Curse

RexDoloris · Jun 15, 2006, 08:12 PM // 20:12

Hi! I have calculated the damage reduction value that our armors give us depending protection armor value. Here are the results:

With an increment of 40 units of armor value we reduce damage in 50%. So we have that 1 unit of armor value give us a (1 - raíz_40(0,5)) * 100 = 1,17179% of damage reduction.

And, finally, we can use this formula:

FD = BD * (0,98282)^(A-60)

where:
FD is the final damage.
BD is the base damage (the damage value that is show on skill descriptions. It refers to damage that will suffer a target with 60 of armor value):
A: protection value of target's armor.
* means multiplication and ^ power.

For example:
I want to know the damage that a flame burst will do to an enemy with 140 of armor value. My fire magic value is 14, so BD = 113 (shown at description). A = 140 so:

DF = 113 * (0,98282)^(140-60) = 28,24.
Rounding off: Final damage = 28.

NOTE:
This formula does to all damage that doesn't ignore armor, with the exception of weapons damage, wich is ranged and we couldn't obtain BD. However, we can calculate the lower bound and the upper bound of damage that a weapon can do if we take BD as min and max value of the range and we add the bonus to it, respectively.

unienaule · Jun 15, 2006, 09:22 PM // 21:22

I think you're wrong, but, what the heck is "raiz_40"? Damage reduction isn't linear. As in, 20 more armor doesn't give you 25% damage reduction. You might want to check the article on Combat information:
http://www.guildwarsguru.com/content...nics-id674.php

Which states this:
[Actualized Damage] = [Base Damage] × 2(( [Strike Level] - [Armor Level] ) / 40)

Where, for weapons:

[Strike Level] = 5 × [Attribute Level]

For skills:

[Strike Level] = 3 × [Character Level]

CyberNigma · Jun 15, 2006, 10:24 PM // 22:24

Guru and GuildWiki both have damage formulas worked out with some extensive research. Having said that, I'd also point out that someone from ANet pointed out recently that while it is commendable that these things are worked out by the players, not to overly-rely on them as they are likely to change as the game evolves. I believe she was referring to the damage tables in particular. They probably need to be re-worked every release or two to remain accurate (in case of changes), though I'm sure not going to do it lol..

RexDoloris · Jun 15, 2006, 11:19 PM // 23:19

Sorry, raiz is root. By other hand, that formula doesn't says that 20 more armor doesn't give you 25% damage reduction; says that you each point of armor reduces damage in 1,171%, that is, if you have 62 armor points, the Final Damage = (100% - 1,171%) of Final_Damage_of_61_armor_points.

It seems that the formula is equivalent to

Quote:

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

excepting the point that I hadn't consider strike level. (It's because I test armors with one strike level only (max for pcharacter).

Drax Daruk · Jun 16, 2006, 12:41 PM // 12:41

Question: Say I have 12 Sword Attribute points, with a req 9 sword. Will I do more dmg than if I had 12 Att pts with a req 12 sword?

JR · Jun 16, 2006, 12:43 PM // 12:43

Quote:

Originally Posted by Drax Daruk

Question: Say I have 12 Sword Attribute points, with a req 9 sword. Will I do more dmg than if I had 12 Att pts with a req 12 sword?

No.

As long as you meet the requirment of the sword; base damage its the same. Damage further increases from there as you raise your Swordsmanship attribute level, nothing to do with the req of the Sword.

torquemada · Jun 16, 2006, 12:51 PM // 12:51

Moreover, you'll find the lower req.skills more expensive in the market (same max dmg tho).

Drax Daruk · Jun 16, 2006, 09:17 PM // 21:17

So why in heck does a req 8 cost SO much more than a req 12 weapon when you should have 12 anyway?

MSecorsky · Jun 16, 2006, 09:20 PM // 21:20

Quote:

Originally Posted by Drax Daruk

So why in heck does a req 8 cost SO much more than a req 12 weapon when you should have 12 anyway?

Ask P.T. Barnum.

Drax Daruk · Jun 16, 2006, 10:25 PM // 22:25

Quote:

Originally Posted by MSecorsky

Ask P.T. Barnum.

...lmao

Katari · Jun 19, 2006, 04:03 AM // 04:03

Quote:

Originally Posted by Drax Daruk

So why in heck does a req 8 cost SO much more than a req 12 weapon when you should have 12 anyway?

For roughly the same reason sundering mods cost more than vamp mods.

Doomlord_Slayermann · Jun 19, 2006, 04:41 AM // 04:41

Quote:

Originally Posted by Katari

For roughly the same reason sundering mods cost more than vamp mods.

