Damage question (for people who are concerned about such things) - Guild Wars Forums

Diomedes · Aug 31, 2005, 07:52 PM // 19:52

Hello,
First off, I've been reading the great damage FAQ from Ensign (http://www.guildwarsguru.com/content...nics-id674.php), but I've gotten stuck on a few questions.

First on this article:
http://www.guildwarsguru.com/content...ess-id1103.php

Let's start with the sword. 15-22. That's 18.5 for an average hit. That's 25.53 running a customized sword with +15% damage on it (18.5*1.2*1.15). By the damage calculator (http://www.guildwarsguru.com/calculators/guru_armor.php) that's 25.53 damage vs an AL 60 target and 18.05 vs an AL 80 target. Given that a sword attacks at 1.33333 secs/swing (I think) that's 19.14 dps and 13.54 dps respectively. Where does the 18.92 number come from? I've tried it without customization and other iterations, but I can't make that number come out.

Second, on this thread:
http://www.guildwarsguru.com/forum/s...&postcount=114

Ensign mentions that using eviscerate or executioner's strike, you'll hit for 81 damage with 10 str and 16 axe.

Let's say I've got a +15% customized axe, hence:

6-28 (17 ave, 23.46 ave customized and +15%)

Quote:

[Actualized Damage] = [Base Damage] ?? 2(( [Strike Level] - [Armor Level] ) / 40)

Where, for weapons:

[Strike Level] = 5 ?? [Attribute Level]

23.46*2^((5*16-60)/40) = 33.18 damage per hit.

Now, when I add in the damage from eviscerate, do I add that to the base damage?

(23.46+45[evi])*2^((80-48)/40) = 119.2?!! That's far higher than the claim and much more damage than I've ever seen it do.

Do you apply them as separate attacks?

23.46*2^(.5) = 33.18
45*2^((80-48)/40) = 78.35
________________________
111.53 ?!!?! Still too high

Can someone tell me where I've gone wrong with the formula?

Thanks for your time.

-Diomedes

Jenosavel · Aug 31, 2005, 09:59 PM // 21:59

Just a guess, but you might want to use the right formula.

Quote:

Skill Damage
[Effective Damage] = [Skill Damage] ?? 2^((3 ?? [Character Level] - 60) / 40)

I believe the equation you were trying to use is for normal attacks, not skills. If I'm understanding things correctly, the calcuations for Eviscerate/Executioners would go more like this (assuming a character at lvl 20):

Effective Damage = 81 x 2 ^ (( 3 x 20 - 60) / 40)
Effective Damage = 81

As you can see, no where does the weapon's stat enter into the equation when dealing with skill damage. Therefore, weapon damage would be only for normal physical attacks, not skills.

LifeInfusion · Aug 31, 2005, 11:07 PM // 23:07

whatever people say, axe has a higher critical. And eviscerate is more useful than cleave.

Diomedes · Aug 31, 2005, 11:14 PM // 23:14

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jenosavel

Just a guess, but you might want to use the right formula.

I believe the equation you were trying to use is for normal attacks, not skills. If I'm understanding things correctly, the calcuations for Eviscerate/Executioners would go more like this (assuming a character at lvl 20):

Effective Damage = 81 x 2 ^ (( 3 x 20 - 60) / 40)
Effective Damage = 81

As you can see, no where does the weapon's stat enter into the equation when dealing with skill damage. Therefore, weapon damage would be only for normal physical attacks, not skills.

Fine, we'll play it that way. Where did you get that 81 number from? Eviscerate is at +45.

45*2^((3*20-60)/40) = 45

Joy

45 + 33.18 per hit from the ave axe damage = 88.18. That's STILL not 81. Further, I know that somewhere STR is supposed to lower the armor vs attack SKILLS. Since the equation that you mentioned does not take AL into account at all, I can only conclude that it is NOT the right equation to look at.

Quote:

[Actualized Damage] = [Base Damage] ?? 2^(( [Strike Level] - [Armor Level] ) / 40)

For skills:

[Strike Level] = 3 ?? [Character Level]

If I use this one, then:

45*2^((60-48 (applying str to this point))/40) = 55.4

If I add 33.18 to this I get 88.15. That's STILL not 81.

