Aller au contenu

Photo

Power Damage's effect on Ammo Powers


52 réponses à ce sujet

#26
IntrepidProdigy

IntrepidProdigy
  • Members
  • 534 messages
Well now, this changes everything. Now I'm curious as to whether power damage bonus armor pieces cause more potential damage or if weapon damage bonus armor pieces are still more devastating in the long run. I would do the math, but I hate math, so...

#27
WillieStyle

WillieStyle
  • Members
  • 1 298 messages

IntrepidProdigy wrote...

Well now, this changes everything. Now I'm curious as to whether power damage bonus armor pieces cause more potential damage or if weapon damage bonus armor pieces are still more devastating in the long run.


If you do all (or almost all) your damage via weapons, then weapon damage bonuses will be better than power damage bonuses.

This is true as long as there is no ammo type that gives +100% weapon damage, and there isn't.
If you use Tungsten ammo (+70% weapon damage) then power damage bonuses are only 70% as powerful as weapon damage bonuses.

Of course, if you do a significant amount of damage via powers (like Incenerate or Reave) then all bets are off.  You'll have to figure out for yourself whether to go with power damage or weapon damage bonuses.

Modifié par WillieStyle, 11 février 2010 - 06:21 .


#28
IntrepidProdigy

IntrepidProdigy
  • Members
  • 534 messages

WillieStyle wrote...

IntrepidProdigy wrote...

Well now, this changes everything. Now I'm curious as to whether power damage bonus armor pieces cause more potential damage or if weapon damage bonus armor pieces are still more devastating in the long run.


If you do all (or almost all) your damage via weapons, then weapon damage bonuses will be better than power damage bonuses.

This is true as long as there is no ammo type that gives +100% weapon damage, and there isn't.
If you use Tungsten ammo (+70% weapon damage) then power damage bonuses are only 70% as powerful as weapon damage bonuses.

Of course, if you do a significant amount of damage via powers (like Incenerate or Reave) then all bets are off.  You'll have to figure out for yourself whether to go with power damage or weapon damage bonuses.

Ah, ok then. So being a soldier, I should just stick with weapon damage bonuses even while using ammo powers?

#29
Diark

Diark
  • Members
  • 2 messages

What kind of abilities are Concussive Shot, AR, and Inferno Grenades listed as?

They're all under "Combat" category, so they don't get bonuses from Tech or Biotic research upgrades.
I'm not entirely sure about Inferno Grenades though.

Modifié par Diark, 11 février 2010 - 07:08 .


#30
themaxzero

themaxzero
  • Members
  • 966 messages
So if a Sentinel with Raider (15%), Power Armour (15%) and Blood Dragon Armour (15%) took AP ammo:

70% x 45% = 101.5% weapon damage. Almost like perma Ad. rush.

Not to mention 200 x 45% = 290 (580 on shields) Heavy Overloads and 290 (580 on Barriers and Armour) Heavy Warps. Thats near Sniper rifle headshot damage.

With 110% shielding (Power Armour + Blood Dragon Armour).

Modifié par themaxzero, 11 février 2010 - 08:45 .


#31
DesolCobra

DesolCobra
  • Members
  • 27 messages

Trefecka wrote...

DesolCobra wrote...

Wouldn't it be:
let x = dmg
- assume Tungsten gives 70% and another power bonus gives 15%

Final Dmg(x) = x*(1.70)*(1.15) = 1.955x

In other words, bonus is 95.5% combined. In that case, power bonus is really great :).


Your equation is not quite right since the bonus is actually applied twice in your example.

MATH WARNING

In your equation the Final Dmg (x) can be de-constructed to be:

Final Dmg(x)
= x*(1.70)*1.15
= x*(1+.7)*1.15
=1.15x+1.15(0.7x)

As you can see, the 15% bonus is applied to the "base damage" x as well as the "bonus damage" 0.7x.  


Sorry I didn't see previous post is by Bioware so he revealed the details already.  I figured that it wouldn't be what I previously mentioned because it fails "sanity check" :).

Although that leaves another question - weapon dmg bonus.
If you got a shotgun before upgrade (assume 10%) with tungsten ammo and 15% power bonus, it would be:
x*(1+0.7*1.15)=1.805x dmg
When I upgrade shotgun for 10% bonus dmg, should it be:
(x*1.1)*(1+0.7*1.15) = 1.9855x

In other words, the shotgun upgrade bonus is added before applying the tungsten / power bonus.  In the above example, the 10% extra dmg has resulted in a final bonus increase of 18.05%.  True?

#32
Br0th3rGr1mm

Br0th3rGr1mm
  • Members
  • 406 messages

themaxzero wrote...


