PDA

View Full Version : Weapon Damage Calculations


Mehran
08-08-2013, 05:30 PM
Okay this thread is basically figuring out some damage mechanics.

#1. I tested the other day and fairly certain that crit damage is 150% (was doing roughly 30's of normal damage and mid 40's as crits, today I tested again and did 30-33 normals and 44-49 crits) So i'm quite sure of this.

#2. Onto my question which I have not yet tested because I don't know how to start (Probably take off all extra Attributes and use a init. bow) ... How are Weapon Add-Ons actually added?

For instance: http://tinypic.com/view.php?pic=2j5jri9&s=5

Would it be +12 damage to both the 12-16 pierce AND 5 ice damage (for a combined [12(+12)-16(+12)]+5(+12) to become 24-28 + 17 ice damage, OR is it just +12 damage to the final. So.. 12-16(+5 ice damage) and only 1 (+12) instead of 2. Also, if the bow had a +15 fire damage gem or another stat, the fire damage would just be added to the grand total, correct? Just once?

In finale, does this bow have 29-33 damage, or 41-45 damage? Also with the fire damage, would it be just +15 or +30?

Thanks in advance!

Tamui
08-09-2013, 12:10 PM
I think they are added last.

Usually, I just add everything together ,if you have two damage types, then the (+XX) on the top to the minimum and maximum, then the bonuses/gems.

If I remember correctly, powers like Recharged Arrows don't think in count the gems embed. If I find the thread, I'll link it here.

If I were to count the bow damage;
I'd come up with 29-33, and the gem embedded, 44-47.


We need an Enio over here :D

Mehran
08-09-2013, 01:39 PM
I think they are added last.

Usually, I just add everything together ,if you have two damage types, then the (+XX) on the top to the minimum and maximum, then the bonuses/gems.

If I remember correctly, powers like Recharged Arrows don't think in count the gems embed. If I find the thread, I'll link it here.

If I were to count the bow damage;
I'd come up with 29-33, and the gem embedded, 44-47.


We need an Enio over here :D

To be honest I was actually hoping for him or Kit. :p

Mehran
01-20-2014, 07:50 PM
Bump. If anyone could shine some light on this in detail, Enio, Kitsu....

V1r14
01-21-2014, 07:46 AM
The Formula goes as followes:

number in brackets + gem + (weapons +rings) * RA/weapondmgpassive + (dexterity - 20) * A

A = 1.0 for Hunter, 1.5 for Marx

so, in the case of the screenshot:

max-dmg = 12+0+(16+5+ DSring? +arrows)*1.0 +(39-20)*1.5
min-dmg = 12+0+(12+5+ DSring? +arrows)*1.0 +(39-20)*1.5

With RA(5) the underlined modifier would be 1.4

To Sum it up: Bracket-numbers in Bows e.g (+12) are not affected by buffs and although commenly mistaken, they don't go unhindered through armor.
The same applies for carved gems, which is the second reason a Magnanite-Bow is overestimated.
Out of 204dmg (=135+39+2x15), 69dmg is unaffected by buffs.

pieceofmeat
01-21-2014, 09:36 AM
The Formula goes as followes:

number in brackets + gem + (weapons +rings) * RA/weapondmgpassive + (dexterity - 20) * A

A = 1.0 for Hunter, 1.5 for Marx

so, in the case of the screenshot:

max-dmg = 12+0+(16+5+ DSring? +arrows)*1.0 +(39-20)*1.5
min-dmg = 12+0+(12+5+ DSring? +arrows)*1.0 +(39-20)*1.5

With RA(5) the underlined modifier would be 1.4

To Sum it up: Bracket-numbers in Bows e.g (+12) are not affected by buffs and although commenly mistaken, they don't go unhindered through armor.
The same applies for carved gems, which is the second reason a Magnanite-Bow is overestimated.
Out of 204dmg (=135+39+2x15), 69dmg is unaffected by buffs.

I think the "-20 dex/str/int" has been removed.

V1r14
01-21-2014, 10:08 AM
@pieceofmeat It still applies. I'm not throwing some old unproved wiki-stuff here. ;)
A recent example:

He has Specialist(5) and no active RA.

39+30+(135+50+25+24+67+16)*1.1+(125-20)*1.5 = 575.2
39+30+(120+50+15+24+49+16)*1.1+(125-20)*1.5 = 527.9

PS: IIRC Crit-dmg was around 133%, not 150%. Dont forget that the Crit-Multiplier comes before the armor-reduction. :P

Mehran
01-21-2014, 07:35 PM
Thanks! Still would like more info, if possible. :dumbofme: