Latest revision |
Your text |
Line 31: |
Line 31: |
| :Total Damage = Base Damage x (1+A1+A2+A3+...) x (1-D1) x (1-D2) x (1-D3) x ... . It is only a bit tricky that positive A/D difference should be included as an A, and negative A/D difference as a D. The caps of A = 3 and D = 0.7 are applied only to A/D difference though, damage can be increased or reduced further by other factors. Feel free to let me know what you think and then we can decide how to best phrase the formula. | | :Total Damage = Base Damage x (1+A1+A2+A3+...) x (1-D1) x (1-D2) x (1-D3) x ... . It is only a bit tricky that positive A/D difference should be included as an A, and negative A/D difference as a D. The caps of A = 3 and D = 0.7 are applied only to A/D difference though, damage can be increased or reduced further by other factors. Feel free to let me know what you think and then we can decide how to best phrase the formula. |
| :-[[User:Entelechy|Entelechy]] 11:11, 17 July 2014 (CEST) | | :-[[User:Entelechy|Entelechy]] 11:11, 17 July 2014 (CEST) |
|
| |
| ::My reasoning is, that because there cannot be postive and negative AD-differnce affecting the result at the same time, should the factor therefore be sparate from the others. This seems more "beautiful to my mathematical eye". :)
| |
|
| |
| ::My knowledge about the calculation seems to be wrong appears to be wrong here! I have always believed, that those reductions are added up together, but it seems not to be the case. As Ecoris said [http://heroescommunity.com/viewthread.php3?TID=11801&PID=366833#focus here] – short and sweet I might add – "''damage bonuses are cumulative, while damage reductions are multiplicative''". I have never studied or even thought this more closely until now. That is, of course, much more logical. If expert Armorer (-15%) and expert Shield (-30%) affecting at the same time, the correct final reduction seems to be (1 - 0.15) × (1 - 0.30) = -0.595 or -41.5% not -45% (or factor 0.55) as I have believed. My apology. :) --[[User:Kapteeni Ruoska|Kapteeni Ruoska]] 12:38, 17 July 2014 (CEST)
| |
|
| |
| :::Uh, but this "new" infromation also changes the calculation routine, bummer. --[[User:Kapteeni Ruoska|Kapteeni Ruoska]] 12:40, 17 July 2014 (CEST)
| |
|
| |
| ::::No problem, I agree that writing these articles has been quite educational. I learned, for example, that an ammo cart can be raised as a skeleton :-s. Talking about mathematical beauty, all As are basically interchangeable in the formula (only their weighting differs) and so are all Ds, so we may not even have to bother with linking the numbers to specific variable names. Identifying a modifier as an attack or defense variable and giving its weighting may also suffice. Finally, perhaps my edit about magic resistances and immunities is a bit lengthy - I wonder if it is easier to just say that modifiers of spell damage are only valid when the target does not resist the spell and is not immune to it. -[[User:Entelechy|Entelechy]] 23:38, 17 July 2014 (CEST)
| |
|
| |
| :::Ammo Cart becomes skeleton. :) With [[Animate Dead]] or [[Necromancy]]? I think you made good additions to spell damage. Sometimes things just cannot be said shortly. Perhaps a table could help, if you think it is too long. --[[User:Kapteeni Ruoska|Kapteeni Ruoska]] 06:09, 18 July 2014 (CEST)
| |
|
| |
| ::::With Necromancy apparently :). I would also advice against cloning a legion of level 1 units against Necro if you don't plan to win the battle :p. Thanks for the feedback, I will leave it the way it is then. I have just edited the page a bit, but I am a slow writer (the fact that my activities will increase again next week will also not help). A suggestion that I have is to change attack-defense ratio into attack-defense difference. That is, after all, what it basically is. To my knowledge attack-defense ratio stems from HoMMIV, where this was indeed how damage was calculated. -[[User:Entelechy|Entelechy]] 22:57, 18 July 2014 (CEST)
| |