# How Much Damage Can Armors Take?

I have been looking around for a bit. The Armor Resistance seems readily available, but I am unsure how much damage a piece of armor need to take before breaking. Are the total armor durability subjected to hull bonus/diminishing returns?

So for example

If I have 1 Ultraheavy armor, it can take up to 145 damage

If I have 2 Ultraheavy armor, will each piece have 145, for a total of 290? Or will it be affected by the 97%, or 140.65 each for a total of 281.3?

Second question

Is this the correct formula to figure out current armor resistant?

Current Armor Resistant = Total Armor Resistant*(Current Armor Durability/Total Armor Durability)

So if all my armor lose half it’s durability does that mean my armor resistant is dropped by half?

Thanks a lot if anyone can help.

I believe the total amount of damage you can take is equal to the combined armor values, times whatever efficiency penalty there is. (I don’t have that info on hand.) I don’t think armor has an efficiency penalty, but I’m not sure. Judging by your post it sounds like it might be 0.97.

So two Superheavy armors will each have 140.65 for a total armor “durability” of 281.30.

As for the armor resistance, it’s:

(Current Armor Durability) / (Total # of modules on the Ship + 1)

So as your armor durability goes down, your resistance goes down too.

So basically, you guys are saying that as your armor gets damaged, your resistance goes down, proportional to how much its damaged? That would explain why high armored targets seem to do fine, then blow up all of a sudden.

So getting JUST 70 resistance is probably not going to do much against beam spam? Interesting…

Exactly. The jury is still out if this implementation is better or worse

Personally, I like the idea that armor does go down slowly, but I think fighters take it apart too quickly. You need a TON of armor to not get instantly ripped apart by a few squadrons of fighters, and fighters are pretty much impossible to kill fast.

Exactly. The jury is still out if this implementation is better or worse

Personally, I like the idea that armor does go down slowly, but I think fighters take it apart too quickly. You need a TON of armor to not get instantly ripped apart by a few squadrons of fighters, and fighters are pretty much impossible to kill fast.
[/quotehit ]
I generally make sure there is an advanced repair unit - it doesn’t help too much for cruiser vs cruiser fights - but it keeps that armour up enough that lucky shots are kept off for a good while. It is also cheaper than super-heavy-armour. 2 Sheets of the best armour and an advanced armour repair will keep fighters off at least until the battle is close to over.

But I do not like how the armour system works - I think for the cost armour is really underpowered.

What if lucky shots punch through and do hull point damage instead? At least from small rapid weapons…

Berny

On my machine, I’ve modded the game to make armor more effective and I like the results.
Basically I’ve increased the armor points of all armors and the armor penetration of all weapons by x5.

Armor lasts five timers longer against penetrating weapons and significantly longer against non-penetrating weapons.
Armored fighters and Alliance fleets seem a little too effective, but I still have fun.

I end up having to take down the shields before I can hit with the armor-penetrating weapons. Once the armor-penetrating weapons strip off the armor, which can sometimes take awhile, the fighters can clean up. But the fighters are pretty ineffective while the armor is still on, and the armor can’t be taken out by the capital ships until the shields are dealt with.

Battles, of course, take longer.