36 réponses à ce sujet

[Sylvius the Mad]

Could someone give me a quick explanation of how Base Damage is calculated for Mages?  Most or all of the spells seem to do damage based on a multiple of Base Damage, but I don't know how to calculate what my Base Damage is.

[SuicidalBaby]

Base damage is sourced from 2 specific numbers.

Magic and the base weapon damage of the staff equiped.

brb with data.

2 months ago Graunt wrote...

At 13/20/30/40 Magic the damage for each (upgraded) spell without a staff is:

Chain Lightning - 16/28/44/60
Stone Fist - 30/55/85/115
Tempest - 3/6/9/13
Hemorrhage - 34/61/94/128
Fist of the Maker - 9/16/25/34
Spirit Bolt - 20/36/57/77
Walking Bomb - 13/24/38/51
Dispel - 13/24/38/51
Paralyzing Prison - 72/129/201/273
Winter's Grasp - 22/40/63/85
Cone of Cold - 15/27/43/58
Fireball - 7/12/19/26
Firestorm - 9/16/25/34

At 40/50 Magic with a 42 damage staff the numbers are:

Chain Lightning - 179/195
Stone Fist - 345/376
Tempest - 38/42
Hemorrhage - 384/417
Fist of the Maker - 102/111
Spirit Bolt - 230/250
Walking Bomb - 154/167
Dispel - 154/167
Paralyzing Prison - 819/890
Winter's Grasp - 256/278
Cone of Cold - 174/189
Fireball - 77/83
Firestorm - 102/111

Actually, it looks like the increase greatly diminishes with a weapon equipped or after a specific Magic level. The gains are definitely not 20% going from 40 Magic to 50 Magic. Looks more like 9% - 10% or approximately 1% per point. That's entirely excluding end of tree bonuses or bonuses from gear however.

Modifié par SuicidialBaby, 02 juin 2011 - 11:18 .

[mesmerizedish]

Base damage is staff damage + spellpower ((Magic-10)/2).

Each spell is then a multiplier of that base damage.

Modifié par ishmaeltheforsaken, 02 juin 2011 - 11:22 .

[Sylvius the Mad]

Thanks, Ish.

I was in the middle of trying to reverse engineer it from that list of numbers.

Modifié par Sylvius the Mad, 02 juin 2011 - 11:22 .

[mesmerizedish]

I made a mistake, though... spellpower is actually 1/2 of (magic-10).

I'm of the mind that damage is too dependent on weapon and not dependent enough on stats. I wonder if that's possible to mod :-/

[SuicidalBaby]

damn cat.



thanks ish

edit: although it is nice to see how it plays out in direct data from the game

Modifié par SuicidialBaby, 02 juin 2011 - 11:26 .

[Sylvius the Mad]

It is nice to see the game's output data, yes. I was just looking at that thinking it didn't add up - I couldn't figure out how weapon damage of 42 and spellpower of 30 produced fireball damage of 77 (and thus base .damage of 57)

But it doesn't. Spellpower is 15, not 30, now that I have the correction.

No, sorry, I didn't just trust you. I had to check your figures against the data.

Modifié par Sylvius the Mad, 02 juin 2011 - 11:40 .

[Sylvius the Mad]

ishmaeltheforsaken wrote...

I'm of the mind that damage is too dependent on weapon and not dependent enough on stats.

I agree entirely.  I don't think the two should be related at all.

If we could change the base damage to be spellpower * 4 (or so), that would produce similar numbers without relying on the staff.

That would also make staff auto-attack damage unrelated to the staff you were using.  Whether that's a good thing is open to debate.

Modifié par Sylvius the Mad, 02 juin 2011 - 11:43 .

[SuicidalBaby]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

It is nice to see the game's output data, yes. I was just looking at that thinking it didn't add up - I couldn't figure out how weapon damage of 42 and spellpower of 30 produced fireball damage of 77 (and thus base .damage of 57)

But it doesn't. Spellpower is 15, not 30, now that I have the correction.

No, sorry, I didn't just trust you. I had to check your figures against the data.

Oh, no I wasn't accusing you of...  I was just commenting on the real time application of the equation.

[Sylvius the Mad]

SuicidialBaby wrote...

Oh, no I wasn't accusing you of...  I was just commenting on the real time application of the equation.

The apology was directed at Ish for not trusting her formula - which is funny, because her formula was wrong.

You're right, though.

Modifié par Sylvius the Mad, 03 juin 2011 - 12:03 .