So if a Sentinel with Raider (15%), Power Armour (15%) and Blood Dragon Armour (15%) took AP ammo:

70% x 45% = 101.5% weapon damage. Almost like perma Ad. rush.

Not to mention 200 x 45% = 290 (580 on shields) Heavy Overloads and 290 (580 on Barriers and Armour) Heavy Warps. Thats near Sniper rifle headshot damage.

With 110% shielding (Power Armour + Blood Dragon Armour).

I doubt those bonuses add together.  Most games that allow for multiple +% bonuses either don't allow them to stack beyond a certain point or multiply them together so you can't actually reach double damage.  I have no idea how ME2 applies them, but I seriously doubt they add up with no restriction.

#33
mundus66

mundus66
  • Members
  • 407 messages
Good to know, guess ammo power is best for any class then, except for soldier and vanguard. Since they already have incendiary rounds, which are basically as good as AP rounds anyway.

#34
themaxzero

themaxzero
  • Members
  • 966 messages

Br0th3rGr1mm wrote...

themaxzero wrote...


So if a Sentinel with Raider (15%), Power Armour (15%) and Blood Dragon Armour (15%) took AP ammo:

70% x 45% = 101.5% weapon damage. Almost like perma Ad. rush.

Not to mention 200 x 45% = 290 (580 on shields) Heavy Overloads and 290 (580 on Barriers and Armour) Heavy Warps. Thats near Sniper rifle headshot damage.

With 110% shielding (Power Armour + Blood Dragon Armour).

I doubt those bonuses add together.  Most games that allow for multiple +% bonuses either don't allow them to stack beyond a certain point or multiply them together so you can't actually reach double damage.  I have no idea how ME2 applies them, but I seriously doubt they add up with no restriction.


Actually there was a Bioware post a bit back that said that that vast majority do stack. Power Armour and Barrier, etc stack.

#35
JSLfromBx

JSLfromBx
  • Members
  • 276 messages
This is great info but one question remain, what about the upgrade to tech/biotic damage?

It seem normal that warp would be classified under biotic power, but what about the other ammo, are they tech or combat?

#36
Murmillos

Murmillos
  • Members
  • 706 messages
-

Modifié par Murmillos, 11 février 2010 - 05:23 .


#37
IntrepidProdigy

IntrepidProdigy
  • Members
  • 534 messages
I think it makes sense that inferno/disrupter ammo is classified as tech (see incinerate and overload), but we won't know for sure until a dev posts the stats up. Christina said she would post them up some time today.

#38
JSLfromBx

JSLfromBx
  • Members
  • 276 messages
judging by how weak inferno grenade is compared to incinerate in the end game, I am 90% sure that it doesn't benefit from the upgraded damage to tech power.


#39
Eric Fagnan

Eric Fagnan
  • BioWare Employees
  • 561 messages

Br0th3rGr1mm wrote...

themaxzero wrote...


So if a Sentinel with Raider (15%), Power Armour (15%) and Blood Dragon Armour (15%) took AP ammo:

70% x 45% = 101.5% weapon damage. Almost like perma Ad. rush.

Not to mention 200 x 45% = 290 (580 on shields) Heavy Overloads and 290 (580 on Barriers and Armour) Heavy Warps. Thats near Sniper rifle headshot damage.

With 110% shielding (Power Armour + Blood Dragon Armour).

I doubt those bonuses add together.  Most games that allow for multiple +% bonuses either don't allow them to stack beyond a certain point or multiply them together so you can't actually reach double damage.  I have no idea how ME2 applies them, but I seriously doubt they add up with no restriction.


You're correct. Ammo powers always increase base damage, so they don't take into account weapon upgrades, such as the 10/20/30/40/50% upgrades that each weapon type gets.

#40
Grand_Commander13

Grand_Commander13
  • Members
  • 987 messages

Eric ****nan wrote...

You're correct. Ammo powers always increase base damage, so they don't take into account weapon upgrades, such as the 10/20/30/40/50% upgrades that each weapon type gets.

So this means that a 100 damage weapon with +50% damage from an upgrade and +50% damage from ammunition then does 200 damage (100 * (1 + 0.5 + 0.5))?  And +10% Weapon Damage from armor then make it 210 damage?

#41
themaxzero

themaxzero
  • Members
  • 966 messages

Eric ****nan wrote...

Br0th3rGr1mm wrote...

themaxzero wrote...


So if a Sentinel with Raider (15%), Power Armour (15%) and Blood Dragon Armour (15%) took AP ammo:

70% x 45% = 101.5% weapon damage. Almost like perma Ad. rush.

