Talk:Armor

The damage reduction formula should be corrected to

where ```+8``` has been moved inside the ```min``` function. This modification is consistent with the graphs and damage table on the page:

https://www.desmos.com/calculator/zandhkto8t

(a=armor, t=toughness, d=raw damage) If you allow toughness above 12 and move the ```+8``` out of the min function, the function becomes inconsistent with stated values on this wiki page.

I do not have the time to double check this in the code, so I'll leave that up to some-one else. (Or I'll come back to this in the future)

DaAresinger (talk) 19:18, 24 January 2025 (UTC)

Bumping this even though this was almost a year ago, as it's really important that the formula is correct. Can someone check the code? Right now I don't think it contradicts what the text says, as it says that if the toughness is over 20 it would just be treated as 20, but I'm not sure about the values, though the values don't seem to even include armor toughness. ‑‑MinecraftExp123^{(talk|contribs)} 02:07, 4 January 2026 (UTC)

I looked at the source code, and here is the code snipplet:

publicstaticfloatgetDamageAfterAbsorb(LivingEntitylivingEntity,floatf,DamageSourcedamageSource,floatf2,floatf3){
floatf4;
Levellevel;
floatf5=2.0f+f3/4.0f;
floatf6=Mth.clamp(f2-f/f5,f2*0.2f,20.0f);
floatf7=f6/25.0f;
ItemStackitemStack=damageSource.getWeaponItem();
if(itemStack!=null&&(level=livingEntity.level())instanceofServerLevel){
ServerLevelserverLevel=(ServerLevel)level;
f4=Mth.clamp(EnchantmentHelper.modifyArmorEffectiveness(serverLevel,itemStack,livingEntity,damageSource,f7),0.0f,1.0f);
}else{
f4=f7;
}
floatf8=1.0f-f4;
returnf*f8;
}

I can't really understand what this is doing as the variables are named like that, but I"m just putting it here for reference. ‑‑MinecraftExp123^{(talk|contribs)} 03:31, 7 January 2026 (UTC)

The damage reduction formula currently on the page is correct. The above suggested change is incorrect. The variables work out to be f = damage, f2 = armorPoints, f3 = toughness; f5, f6, and f7 are different pieces of the overall formula; f4 is the total damage reduction; f8 is the portion of damage left over after the reduction. The formula listed on the page also has a little mathematical simplification for the portion with toughness, which is why the code looks a little different from the formula. Toughness over 20 is treated as 20. This is not determined by this bit of code, but by the armor_toughness attribute itself; the definition of the attribute clamps it at 20. I added that part to the article. You can test it in-game yourself using /attribute to set the values as high as you'd like, then /damage and /data to simulate attacks and check how much damage you took. Rampage455 (talk) 04:24, 7 January 2026 (UTC)

Should the armor mechanics section be split and become an independent page? Aed8814 (talk) 12:12, 13 July 2025 (UTC)

How much the chance of a mob spawn with copper armor. Hassan (talk) 18:25, 25 July 2025 (UTC)

Agreed. -~- Nerdyguy2000   Talk   Edits  16:05, 29 July 2025 (UTC)

@Realshow19 made the current file. 👁 Image
NmF (talk) 16:08, 29 July 2025 (UTC)

Fair critique, I'll try to make a new version with better contrast soon. Realshow19 (talk) 16:13, 29 July 2025 (UTC)

When you do that, maybe add copper armor to the file as well? --MinecraftExp123^{(talk|contribs)} 03:41, 30 July 2025 (UTC)

Thought about that, but unfortunately it’s a bit of a stalemate. Either it would have to wait until the update drops or need to be redone again, especially if they ever change the textures. Realshow19 (talk) 03:43, 30 July 2025 (UTC)

Yeah, I guess that could be done once Fall Drop 2025 becomes a full release, i.e. 1.21.9 is out, in case of texture changes. --MinecraftExp123^{(talk|contribs)} 03:44, 30 July 2025 (UTC)

@Realshow19 Updating this topic as it has been around a month and that I noticed the image hasn't changed yet. Is the new image done yet? --MinecraftExp123^{(talk|contribs)} 10:46, 27 August 2025 (UTC)

I decided to wait for the drop first to be safe, though I’m also having some computer problems. Realshow19 (talk) 14:09, 27 August 2025 (UTC)

Oh, okay then. I'm asking because the latest article feedback just asked why the copper armor isn't in the image. --MinecraftExp123^{(talk|contribs)} 22:52, 27 August 2025 (UTC)

The image has been updated.--Capopanzo (talk | contribs) 19:03, 29 September 2025 (UTC)

For the first time in Minecraft, there is a non-linearity between two tiers of armor when measuring their protective value and their durability. (see Armor materials. Until copper armor, there was no armor tier that had higher protective value, but lower durability.) Copper armor has a durability multiplier of 11 compared to gold armor's 7. Conversely, gold armor grants more protective value when compared to copper armor: 11 armor points total compared to 10.