You can tell me all day that I'm using the wrong equation, but unless you can make it work please don't start insulting me.

-Diomedes

Jenosavel · Sep 01, 2005, 12:01 AM // 00:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by Diomedes

Ensign mentions that using eviscerate or executioner's strike, you'll hit for 81 damage with 10 str and 16 axe.

I got 81 from your original post, though apparently I must have misread. I thought you were meaning 81 to be the listed damage of the skill, not the final damage. I don't have something in front of me at the moment to give the listed damage at a certain attribute, so forgive me that mistake.

Quote:

45 + 33.18 per hit from the ave axe damage = 88.18.

First, I'm not sure why you're adding average axe attack damage. Skills and attacks do separate damage and should be calculated separately.

Quote:

Further, I know that somewhere STR is supposed to lower the armor vs attack SKILLS. Since the equation that you mentioned does not take AL into account at all, I can only conclude that it is NOT the right equation to look at.

The equation I gave will give you effective damage for skills, which can then be plugged into the equation for actualized damage if that's what you're looking for. I didn't mean to be insulting, even if I came off that way and merely intended to point out that there are different equations for normal attacks and attack skills.

Here's the whole process as I understand it:

[Effective Damage from Skills] = [Skill Damage] * 2 ^((3 * [Character Level] - 60) / 40)

[Effective Damage from normal Attacks] = [Weapon Damage] * 2 ^ ((5 * [Attribute Level] - 60) / 40)

[Defensive Adjustment] = 2 ^ ((60 - [Armor Rating]) / 40)

[Armor Rating] = [Armor Level] * (1 - [Armor Penetration] / 100)

[Actualized Damage] = [Effective Damage] - [Defensive Adjustment]
Note that effective damage here is either from skills or normal attacks, not both, and not any combination of the two.

Therefore if you mush it all together (for skills) you get:
[Actualized Damage] = [Skill Damage] * 2 ^ ((3 * [Character Level] - 60) / 40) - 2 ^ ((60 - ([Armor Level] * (1 - [Armor Penetration] / 100))) / 40)

Which is a fancy version of:
[Actualized Damage] = [Skill Damage] * 2 ^ (( 3 * [Character Level] - ([Armor Level] * (1 - [Armor Penetration] / 100))) / 40)

As an example, if the listed damage of the skill you are using is 45, and you're attacking a caster (AL = 60) with 10% armor penetration (due to 10 points in strength) you would deal:
45 * 2 ^ ((3 * 20 - (60 * (1 - 10 / 100))) / 40) = 49.9 damage

However, if you are attacking someone with a different AL, say 80 + 20 (Gladiators vs. physical damage) with the same 10 strength you would deal something more like:
45 * 2 ^ ((3 * 20 - (100 * (1 - 10 / 100))) / 40) = 26 damage

So to reiterate, I misunderstood your initial post, and thus my numbers were incorrect. My point, however, remains that when dealing with damage from a skill, your weapon's damage does not enter into it. Character level, armor level, and the listed damage of the skill at your attribute level are the factors to be concerned with.

Once again, I apologize for sounding insulting. I did not intend to be so.

EDIT: 'cause the armor penetration got lost in the shuffle... an artist posting on math... I tell ya.

Diomedes · Sep 01, 2005, 12:15 AM // 00:15

Quote:

Once again, I apologize for sounding insulting. I did not intend to be so.

Thanks, I must have just misread your tone, my bad.

Quote:

My point, however, remains that when dealing with damage from a skill, your weapon's damage does not enter into it. Character level, armor level, and the listed damage of the skill at your attribute level are the factors to be concerned with.

But then here's what I don't understand:
Eviscerate {Elite} - Axe Attack
If Eviscerate hits, you strike for 1-34 more damage and inflict a deep wound, lowering your target's maximum health by 20% for 5-17 seconds.

When it says, "1-34 more damage" I was reading that as "more than your usual attack". This is why I keep trying to add weapon damage in. However I don't know where I should be adding it in.

Further, I know from personal experience that eviscerate does far more than that (34), but is much closer to the 80 number. This enforces the belief that somewhere I need to tack weapon damage in there.