Not to mention 200 x 45% = 290 (580 on shields) Heavy Overloads and 290 (580 on Barriers and Armour) Heavy Warps. Thats near Sniper rifle headshot damage.

With 110% shielding (Power Armour + Blood Dragon Armour).

I doubt those bonuses add together.  Most games that allow for multiple +% bonuses either don't allow them to stack beyond a certain point or multiply them together so you can't actually reach double damage.  I have no idea how ME2 applies them, but I seriously doubt they add up with no restriction.


You're correct. Ammo powers always increase base damage, so they don't take into account weapon upgrades, such as the 10/20/30/40/50% upgrades that each weapon type gets.


Yeah but we are talking about how +% Power Damage affects the ammo powers themselves.

In my example it's AP Ammo:

(70% weapon damage for rank 4 self only version)

+15% (Blood Dragon which is a 10.5% increase in AP)
+15% (Raider Passive which is a 10.5% increase in AP)
+15% (Power Armour which is a 10.5% increase in AP)

70% +10.5% +10.5% +10.5% = 101.5% increase in weapon damage.

Have I made a mistake?

Modifié par themaxzero, 11 février 2010 - 06:56 .


#42
Murmillos

Murmillos
  • Members
  • 706 messages

Grand_Commander13 wrote...

Eric ****nan wrote...

You're correct. Ammo powers always increase base damage, so they don't take into account weapon upgrades, such as the 10/20/30/40/50% upgrades that each weapon type gets.

So this means that a 100 damage weapon with +50% damage from an upgrade and +50% damage from ammunition then does 200 damage (100 * (1 + 0.5 + 0.5))?  And +10% Weapon Damage from armor then make it 210 damage?


Well, don't forget some weapons base damage does more damage to shields or armor - and then weak vs the other.  So your weapon at 210 base damage would do 260 damage vs armor yet still only 210 vs. shields.

Modifié par Murmillos, 11 février 2010 - 08:55 .


#43
DesolCobra

DesolCobra
  • Members
  • 27 messages
So the conclusion so far (until Eric replies again) is that they all add up linearly like so:

Total DMG = based + base*(weapon bonus %) + base*(ammo power bonus%) + SUM(1, N, base*(ammo power bonus%)*(Power Bonus[N]%) )



Of course, the ammo power bonus will be affected by what the weapon is hitting (shield / armor / barrier) in the form of discounting the ammo power bonus. What about something like Shotgun Shield Penetrating upgade?

#44
Vilanova

Vilanova
  • Members
  • 68 messages
I wonder though... Does Biotic damage+ affect warp ammo?

Warp ammo is biotic but I have no idea...

Im on my Insanity run with an infiltrator and chose assault rifle training.

#45
termokanden

termokanden
  • Members
  • 5 818 messages
It doesn't. Warp Ammo is a combat power, not a biotic power. Biotic research upgrades only affect biotic powers.

It's affected by general +power damage though.

Modifié par termokanden, 15 août 2010 - 12:52 .


#46
Guest_Aotearas_*

Guest_Aotearas_*
  • Guests
Posted Image



Completely unneccessary question that is easily explained if you'd look inside the correct topic "Gameplay Mechanics".



Necros really are a problem in here!

#47
termokanden

termokanden
  • Members
  • 5 818 messages
In my opinion, a larger problem on forums is being rude to people asking genuine questions, even if the answers can be dug up somewhere.

#48
Guest_Aotearas_*

Guest_Aotearas_*
  • Guests

termokanden wrote...

In my opinion, a larger problem on forums is being rude to people asking genuine questions, even if the answers can be dug up somewhere.



If people are ruse, yes. They shouldn't be. But if people are stating the obvious, then it's fine in my opinion. Seeing as he/she must have used the Search Funktion to find this old thread, one could expect them to find the relevant answers aswell instead of resurrecting a 6 months old topic.

#49
Sailears

Sailears
  • Members
  • 7 077 messages
The search function isn't that useful on this forum though - always digs up really old threads only.
I tend to use google to search here instead.

Modifié par Curunen, 15 août 2010 - 06:00 .


#50
JaegerBane

JaegerBane
  • Members
  • 5 441 messages

Neofelis Nebulosa wrote...
If people are ruse, yes. They shouldn't be. But if people are stating the obvious, then it's fine in my opinion. Seeing as he/she must have used the Search Funktion to find this old thread, one could expect them to find the relevant answers aswell instead of resurrecting a 6 months old topic.


Nevertheless, he's just asking a question on a thread. Whether you consider the question answered or the thread unduly necro'd or whatever, is ultimately irrelevant.

Seriously, there are far more important things to get hot and bothered about.

Modifié par JaegerBane, 15 août 2010 - 08:45 .