IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

> Rage/cunning Numbers (download), Submitted for your approval
Tynan
post Jan 24 2007, 01:32 PM
Post #1


Ee san
Group Icon

Group: Nobles
Posts: 506
Joined: 3-July 06
From: British Columbia, Canada
Member No.: 12



*NOTE: The specifics of this post are WRONG. I am leaving it here for now but I have made corrections which can be found further on.*

All right, so, I made a spreadsheet during a boring topology lecture yesterday, and got some very interesting results. I compared current strike damages between Baekhos and Chung Ryongs (hereafter referred to as just rogues and warriors), and then made alterations.

First of all, though, some notes:

I used the formula: Damage = (8.8125 + Might/8 + 2.5*DAM + Weapon*Ingress)*Fury*Invisible

Note that Weapon is the average damage of the weapon ((minimum+maximum)/2) and that my calculations will show the damage done to +100 AC, as I am using the weapon values as displayed with no modification. This is of little consequence as my numbers are not meant to give an idea of raw damage, but rather comparative damage; so long as proportion is maintained, it does not matter if the numbers shown are very large or very small. This is also why the polearm modifier is dropped.

Also, Invisible is exactly a x9 multiplier, not x8 as some people believe. You are free to test it yourselves with a Star-staff and an invisible rogue...the strike will always be exactly 9 times as hard when the rogue is invisible, ignoring possible round-off error.

Furthermore, all numbers for each rank are given using the best polearm for that rank, as well as the best Ingress. I have also tried to give semi-realistic Might and DAM numbers for each rank, though I may have failed there as I honestly have little idea as to what is normal. I welcome criticism, though I doubt my values are off by enough to severely alter anything.

Finally, please note that I make no attempt to quantify the possible advantages of a warrior not needing to be invisible to do full damage, nor the fact that warriors always have 4-way attacks up. I leave it to the reader to gauge this himself, and only supply the strike damage done to a single target.

Without further ado, here are the numbers!

I have provided three files:

1.)XHTML output file
2.)OpenDocument Spreadsheet
3.)Microsoft Excel Spreadsheet (no idea if this works well since I saved it in this format through OpenOffice)

If you just want to look at the numbers, just look at the XHTML file. If you want to play with numbers yourself, look at a spreadsheet.

Please note that the output is not user-friendly, and neither are the spreadsheets. When I make such things I make them for myself and do not waste time with formatting and such, as I can understand them just fine. I will endeavor, however, to explain what you are looking at. While I admit it is ugly, I think the average person can understand it just fine if some effort is made, especially since I'll explain the main points.

First of all, you will notice that side-by-side are Warrior and New Warrior, and Rogue and New Rogue. The former titles show the statistics for swing damage as it currently is, with no modifications at all. The latter titles show the statistics for swing damage as I have suggested, with modifications to some values.

The Damage area for each shows single strike damage at each step of the fury, and for each rank. For example, an il san warrior currently will hit for 4326.25 damage at R3 by my formula. With my new numbers, under the same starting conditions, he will hit for 6922 damage.

The Mean area for each is the heart of this spreadsheet and is of the most interest. What it shows, for each rank, is the mean strike damage across the whole of the fury with the listed level being the last step.

I realize this is unclear, so I will explain with an example.

Let us look at the Mean area for the New Rogue. Specifically, please turn your attention to the box in the C3 row in the Level 99 column. You will see a value of 6739.21. What does this mean? This means that my new level 99 rogue who uses Cunning to get to C3 and then stops, staying on that level for the rest of the duration, will average 6739.21 damage per strike. The calculation averages the damage done at C1 for 150s, C2 for 150s, and then C3 for 638s, the remainder of Cunning.

I hope this explains it well enough. The goal of this portion of the spreadsheet is to give some idea of damage across a fury, rather than just compare damage at specific levels, which is not as enlightening.

While we are on the subject, please note that you need to use common sense when looking at these values. Is it realistic to assume a plain level 99 warrior will get to R6? No. He will only get to R4, maybe R5. Likewise, a Rogue will only get to about C4. Therefore, it is unwise to compare, at level 99, a rogue's C5 cycle to a warrior's R6 cycle - this will give no valid information.

Finally, to those brave souls who attempt to use the sheet themselves, all editing is done on the Data sheet, not the Stats sheet. Also, the only columns I advise you edit are New Rage, New Cunning, New W Ing (Warrior Ingress), New R Ing (Rogue Ingress), Might, and DAM.

You are free to edit Weapon, as well, but I have already entered the average PA values that are of the most importance. I suppose you can compare any weapons you wish, however.

As for the ordering in the columns, the first box is 99, then il san, then ee san, then sam san. It is not marked anywhere, but it will be obvious what I mean, especially given the numbers already in place.

If you have any questions, comments, or concerns, please post here. Thank you.

*NOTE: The specifics of this post are WRONG. I am leaving it here for now but I have made corrections which can be found further on.*
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

Posts in this topic
- Tynan   Rage/cunning Numbers (download)   Jan 24 2007, 01:32 PM
- - Tynan   Anyway, based on what I found from my data which c...   Jan 24 2007, 02:00 PM
|- - Hugen   I think you are going to need to modify your formu...   Jan 24 2007, 03:22 PM
- - Tynan   All right, I used more suitable damage numbers and...   Jan 24 2007, 03:41 PM
- - Tynan   QUOTEAs far as your "mean" numbers. I wi...   Jan 24 2007, 04:08 PM
- - Tynan   Okay, based on Hugen's suggestions I had to ch...   Jan 24 2007, 04:22 PM
- - Tynan   I forgot to add the warrior's innate Damage bo...   Jan 24 2007, 04:42 PM
- - Tynan   Okay, I now feel that I now have the Might and DAM...   Jan 24 2007, 06:44 PM
|- - Hugen   I've looked at your spreadsheet and all your c...   Jan 26 2007, 11:39 AM
- - Tynan   Well, the issue is indeed...complex. I suppose tha...   Jan 26 2007, 03:31 PM
|- - Hugen   QUOTE(Tynan @ Jan 26 2007, 03:31 PM) 2465...   Jan 27 2007, 10:35 PM
- - Tynan   Well, first of all, a slight correction: The sans...   Jan 28 2007, 02:23 PM
|- - Hugen   QUOTE(Tynan @ Jan 28 2007, 02:23 PM) 2475...   Jan 29 2007, 09:55 AM
- - Siverno   My reply here is kind of late... but... It seems ...   Feb 20 2007, 02:49 AM
|- - Hugen   QUOTE(Siverno @ Feb 20 2007, 02:49 AM) 26...   Feb 20 2007, 10:05 AM
- - Siverno   Ahh I looked back through the spell list. I comple...   Feb 20 2007, 11:37 PM
- - SinJackal   It's time for SinJackal to post. I wou...   Mar 22 2007, 08:51 PM
|- - Hugen   SinJackal, the problem with your calculations is ...   Mar 26 2007, 10:21 AM
- - Vortextk   I don't know why there is any debate to make r...   Mar 26 2007, 01:54 PM
- - SinJackal   Exactly. Warriors have always been able to make 1...   Apr 10 2007, 10:42 AM
|- - PureLight   QUOTE(SinJackal @ Apr 10 2007, 10:42 AM) ...   Apr 10 2007, 07:56 PM
- - Euphoria   Mug said rogues were getting something so dont be ...   Apr 10 2007, 07:55 PM


Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 

RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 28th March 2024 - 05:18 AM
Nexus Forums is part of: Nexus Atlas © all rights reserved.