Hence my complete and total confusion. I agree that the equations seem to give results for normal attacks or for skill attacks, but it seems like these adrenaline attacks are both?

Plus I still can't flip the equation around to make it work no matter what assumptions I seem to be placing on it.

Jenosavel · Sep 01, 2005, 01:07 AM // 01:07

Well, I do see your dilema now. Please, walk with me in thought for a moment and see if we come to any conclusions at all.

First I would assume that Eviscerate's damage must be calculated all by one equation or all by the other. Thus, I'm first going to plug the numbers into the attack equation and then the skills equation. We'll see if either set of numbers come out reasonable.

Of course, we have to make some things clear before starting. For my calculations I'm assuming the following:
1) Axe Damage 6-28, customized and with +15% would come to 8.1-37.8 damage realistically.
2) We're facing an AL 60 target
3) We've got 10 Str = 10% armor penetration
4) Eviscerate is listed at +45 damage at 16 Axe (getting the number from when it was mentioned above; I don't have access to a warrior with Eviscerate at the moment)

Assuming Eviscerate is calculated as an attack:
[8.1 + 45] * 2 ^ (( 5 * 16 - (60 * (1 - 10 / 100))) / 40) = 83.3 damage
[37.8 + 45] * 2 ^ (( 5 * 16 - (60 * (1 - 10 / 100))) / 40) = 129.9 damage
The numbers given by this lead me to believe that Eviscerate is not calculated as an attack, which makes sense since it is indeed a skill. Let's move on.

Assuming Eviscerate is calculated as a skill:
(8.1 + 45) * 2 ^ (( 3 * 20 - (60 * (1 - 10 / 100))) / 40) = 58.9 damage
(37.8 + 45) * 2 ^ (( 3 * 20 - (60 * (1 - 10 / 100))) / 40) = 91.8 damage

This would give it a damage range of 58.9 - 91.8 damage. Considering that higher Axe gives a greater chance of criticals, the 81 damage from Ensign sounds quite reasonable to me. Since Ensign is my hero, I will now proceed to assume that he knows how to find the average damage given 16 Axe and could thus narrow it to 81. I, however, don't know how much a chance of criticals you have normally, nor how much 16 axe would increase that to. Thus, I can't calculate an average damage, only the damage range.

Did that make any sense/help?

Diomedes · Sep 01, 2005, 02:34 AM // 02:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jenosavel

This would give it a damage range of 58.9 - 91.8 damage. Considering that higher Axe gives a greater chance of criticals, the 81 damage from Ensign sounds quite reasonable to me. Since Ensign is my hero, I will now proceed to assume that he knows how to find the average damage given 16 Axe and could thus narrow it to 81. I, however, don't know how much a chance of criticals you have normally, nor how much 16 axe would increase that to. Thus, I can't calculate an average damage, only the damage range.

Did that make any sense/help?

Gotcha, so he gets the 81 ave by using a crit equation? Given that the mean for 58.9-91.8 is 75.35, then it makes sense that tacking on crits would bump up the damage to closer to 81.

Alright, I guess that must be how he does it. It's sort of disappointing that I can't reproduce the results however. Ah well, thanks.

-Diomedes

kirkmping · Sep 01, 2005, 03:20 AM // 03:20

do elemental weapon upgrades eg- icy, shocking, change the weapons damage? I know that elemental upgrades wont be effected by +defense versus physical, but WILL be effected by +defense versus elemental right? So in theory an elemental upgrade will be more effective versus enemies damage wise unless they have +defense against elemental such as ranger armor and wanderers armor. Please correct me if im wrong.

Another question, do certain elemental upgrades do more damage than others? I noticed that in pvp, an ebon hammer will do less againt a warrior than a fiery hammer. Please give me some insight.

Silmor · Sep 01, 2005, 03:43 AM // 03:43

Switching between physical and elemental can indeed improve your damage output against certain targets. A physical hit landing on an unbuffed warrior's Gladiator chestpiece (80 armour +20 vs. physical) will do damage as versus 100 armour, whereas an elemental hit will do damage as versus 80 armour, and thus the elemental hit will inflict more damage. On a monk with tattoo armour (60 armour flat) you'll do similar damage with physical and elemental, on a ranger (70 armour +30 vs. elemental, possibly with additional elemental defense) the physical hit will easily outdamage the elemental hit.