It's the "Wammo mentality". There are a good number of idiots out there that measure their success by how close their warrior is to being a FoW wearing w/mo with Mending, Healing Hands, and a perfect 15^50 20/20 sundering +30 heath Fellblade. It's idiotic, because FoW warrior armor looks ugly, sundering sucks, felblades are ugly, and fortitude is not that great a mod, nor is 15^50 (although it works well with most builds, thus the popularity).

Gah, we need more creativity where weapon mods are concerned.

/endrant

dgb · Jun 19, 2006, 07:51 AM // 07:51

Right on most cases except Fortitude is generally the strongest mod and hte same with 15^50. Depending on the build -5 energy is strong but the others are pox.

Doomlord_Slayermann · Jun 19, 2006, 06:36 PM // 18:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by dgb

Right on most cases except Fortitude is generally the strongest mod and hte same with 15^50. Depending on the build -5 energy is strong but the others are pox.

You completely miss the point. In PvP especially, but ideally also in PvE, you do not take mods that are "generally the strongest". You take the mods that are best for your specific build. In most cases this is actually the "(while enchanted)" or "(while in stance)" mods, depending on your build. 30 health also makes very little difference in most situations; you might be better off with a "Mastery" or "Enchanting" mod, although these make very little difference in PvP just like a "Fortitude" mod.

romO · Jun 19, 2006, 07:25 PM // 19:25

Quote:

Originally Posted by Doomlord_Slayermann

You completely miss the point. In PvP especially, but ideally also in PvE, you do not take mods that are "generally the strongest". You take the mods that are best for your specific build. In most cases this is actually the "(while enchanted)" or "(while in stance)" mods, depending on your build.

You may run a build where you are enchanted a great majority of the time, and then, you get a damage bonus! Great! You may be in a stance most of the time or at least when you need the extra damage, and then, you get it! Super! You can get out of a stance and have an enchantment removed, but when will your health be under 50% and you will still be attacking with full force? Never! 15^50 damage mods are just about 15% always, and there is nothing that you can be knocked out of or have removed to cripple your damage except for your life, and if whoever you are facing is running a build where they have all "life removal" skills, then you are doing zero damage anyway because you are dead. No one is going to say "Hey! Get that warrior down to under 50% health so that he does 15% less damage and then stop attacking him!" whereas getting out of a stance or removing an enchantment is realistic and common.

Doomlord_Slayermann · Jun 19, 2006, 07:50 PM // 19:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by romO

You may run a build where you are enchanted a great majority of the time, and then, you get a damage bonus! Great! You may be in a stance most of the time or at least when you need the extra damage, and then, you get it! Super! You can get out of a stance and have an enchantment removed, but when will your health be under 50% and you will still be attacking with full force? Never! 15^50 damage mods are just about 15% always, and there is nothing that you can be knocked out of or have removed to cripple your damage except for your life, and if whoever you are facing is running a build where they have all "life removal" skills, then you are doing zero damage anyway because you are dead. No one is going to say "Hey! Get that warrior down to under 50% health so that he does 15% less damage and then stop attacking him!" whereas getting out of a stance or removing an enchantment is realistic and common.

Wrong. 15^50 is not "just about 50% always". It's not even close. In many cases, the ONLY time you will be doing any considerable damage with a weapon is during a coordinated adrenaline spike, which means using Frenzy, which is a stance. Enchantments are supposed to be stacked to protect the essential ones at the bottom, and melee fighters are generally not the targets of enchantment removal anyways. The only two skills I can think of that cancel stances are Wild Blow and Wild Strike, and no one will bring those into PvP. And there will be quite a few times where you're health happens to be at less than half its maximum. Saying that if you've fallen under 50% health that you're going to die is rather pessimistic. Using Endure Pain or a similar skill, 50% health is still quite a bit of health, and just because you fall under that does not mean you are about to die, nor does it mean you should run away if you have some sort of healing on the way. Plus, no one but you actually knows what weapon you're wielding, and they will not strip enchantments and cancel stances JUST on the chance that they can make you do 15% less damage.

Get used to it, people. 15^50% is usually not the best mod for a weapon.

crimsonfilms · Jun 19, 2006, 08:23 PM // 20:23

I disagree. Warriors are often not the primary targets in PvP - especially GvG. Midline and backline are. 15/50 is the best mod for warriors. Stances are much more conditional than 50% HP. Enchantment is fine if the build is designed around it (like bonding, Taint, etc).
But overall 15/50 IS THE BEST, especially when warriors have self healing. Yes Frenzy is a great stance, but you can't spam - unless you want to be the target of a spike (one of the few instances where warriors are spikeable by almost any build).

Regarding warriors not getting drain enchant? That is also false. Drain Enchanment are used against warriors as any. Why? Because of positioning. Especially for monk builds.

20% + 1 is a decent mod, but the bonus is heavily conditional and not that high in the long run. And it only affects skills that are being used. Your regular attacks to build up adrenaline are not affected.

