Which Is Better, Armor Reduction Or Damage Increase?

[ReizoIcefield]

I'm a new player, or at least still new to most of the game mechanics, and so here is my question.

Well, to be more specific I'm referring here to aura mods like "Corrosive Projection" and "Rifle Amp", both of them increase damage you deal but in a different way.

 

Corrosive Projection reduce armor by 30% for every aura in team, but not all enemies use armor.

 

And

 

Rifle Amp increase damage deal by rifle by 27% for every aura in team, the number is lower then corrosive projection but it will work on all enemies since its just damage boost.

 

 

So if you understand the armor and damage calculation, between armor reduction and damage boost, could you care to tell me which one is better and possibly explain why?

 

 

[Kthal]

At high levels, Corrosive Projection is better. At low levels, Rifle Amp provides more of a damage bonus...

 

However - When the enemy level is low enough for Rifle Amp to provide more, you really don't need it, so Corrosive Projection is generally the better choice.

 

-edit- Against armoured enemies.

 

 

I recall seeing a spreadsheet on how the two mods interacted with different enemies, and if memory serves me, the cutoff point is around level 20.

Edited February 5, 2016 by Kthal

[Mcl_Blue]

Corrosive Projection reduce armor by 30% for every aura in team, but not all enemies use armor.

The real answer is to change which aura you're using depending on which faction you're fighting.

 

Overall, for enemies that do have armor, Corrosive Projection (and anything armor-reducing) is leaps and bounds better than any tiny damage increase. Armor scales with the level, and soon enough the enemies have massive damage reductions on their side to protect them. Since enemy armor scales, armor reduction also scales, whereas damage increase does not.

 

Remember this for your future endeavors in this game: utility is always better than just raw power, because utility never stops being effective, while raw power will always, sooner or later, just not be enough.

[S0V3REiGN]

Long story short; Removing damage mitigation is better then increasing damage. Corrosive Project is better then something like Steel Charge unless you are looking at very low levels and at that point it doesn't matter.

Edited February 5, 2016 by S0V3REiGN

[ReizoIcefield]

wow, didn't expect such fast response.

I see, now that you point it out, low level enemies die so fast that damage bonus doesn't make much of a difference at that point, so corrosive projection does sound better.

And yea, if armor really scales that much then i suppose reducing it is better choice.

 

Thanks for fast reply

 

Now, just last question, does 30% armor reduction translate to 30% damage increase, or it's not that simple?

[Autongnosis]

Not that simple.

The damage reduction fom armour is calculated as follows:

Actual damage = raw damage * (300/(300+armour value))

So a 30% armour reduction generally does not translate to a 30% damage increase. It dependa on the armour value.

[Kthal]

Now, just last question, does 30% armor reduction translate to 30% damage increase, or it's not that simple?

 

Far less simple... Damage in this game is extremely complicated, and I normally enjoy number-crunching.

 

Reduction = n/(300+n)

If I'm reading it correctly, the Wiki is stating that a level 8 Heavy Gunner has 500 armour. (This is much higher than most other enemies)

Ignoring damage types, 500 armour is a 62.5% reduction in damage.

If you reduce that by 30%, that gives 350 armour, a 53.8% reduction.

37.5% damage to 46.2% damage is a 23% increase.

Edited February 5, 2016 by Kthal

[zeroth0x]

While everyone else here has a valid point, if you are just starting out, just match the polarity to the warframe slot, you can worry about what is optimal later down the road