One element does not inflict more damage than another, unless the other side is using specific methods to defend against certain elements, for instance by using mantra of earth to buff up against earth attacks, or by using armour specifically designed to offer more protection against a certain element such as elementalist Geomancer armour with higher protection versus earth damage.

Jenosavel · Sep 01, 2005, 12:56 PM // 12:56

I just found an answer to one of our remaining questions here.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ensign

The critical hit percentage of an axe at level 16 is roughly 24% (critical percentage is roughly 1.5% * attribute level for level 20 on level 20, with a minimum chance of around 1-2%. The percentage when there's a level disparity is a nightmare that I'm still working on.)

If you add that into the above numbers, you come up with something like:

(.24 * 91.8) + (.76 * (58.9 + 91.8) / 2) = 79.3

So while it's not directly hitting 81, we're starting to get in the ballpark. I could have made errors in countless places to make the numbers shift that slight 2 points (not the least of which is rounding too early).

Diomedes · Sep 01, 2005, 02:02 PM // 14:02

Quote:

If you add that into the above numbers, you come up with something like:

(.24 * 91.8) + (.76 * (58.9 + 91.8) / 2) = 79.3

Quote:

(37.8 + 45) * 2 ^ (( 3 * 20 - (60 * (1 - 10 / 100))) / 40) = 91.8 damage

Wow, I hate to make this even worse, but when you crit, you act as if you had +4 ranks in your weapon (http://www.guildwarsguru.com/content...nics-id674.php), hence:

(37.8 + 45) * 2 ^ (( 3 * 24 - (60 * (1 - 10 / 100))) / 40) = 113.1 damage

(.24*113.1) + (.76 * (58.9 + 113.1) / 2) = 92.5

please note, this number should actually be even higher, eviscerate is still set to 45 for 16 axe, it should be 56 for axe lvl 20. Let's see if we just apply that and not adjust the exponent...

(37.8 + 56) * 2 ^ (( 3 * 20 - (60 * (1 - 10 / 100))) / 40) = 104.1 damage
(.24*104.1) + (.76 * (58.9 + 104.1) / 2) = 86.9

If I adjust both the exponent and the eviscerate damage, then I'm shot through the roof. Have I gone and made things worse? Or do you think that the +4 ranks only applies to non-skill attacks?

Your calculation does come so close that I'm content to use it, supposing that the +4 ranks shouldn't be applied. Thanks for your input.

-Diomedes

Diomedes · Sep 01, 2005, 02:06 PM // 14:06

Just for fun... if the crit did apply for both eviscerate and the exponent...

(37.8 + 56) * 2 ^ (( 3 * 24 - (60 * (1 - 10 / 100))) / 40) = 128.1 damage!

(.24*128.1) + (.76*(58.9+128.1)/2) = 101.8 damage

That's some scary damage

-Diomedes

Diomedes · Sep 01, 2005, 03:12 PM // 15:12

Quote:

(.24 * 91.8) + (.76 * (58.9 + 91.8) / 2) = 79.3

(37.8 + 45) * 2 ^ (( 3 * 20 - (60 * (1 - 10 / 100))) / 40) = 91.8 damage

Also, I think we may disagree with max damage.

28 * 1.15 * 1.20 (+15% customized) = 38.64

(38.64 + 45) * 2 ^ (( 3 * 20 - (60 * (1 - 10 / 100))) / 40) = 92.8 damage
(.24 * 92.8) + (.76 * (58.9 + 92.8) / 2) = 79.9

Doesn't help much, but it does inch us closer to 81

Did I do the max axe damage correctly or did you?

-Diomedes

Jenosavel · Sep 01, 2005, 03:39 PM // 15:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by Diomedes

28 * 1.15 * 1.20 (+15% customized) = 38.64

I think you're wrong, actually, though it's a minor point. I'm fairly certain you're incorrectly multiplying your damage.