Although this page currently implies gold is the better of the two, it does so under the statement that "The six full sets are shown below in order from weakest (offers the least protection and is the least durable) to strongest (offers the most protection and is the most durable,)" not reflecting this non-linearity. I believe it may be worth reaching a consensus as to which of these tiers of armor should be ranked higher when speaking of the "tiers" of armor. Gender Machine (talk) 06:53, 2 August 2025 (UTC)

I think that is relatively insignificant to the average reader but kinda confusing when you put it there. Maybe it fits better into the trivia section. --MinecraftExp123^{(talk|contribs)} 02:14, 17 August 2025 (UTC)

Bumping this, can someone check the code? This seems quite important and it's weird that it isn't documented anywhere. From testing, it appears to be random and not interval based, so maybe it's like a chance for every tick? ‑‑MinecraftExp123^{(talk|contribs)} 02:18, 4 January 2026 (UTC)

Bumping at a different time of day ‑‑MinecraftExp123^{(talk|contribs)} 08:27, 5 January 2026 (UTC)

After reviewing the code (JE 1.21.11) and doing some in-game testing, I believe the odds of a helmet taking damage are about 2% per tick at light level 15. There are two random number checks, the first is based on the current internal skylight level, and if that passes, there's a 50% chance of the durability decreasing by 1. The odds are slightly lower for light levels 12-14, but the light levels are in that range for a relatively short portion of the Minecraft day. Although, I may be slightly misreading something. The code seems to imply that undead mobs shouldn't burn at light level 12, but they do. For light level 12, there is a number that equals exactly 0.5, but the code requires that number to be greater than 0.5 for undead mobs to burn. For in-game testing, I got values of 40 to 60 ticks per point of damage, which averages to a 2% (1/50) chance.

If you'd like to check the code yourself, the relevant methods and classes are:

isSunBurnTick() and burnUndead() in Mob

getLightLevelDependentMagicValue(BlockPos blockPos) in LevelReader

lerp(float f, float g, float h) in Mth
Rampage455 (talk) 02:27, 6 January 2026 (UTC)

Okay, I'll check the source code myself later, but that does mean I'll have to download a Java runtime (which I don't have one yet) and go through some stuff. ‑‑MinecraftExp123^{(talk|contribs)} 02:30, 6 January 2026 (UTC)

You can also check the decompiled code here: https://mcsrc.dev/ --Capopanzo (talk | contribs) 03:24, 6 January 2026 (UTC)

@Rampage455: Yeah, I still don't really know how light level 12 works. I thought maybe the internal light level in getMaxLocalRawBrightness just works differently, so I used grep -r on my Mac to find the method it calls repeatedly, but due to a lot of @Overrides I can't find what actually gets called. I think right now, it should just say that every tick where the mob would normally be set on fire, it has a 50% chance to lose 1 durability. ‑‑MinecraftExp123^{(talk|contribs)} 11:33, 6 January 2026 (UTC)

Copper armor is still upcoming and therefore not included in the image. MinecraftBedrockPlayer7 (talk) (contribs) 👁 Image
10:41, 27 August 2025 (UTC)

You can start a discussion at the talk page of MCW:P/DIG. A consensus has already been reached for this. --MinecraftExp123^{(talk|contribs)} 11:54, 23 November 2025 (UTC)

I noticed a mini edit war regarding whether {{Armor}} should be used to visually represent armor toughness. If anyone would like to discuss it on the talk page, here you go. Personally, I kind of like having an icon, and wish we could use the light blue icon seen in various mod packs, but those aren't official, so we can't do that I suppose. I saw an argument that infoboxes use the armor icon for items that have armor toughness. That's true, but could easily be changed with a simple edit to {{Infobox item}} if the community is opposed. Rampage455 (talk) 00:23, 9 December 2025 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Fixed. 👁 Image
amethyst_hhh👁 Image
07:56, 18 December 2025 (UTC)

All thats missing is the history from a few pages. I think we are ready to finish the split. CrockCraftMC (talk) 16:05, 3 January 2026 (UTC)

The gold armor page still doesn't have a complete usage section (it doesn't mention piglins), and I think we should split after the History sections are done. I'll work on them today. ‑‑MinecraftExp123^{(talk|contribs)} 00:21, 4 January 2026 (UTC)

@CrockCraftMC After some cleanup to get the pages consistent, aI think all sections other than History are now done. I'll try to add all the History sections today. ‑‑MinecraftExp123^{(talk|contribs)} 02:08, 4 January 2026 (UTC)

I'll help too. –LauraFi - talk 03:40, 4 January 2026 (UTC)

Do we really need to split the page? We should make the page more completed rather than spliting. AspectUtsavDreams (talk) 05:50, 27 January 2026 (UTC)

There was already consensus. This discussion was simply for asking whether the split can be completed. ‑‑MinecraftExp123^{(talk|contribs)} 06:56, 27 January 2026 (UTC)

👁 Image
 Done – Well, that's still not the correct grammar but I fixed it. TheCaptainYaya (talk) 16:22, 17 June 2026 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://minecraft.wiki/w/Talk:Armor?oldid=3631929"