Question on damage multipliers

[shebali]

Not everything needs to be changed. I noticed some moves hitting harder than they should. Mostly auto attacks. Like, the WH move Torment is pretty much spot on for its damage. I have video of my Level 32 WH with max deeps and my OP spec during start of tovl. Torments damage and Abo spam damage are in line. Auto attack damage is not. My WH AA would be 300-400. Once I find and record the auto attack damage current in game I can review it.

[Bretin]

and you are sure you know how auto attacks are calculated and that their main factor is whether str nor dps but speed.

all the calculations work properly and how they should work. can you try to make some calculations to proof your assumptions? for me you are comparing apples with pears and your idea of the stat impact seems wrong, while calculation is fine.

[greenstoned]

my dmg seems in line with what i used to have back on live... searing touch crits debuffed soft targets for 900-1k, used to get 1.3-1.5 on live with 1050 intel and some magic power

sporting bout 815 intel atm so a bit above +160 dps
used to have 1050ish plus some magic power but not that much of it nack on live... iirc, my dps bonus with a pot and regular sc staff, not lotd one, was roughly +260 dps

some ppl hit me hard. lots of ppl, actually, but i play a glass cannon, its to be expected
the only thing that hit me really hard than it should were spiked squigs in my early t3 levels, but several ppl told me squigs ignore bolster and its a known bug

[samsauce]

and you are sure you know how auto attacks are calculated and that their main factor is whether str nor dps but speed.

all the calculations work properly and how they should work. can you try to make some calculations to proof your assumptions? for me you are comparing apples with pears and your idea of the stat impact seems wrong, while calculation is fine.

Where is your proof for all these assumptions?

[Luth]

I think this is our official valentines thread because it's all about them feelings.

Seriously, i just tested my slayers (lvl 32) autoattack vs a lvl 39 NPC.

Strength 736, weapon DPS 42.0, speed 3.1:

Mainhand: Your attack hits Feathered Coin Acolyte for 238 damage. (122 mitigated)
Offhand: Your attack hits Feathered Coin Acolyte for 158 damage. (75 mitigated)

lvl 30 NPC

Mainhand: Your attack hits Mindless Noble for 262 damage. (98 mitigated)
Offhand: Your attack hits Mindless Noble for 174 damage. (59 mitigated)

Not in yellow/red stance ofc.

[Bretin]

what proof you want me to bring? shall i calculate both aa dmg from here and live and bring a screenshot proof that they are in line? no probs m8

[roadkillrobin]

From what i remember Torment pre rr81 patch would hit me between 1200-1800. Thats alot more then it does on RoR wich is more like 800-1000. BAL end ticks sometimes hit me for 1200. In t3 Defence is completly lacking gearwise. Blockrates are really low compared to how it was on t4. And armor is MUCH lower aswell. I remember my Black Orc had 110% armor mitigration with just Worn Sov gear compared to RoR were it has something like 70 without pot. And armor is one of those stats that shouldn't be progressive. So i think Armor vallues in general is a bit on the low. Especially with stacking armor debuffs.

[Tesq]

you cant compare t3-with t4 really, each class is a lot more defensive than t3 which is only fine

[Annaise16]

I think this is our official valentines thread because it's all about them feelings.

Seriously, i just tested my slayers (lvl 32) autoattack vs a lvl 39 NPC.

Strength 736, weapon DPS 42.0, speed 3.1:

Mainhand: Your attack hits Feathered Coin Acolyte for 238 damage. (122 mitigated)
Offhand: Your attack hits Feathered Coin Acolyte for 158 damage. (75 mitigated)

lvl 30 NPC

Mainhand: Your attack hits Mindless Noble for 262 damage. (98 mitigated)
Offhand: Your attack hits Mindless Noble for 174 damage. (59 mitigated)

Not in yellow/red stance ofc.

The before-mitigation aa damage values are the same as AOR but the after mitigation values might not be the same.

A problem could arise because Bruglir's aa formulas are showing mitigation due to toughness occurring after the percentage damage modifiers from class mechanics and tactics are applied. The mitigation should occur before the damage modifiers. The confusion arises from the way that the combat log displays mitigation. It doesn't apply the aforementioned percentage modifiers to the mitigation by toughness calculation, while it does apply the crit damage and other percentage modifiers to the mitigation by toughness calculation. I would be surprised if people don't find this somewhat confusing, so I'll give an example.

A slayer has strength = 500, weapon dps = 40, and weapon speed = 2.4. He is hitting a target that has a toughness of 150 and no armor. (The armor component of the calculation isn't relevant here.)

The mainhand aa damage should be:

damage1 = (weapon dps + strength/10) x weapon speed = (40 + 500/10) x 2.4 = 216.

mitigation by toughness should be:

mit1 = toughness/10 x weapon speed = 150/10 x 2.4 = 36

So the damage after mitigation should be:

damage2 = damage1 - mit1 = 216 - 36 = 180

But the slayer was in the red, so he received a 50% bonus to the damage after mitigation term, damage2:

damage3 = 1.5 x damage2 = 1.5 x 180 = 270.

And the combat log would show " ... autoattack hits for 270 (36)."

Note that the 1.5 x damage multiplier from the slayer's mechanic was not applied to the mitigation term as it would have been if the percentage multiplier was due to crit. For example, if the slayer was in the green and had crit for an extra 50% damage, the code would multiply both the damage2 value and the mit1 value by 1.5 and the combat log would show,

" ... atutoattack critically hits for 270 (54)."

Note that the damage value is the same as above but that the mitigation amount (the amount in brackets) is 50% larger. Although the combat log is showing different amounts of mitigation, the important thing is that the damage amounts are equal. Toughness is mitigating damage with the same effectiveness in both situations. The only difference is in the way that mitigation is being displayed in the combat log. This would have been misleading for people who weren't aware of the logical structure of the code.

The main problem with Bruglir's aa formula's are that they are incorrect in the way that mitigation by toughness is applied to aa damage. He appears to been confused by the difference in the way that mitigation by toughness is displayed in the combat log for the two different situations described above. Either that or he made some very misleading typos. His formulas show the calculation for aa damage as:

damage = (weapon dps + strength/10) x weapon speed x class-based percentage modifiers - (toughness/10) x weapon speed

Note that the mitigation by toughness term has been applied after the percentage multiplier term.

Using the same stats as above and when the slayer is in the red, this would give a damage after mitigation by toughness of:

damage4 = (40 + 500/10) x 2.4 x 1.5 - 150/10 x 2.4 = 288,

with the mitigation being the last term of the formula:

mit2 = 150/10 x 2.4 = 36.

The combat log would display this as:

" ... autoattack hits for 288 (36).

Note that the mitigation value is the same as above but that the damage is now 18 points (7%) larger than the correct damage.

I haven't tested how the devs have implemented the aa formulas in ROR. So I can't say if they have copied the errors from Bruglir's formulas or if, instead, they noticed the inconsistent way that mitigation by toughness is being applied in the formulas and corrected them.

[Tesq]

well i get hit on my dok for 1k fireballs and i have cap resistence over the debuff value which mean this should only happened in 1.4
something is odd for sure the problem is that even single error can lead to huge increments when the game is based around huge % boost when crit.
The thing is it seems happening on crits than on normal hits, if there is any error and annaise can help find it should be able to look at combat formula.