[Normal Damage] + [+15% mod] + [+20% from customization]
28 + 28 * .15 + 28 * .2
28 * (1 + .15 + .2)
28 * 1.35

I think what you're taking is 15% of 20% (or vice verse) of the damage rather than adding both 15% and 20% to the damage.

Diomedes · Sep 01, 2005, 04:18 PM // 16:18

Sorry to sound like a n00b on this one, but I can't actually find a reference to that one. I always thought that damage % stacked rather than only worked off the base damage. Would I be too out of line to ask if you can post me a link to that one? If not, I'll try and test it myself tonight.

-Diomedes

Jenosavel · Sep 01, 2005, 04:39 PM // 16:39

I don't have a direct link to anything saying its one way or the other. However, from a logical standpoint it seems rather obvious which is the correct equation. Let's look at what the equation you used actually means.

28 * 1.15 * 1.2

To make things easier, we'll only consider half at first, the 28 * 1.15 We know that it means 115% of 28, or 28 + 15% Written out mathematically we get:
28 * 1.15 = 28 + (28 * .15)

Notice that the two are interchangable and must be so. Now, when we look at the whole thing, it seems (to me) rather silly.

28 * 1.15 * 1.2
(28 + (28 * .15)) * 1.2
28 * 1.2 + 28 * .15 * 1.2

Or from the other side

28 * 1.15 * 1.2
(28 + (28 * .2)) * 1.15
28 * 1.1.5 + 28 * .2 * 1.15

Either way, you've now factored in one of the increases twice, which would seem to give an inaccuratly high number. Logically speaking, it doesn't make sense for the percentage increases to be calculated this way. Logical or not, though, the game may in fact do it your way. I hope it doesn't. I'm none too good at testing such things, but I may try anyways.

Diomedes · Sep 01, 2005, 04:48 PM // 16:48

Quote:

28 * 1.2 + 28 * .15 * 1.2

Yes, that's pretty much exactly what I'm claiming, but I'll break it down further:

28*1.20 = 28 + (28*.2)

hence
28*1.15 * 1.2
(28+(28*.15))*1.2
28*1.2+28*.15*1.2
(28+(28*.2))+.15*(28+(28*.2))

28 + 28*.2 + 28*.15 + 28*.15*.2

Hence we have 28, 28 modified by one mod, 28 modified by the other mod, and finally the interaction term (28 modified by the mods modifying each other).

I always believed that the mods would effect each other, but I don't have any real reason to believe this one way or another. I've been looking for a post on this site to clear the matter up, but I haven't yet found one.

-Diomedes

(As a side note as far a logic is concerned, interaction terms like that happen constantly in Economics [which is my job] hence don't logically seem that odd to me. I guess I'm just accustomed to them)

Jenosavel · Sep 01, 2005, 05:16 PM // 17:16

While this is fascinating, I'm thinking it'd be quite difficult, if not impossible, to test. The difference in values from one equation to the next is a whopping ~.8

I think that's much less than we'd be able to detect in an actual testing scenario of recording values and such.

:\ The other downside is that I've been reading everything I can about the game's mechanics for some time now and have never seen it mentioned anywhere that it's calculated one way or the other. If the info's out there, it's well hidden.

The bright side, however, is that .8 damage is pretty low, and not too much to be worried over. Though keeping it in mind when acknowledging the margin of error in calculations is probably a good thing.

(To your side note: Working in a mathematics-related field most likely makes you more qualified to argue this stuff than me, so if my arguments sound a bit elementary, you know why. lol I'm just an animator dusting off the stuff from back in high-school.)

Diomedes · Sep 01, 2005, 06:33 PM // 18:33

Quote:

:\ The other downside is that I've been reading everything I can about the game's mechanics for some time now and have never seen it mentioned anywhere that it's calculated one way or the other. If the info's out there, it's well hidden.

Yeah, I'm in pretty much the same boat.

I've read that you can use:

Wild Blow - Melee Attack
Lose all adrenaline. If it hits, this attack will result in a critical hit and any "Stance" being used by your target ends. This attack cannot be blocked or evaded.
5 0 5

To test these things since it will auto critical.

Hence we can use it with a clean weapon, and use the damage to impute an AL on the target.

Then we can use it again with a modded weapon. Since the axe may not provide enough of a difference to test which way things turn out (depending on how the game rounds), we could use a hammer.

