armour reduces damage by a factor of 2^0.25 (4th root of 2, or the square root of the square root of 2), which is around 1.189.
1/1.189 = 0.841... so yes, the damage reduction is appproximatly 16%.

So, does having Survivor's insignia increase your health by around 16%?

Incidently and to remove any confusion:

+armour - damage reduction factor

+5 - 2^0.125 ~1.09
+10 - 2^0.25 ~1.189
+15 - 2^0.375 ~1.297
+20 - 2^0.5 ~1.414
etc...

The Juggernauot · Aug 23, 2009, 06:03 AM // 06:03

centurions for me. i initially ran survivors when i made my paragon (back when nightfall was first released, but tried centurions on my first elite set) dunno i seem to have more survivability with centurions.