[SuicidalBaby]

That data was farmed pre 1.01 PC patch or damn near right after it I believe.

Modifié par SuicidialBaby, 03 juin 2011 - 12:09 .

[Sylvius the Mad]

I'm playing 1.00, so that's fine.

[mesmerizedish]

No need to apologize for that, Sylvius

I'm not sure if it's possible to divorce base damage from weapon damage. I'll look into it, though.

I'm also thinking about adjusting enemy health and player damage to make it at least SEEM like they follow the same rules. It's absurd that a spell that barely hurts an enemy can one-shot an ally with friendly fire.

[Sylvius the Mad]

ishmaeltheforsaken wrote...

I'm also thinking about adjusting enemy health and player damage to make it at least SEEM like they follow the same rules.

That sounds like a big job.

Let me know if you need help editing huge data tables or something.

Modifié par Sylvius the Mad, 03 juin 2011 - 12:15 .

[SuicidalBaby]

This untrained Darkspawn has 4 x my vetren warrior's health reserves. Why would that not make sense?

Modifié par SuicidialBaby, 03 juin 2011 - 12:16 .

[mesmerizedish]

I'm not even sure why they decided to take that direction. If I have 200 health, an enemy lieutenant should have 200 health, and my fireball should deal, I don't know, 20-30 damage?

[Mr_Raider]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

It is nice to see the game's output data, yes. I was just looking at that thinking it didn't add up - I couldn't figure out how weapon damage of 42 and spellpower of 30 produced fireball damage of 77 (and thus base .damage of 57)

But it doesn't. Spellpower is 15, not 30, now that I have the correction.

No, sorry, I didn't just trust you. I had to check your figures against the data.

If this is truly the case, then why do people say that increasing magic above 42 has diminishing returns. Spell damage increases linearly with magic.

[SuicidalBaby]

edit: I smoke rocks

Modifié par SuicidialBaby, 03 juin 2011 - 08:56 .

[Sylvius the Mad]

Mr_Raider wrote...

If this is truly the case, then why do people say that increasing magic above 42 has diminishing returns. Spell damage increases linearly with magic.

The formula would support that, yes.

I haven't seen this 42 threshold anywhere, but then I haven't spent much time in the Build forum.

[mesmerizedish]

Mr_Raider wrote...

If this is truly the case, then why do people say that increasing magic above 42 has diminishing returns. Spell damage increases linearly with magic.

It's precisely because it's a linear increase that it always has diminishing returns. Two points of magic add one point of damage. But one point of damage might be 10% at level one, but 1% at level 10. See?

My guess about 42 (other than it being the meaning of life) is that that's the point at which one more point of base damage is less valuable than 1% crit chance or 1% crit damage, for example.

[Sylvius the Mad]

ishmaeltheforsaken wrote...

My guess about 42 (other than it being the meaning of life) is that that's the point at which one more point of base damage is less valuable than 1% crit chance or 1% crit damage, for example.

Now that makes sense.

[SuicidalBaby]

It was originally set as the break point very early on the BM compendium by Graunt. Subsequent speed runs and metabuilds have since disproven it to be "The number to stop at"

Modifié par SuicidialBaby, 03 juin 2011 - 02:33 .

[mesmerizedish]

SuicidialBaby wrote...

It was originally set as the break point very early on the BM compendium by Graunt. Subsequent speed runs and metabuilds have since disproven it to be "The number to stop at"

Is there a real "number to stop at" now? I'm always interested in what stats to put where, but I've not been able to find a nice, organized breakdown D:

[mr_afk]

The number to stop at would be at 100 - which is the cap.
The only times it becomes more worthwhile to pump dex (crit chance) is if you have a base damage of 100+ (which is almost impossible as I don't think staves get to 50+dmg), if you have a high crit damage% via items, or if you've already hit the cap.

It is never worthwhile to pump cunning instead of magic or dex. I could go through the explanation if you like, but I'm slightly sleep deprived so I'll leave this as it is for now

[mesmerizedish]

mr_afk wrote...

The number to stop at would be at 100 - which is the cap.
The only times it becomes more worthwhile to pump dex (crit chance) is if you have a base damage of 100+ (which is almost impossible as I don't think staves get to 50+dmg), if you have a high crit damage% via items, or if you've already hit the cap.

It is never worthwhile to pump cunning instead of magic or dex. I could go through the explanation if you like, but I'm slightly sleep deprived so I'll leave this as it is for now

Aren't you the "worst player ever"? Why should I trust your commentary?