35*1.2*1.15 = 48.3
35*.2 + 35*.15 + 35 = 47.25

That's a point's worth of difference and should let us know which one is being used. I super wish they'd hurry up and get in-guild pvp going so it's easier to test these sorts of things.

Anyhow, I'll try it tonight if I get a chance, I just hoped to save myself some time if someone happened to know.

(To your side note: Working in a math field still means that I make mistakes, so thanks for running through this with me. I'm reminded of a famous story of a math grad student working out a proof on the board. After a solid half hour of scribbling equations on the board before the class and his professor, he got to the last line of the proof and noticed that he had the wrong sign! Casting a glance over the proof he muttered to himself, "I must have made an error somewhere" to which his professor replied, "You made an odd number of errors!")

Anyhow, I'm worried about it since that .8 becomes much larger when multiplied and such. Further, I'm working very hard at programming a damage simulator to help me pick skills and spells. It's a huge task, but if I'm not getting my damage numbers right, there's really no point to it at all.

-Diomedes

Sep 01, 2005, 04:39 PM // 16:39	#17
Jenosavel Master of Beasts Join Date: Jul 2005 Guild: Servants of Fortuna [SoF] Profession: R/	I don't have a direct link to anything saying its one way or the other. However, from a logical standpoint it seems rather obvious which is the correct equation. Let's look at what the equation you used actually means. 28 * 1.15 * 1.2 To make things easier, we'll only consider half at first, the 28 * 1.15 We know that it means 115% of 28, or 28 + 15% Written out mathematically we get: 28 * 1.15 = 28 + (28 * .15) Notice that the two are interchangable and must be so. Now, when we look at the whole thing, it seems (to me) rather silly. 28 * 1.15 * 1.2 (28 + (28 * .15)) * 1.2 28 * 1.2 + 28 * .15 * 1.2 Or from the other side 28 * 1.15 * 1.2 (28 + (28 * .2)) * 1.15 28 * 1.1.5 + 28 * .2 * 1.15 Either way, you've now factored in one of the increases twice, which would seem to give an inaccuratly high number. Logically speaking, it doesn't make sense for the percentage increases to be calculated this way. Logical or not, though, the game may in fact do it your way. I hope it doesn't. I'm none too good at testing such things, but I may try anyways. Last edited by Jenosavel; Sep 01, 2005 at 04:42 PM // 16:42..

Sep 01, 2005, 05:16 PM // 17:16	#19
Jenosavel Master of Beasts Join Date: Jul 2005 Guild: Servants of Fortuna [SoF] Profession: R/	While this is fascinating, I'm thinking it'd be quite difficult, if not impossible, to test. The difference in values from one equation to the next is a whopping ~.8 I think that's much less than we'd be able to detect in an actual testing scenario of recording values and such. :\ The other downside is that I've been reading everything I can about the game's mechanics for some time now and have never seen it mentioned anywhere that it's calculated one way or the other. If the info's out there, it's well hidden. The bright side, however, is that .8 damage is pretty low, and not too much to be worried over. Though keeping it in mind when acknowledging the margin of error in calculations is probably a good thing. (To your side note: Working in a mathematics-related field most likely makes you more qualified to argue this stuff than me, so if my arguments sound a bit elementary, you know why. lol I'm just an animator dusting off the stuff from back in high-school.) Last edited by Jenosavel; Sep 01, 2005 at 05:20 PM // 17:20..

Aug 31, 2005, 11:07 PM // 23:07	#3
LifeInfusion Grotto Attendant Join Date: May 2005 Location: in the midline Profession: E/Mo	whatever people say, axe has a higher critical. And eviscerate is more useful than cleave.