Assassin is a class you can make an argument for where 15/50 is not the best (low armor, enchanment dependent, etC).

But for warriors 15/50 is definently the best. High armor, rarely the primary target, rarely DP's out compared to the midline and backline, have self heals, common target for Drain Enchanment, etc.

romO · Jun 19, 2006, 09:22 PM // 21:22

Quote:

Originally Posted by Doomlord_Slayermann

Wrong. 15^50 is not "just about 50% always". It's not even close. In many cases, the ONLY time you will be doing any considerable damage with a weapon is during a coordinated adrenaline spike, which means using Frenzy, which is a stance..

I think you meant to say that sometimes, this is the case, and that you will be doing the majority of your damage during the spikes. That said, you will be at over 50% health during the spike as well as in a stance. During some spikes, when you overextend or notice enemy warriors eyeing you, you will not be able to use frenzy with a 15% stance mod, so you will not get the damage bonus, although you are still over 50% health.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Doomlord_Slayermann

Enchantments are supposed to be stacked to protect the essential ones at the bottom, and melee fighters are generally not the targets of enchantment removal anyways.

As a monk, the easiest drain or inspired enchantment target is a warrior because they are the closest and if you can get the enchant by simply pressing "c", then it is ideal and speedy for energy management. Warriors are the first target for monk ench removal and often for others as well because of judges insight and balth aura.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Doomlord_Slayermann

The only two skills I can think of that cancel stances are Wild Blow and Wild Strike, and no one will bring those into PvP.

GG. Wild blow used to be incredibly popular to counter trappers and spikes and is still often brought into GvG to knock out distortion or whirling. I suppose if you are a warrior, no one is going to knock you out of your frenzy because they would much rather take the opportunity to kill you, but they can still get you off of your sprint or rush.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Doomlord_Slayermann

And there will be quite a few times where you're health happens to be at less than half its maximum.

Like when? When you are overextended? When you are getting spiked? When you are dead? Yes, your health will eventually drop under 50%, but if your health is that low, you shouldn't be attacking so no matter what your weapon is, it's negligible. You could just as well be using a Rinblade when your health drops that low because you shouldn't attack. Taking damage = time to kite.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Doomlord_Slayermann

Saying that if you've fallen under 50% health that you're going to die is rather pessimistic. Using Endure Pain or a similar skill, 50% health is still quite a bit of health, and just because you fall under that does not mean you are about to die, nor does it mean you should run away if you have some sort of healing on the way.

You're right. If you have monks on your team, that makes up for the need to kite. Just stand there and keep attacking and if you die it's the fault of the healers. Seriously though, if you are under 50% and still taking damage, you need to run. I will refer you to Warskull's article where he asks and answers the question "what is kiting?" here: http://www.guildwarsguru.com/forum/s....php?t=3041944. Hopefully it does some good.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Doomlord_Slayermann

Plus, no one but you actually knows what weapon you're wielding, and they will not strip enchantments and cancel stances JUST on the chance that they can make you do 15% less damage.

No, they will not do it to cancel the damage mod on your weapon, but all stances and enchantments offer them a positive offensive or defensive bonus, and eliminating them will be a priority. They will remove enchantments and knock out stances to take out your benefit from those specific buffs, and if the damage mod goes with it, then so be it, but no one really thinks about it. The stances and enchants are still going to get removed for other reasons.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Doomlord_Slayermann

Get used to it, people. 15^50% is usually not the best mod for a weapon.

No.

Quote:

Originally Posted by crimsonfilms

Assassin is a class you can make an argument for where 15/50 is not the best (low armor, enchanment dependent, etC).

Yes.

Chilly Ress · Jun 19, 2006, 09:42 PM // 21:42

I agree with romO 4827483% x 10^9348394

Y.T. · Jun 19, 2006, 10:01 PM // 22:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by Doomlord_Slayermann

It's the "Wammo mentality". There are a good number of idiots out there that measure their success by how close their warrior is to being a FoW wearing w/mo with Mending, Healing Hands, and a perfect 15^50 20/20 sundering +30 heath Fellblade. It's idiotic, because FoW warrior armor looks ugly, sundering sucks, felblades are ugly, and fortitude is not that great a mod, nor is 15^50 (although it works well with most builds, thus the popularity).

Gah, we need more creativity where weapon mods are concerned.

/endrant

pray tell me whats wrong with 15^50? i just started war after playing casters cars (such as monky and mes) from betas, so basically i'm just trying to copy all good tanks i ever healed - they had no sundering weapons, smtimes they used +30hp weapons tho, they all had diff shileds so i'm not sure whats the best shield for the average war build, and most of them had 15^50 swords/axes.... i think 15/-10AR is dreadful, but whats wrong with 15^50?