Sep 01, 2005, 01:07 AM // 01:07	#7
Jenosavel Master of Beasts Join Date: Jul 2005 Guild: Servants of Fortuna [SoF] Profession: R/	Well, I do see your dilema now. Please, walk with me in thought for a moment and see if we come to any conclusions at all. First I would assume that Eviscerate's damage must be calculated all by one equation or all by the other. Thus, I'm first going to plug the numbers into the attack equation and then the skills equation. We'll see if either set of numbers come out reasonable. Of course, we have to make some things clear before starting. For my calculations I'm assuming the following: 1) Axe Damage 6-28, customized and with +15% would come to 8.1-37.8 damage realistically. 2) We're facing an AL 60 target 3) We've got 10 Str = 10% armor penetration 4) Eviscerate is listed at +45 damage at 16 Axe (getting the number from when it was mentioned above; I don't have access to a warrior with Eviscerate at the moment) Assuming Eviscerate is calculated as an attack: [8.1 + 45] * 2 ^ (( 5 * 16 - (60 * (1 - 10 / 100))) / 40) = 83.3 damage [37.8 + 45] * 2 ^ (( 5 * 16 - (60 * (1 - 10 / 100))) / 40) = 129.9 damage The numbers given by this lead me to believe that Eviscerate is not calculated as an attack, which makes sense since it is indeed a skill. Let's move on. Assuming Eviscerate is calculated as a skill: (8.1 + 45) * 2 ^ (( 3 * 20 - (60 * (1 - 10 / 100))) / 40) = 58.9 damage (37.8 + 45) * 2 ^ (( 3 * 20 - (60 * (1 - 10 / 100))) / 40) = 91.8 damage This would give it a damage range of 58.9 - 91.8 damage. Considering that higher Axe gives a greater chance of criticals, the 81 damage from Ensign sounds quite reasonable to me. Since Ensign is my hero, I will now proceed to assume that he knows how to find the average damage given 16 Axe and could thus narrow it to 81. I, however, don't know how much a chance of criticals you have normally, nor how much 16 axe would increase that to. Thus, I can't calculate an average damage, only the damage range. Did that make any sense/help?

Sep 01, 2005, 03:20 AM // 03:20	#9
kirkmping Frost Gate Guardian Join Date: Jun 2005 Guild: Brothers of the Blood Profession: W/N	do elemental weapon upgrades eg- icy, shocking, change the weapons damage? I know that elemental upgrades wont be effected by +defense versus physical, but WILL be effected by +defense versus elemental right? So in theory an elemental upgrade will be more effective versus enemies damage wise unless they have +defense against elemental such as ranger armor and wanderers armor. Please correct me if im wrong. Another question, do certain elemental upgrades do more damage than others? I noticed that in pvp, an ebon hammer will do less againt a warrior than a fiery hammer. Please give me some insight.

Sep 01, 2005, 03:43 AM // 03:43	#10
Silmor Wilds Pathfinder Join Date: Mar 2005	Switching between physical and elemental can indeed improve your damage output against certain targets. A physical hit landing on an unbuffed warrior's Gladiator chestpiece (80 armour +20 vs. physical) will do damage as versus 100 armour, whereas an elemental hit will do damage as versus 80 armour, and thus the elemental hit will inflict more damage. On a monk with tattoo armour (60 armour flat) you'll do similar damage with physical and elemental, on a ranger (70 armour +30 vs. elemental, possibly with additional elemental defense) the physical hit will easily outdamage the elemental hit. One element does not inflict more damage than another, unless the other side is using specific methods to defend against certain elements, for instance by using mantra of earth to buff up against earth attacks, or by using armour specifically designed to offer more protection against a certain element such as elementalist Geomancer armour with higher protection versus earth damage.

Sep 01, 2005, 02:06 PM // 14:06	#13
Diomedes Lion's Arch Merchant Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Blue Island (think Chicago) Profession: Me/N	Just for fun... if the crit did apply for both eviscerate and the exponent... (37.8 + 56) * 2 ^ (( 3 * 24 - (60 * (1 - 10 / 100))) / 40) = 128.1 damage! (.24128.1) + (.76(58.9+128.1)/2) = 101.8 damage That's some scary damage -Diomedes

Sep 01, 2005, 04:18 PM // 16:18	#16
Diomedes Lion's Arch Merchant Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Blue Island (think Chicago) Profession: Me/N	Sorry to sound like a n00b on this one, but I can't actually find a reference to that one. I always thought that damage % stacked rather than only worked off the base damage. Would I be too out of line to ask if you can post me a link to that one? If not, I'll try and test it myself tonight. -Diomedes