How it works after combat rework ?

kamillosss

Someone knows how damage bonus from items works after combat rework ??



For example I got this 2 items, so how it does work ? is this 3%/5% damage added to damage based on your item level (5%*6332) ?

or added to magnitude encounter or some other way ?

PS. and what about rings with range/melee powers 3% more damage ?

rjc9000

kamillosss said:

Someone knows how damage bonus from items works after combat rework ??



For example I got this 2 items, so how it does work ? is this 3%/5% damage added to damage based on your item level (5%*6332) ?

or added to magnitude encounter or some other way ?

PS. and what about rings with range/melee powers 3% more damage ?

It hasn't changed since Mod 17, it just became more complicated and the system assumes you've liked/followed/subscribed/stalk every dev post from the combat changes.

"Damage" in your character sheet is really "Weapon Damage" of old, but tied to your epeen level rather than weapons now.

Damage buffs such as the ranged/melee rings, or Rusted Boots, or any class self buffs (ex: Barbarian's Rage or Ranger's Rate of Change) will increase your damage by the following in the damage formula:

1+(Total Sum of % Damage Buffs)

So if you have 6000 epeen level damage, use a 200 magnitude At-will, have the Rusted Iron Boots (5% damage buff), have a melee ring (3%), and have a 14% self buff from class mechanics, your damage would look like the following:

(6000)*(2.0)*(1+(0.05+0.03+0.14))
(12,000)*(1+(0.22))
(12,000)*(1.22)
14,640

Do note that said example isn't realistic because of the effects of Defense, scoring Critical hits, situational penalties like Revive Sickness, and so on.

Also note that some abilities are somewhat misleading in terms of damage buffs. For instance, the Executioner's Black Garb "deal 3% more damage to enemies not facing you" or generic "your attack deals 8% of damage as (flavor) damage" from weapon enchantments is not a damage buff, but a separate proc of damage that is just a fraction of your attack's damage.

If you're not adverse to checking out more math, you can see the damage formula in the link below.
https://www.nw-hub.com/mechanics/damagemath

sandukutupu

From what I know, Cryptic Studios has used convoluted math formulas, they end up reducing the +3% damage to +0.003% damage. I always get a kick out of vague descriptions as well, "When you use an At-Will power you have a chance to do more damage depending on the enemies unknown stats.". I just play the game (when possible) and try not to stress on the math. However, I have used the chat combat log to see real numbers. Some people here use the training dummies. I do the following method, when I want to know for myself;

• I go to the area with good mobs to attack and attack me.
  
• In chat, I have a combat only tab set up.
  
• I use /clear command in chat to clear out the old data.
  
• I start my attack.
  
• When done, I collect the data using the mouse to drag (select) all the chat text recorded.
  
• Paste to a text file (word or notepad) and review.
  

Other players like to use parsers, but I don't even know, if the combat parsers are up to date with the current combat logs. Maybe someone else knows that information. The most common parser used here is ACT and there is a thread here on the forums.

rikitaki

@sandukutupu Command "/combatlog 1" does the record for you automatically. (don't forget to switch it off when you are done with "/combatlog 0") Such log can be reviewed in ACT - and there you have everything even in pie chart, which is kinda nice. And yes... it still works after the combat rework even without any further updates (the combat log has still the same format).

Anyway, the +x% dmg should be applied in damage formula - not to the shown base damage or any other accessible number. So, it is literally invisible for naked eye. Figuring out what some bonus does is either question of blind faith or rigorous statistics.

Since the damage was swapped to magnitudes, we lost any kind of preview what the real damage range actually is - and since the latest combat rework effectively disabled fixed weapon damage on the test server, you no longer can test there any bonuses by a single strike as well.
I think that was the real purpose of such chain of changes - to prevent players from figuring out if something works or not.

admiralwarlord

sandukutupu said:

From what I know, Cryptic Studios has used convoluted math formulas, they end up reducing the +3% damage to +0.003% damage. I always get a kick out of vague descriptions as well, "When you use an At-Will power you have a chance to do more damage depending on the enemies unknown stats.". I just play the game (when possible) and try not to stress on the math. However, I have used the chat combat log to see real numbers. Some people here use the training dummies. I do the following method, when I want to know for myself;

• I go to the area with good mobs to attack and attack me.
  
• In chat, I have a combat only tab set up.
  
• I use /clear command in chat to clear out the old data.
  
• I start my attack.
  
• When done, I collect the data using the mouse to drag (select) all the chat text recorded.
  
• Paste to a text file (word or notepad) and review.
  

Other players like to use parsers, but I don't even know, if the combat parsers are up to date with the current combat logs. Maybe someone else knows that information. The most common parser used here is ACT and there is a thread here on the forums.

So if the damage is really the one you mentioned, wouldn't it be much better with the new VOS rings that give status to your character?

I ask this question since in the post on the change of combat at the end of the section on companions it states: "The companions in the fight receive their basic statistics from their owner to help them be a useful extension of the player in combat".

Which would be more proof that the augments are dead in the game and that the important thing is that you are the buffer of your Pokemon. That Cool!

kamillosss

rikitaki said:

I think that was the real purpose of such chain of changes - to prevent players from figuring out if something works or not.

Exactly

sandukutupu said:

The most common parser used here is ACT and there is a thread here on the forums.

I know what is ACT, but I think test it can be hard ,because:

First point: items got various stats and item level, so you got bonus damage from item level and ratings.
Before changes you had unlimited power and const caps on specific trials or dungeons. For example trial: tower of the mad mage - armor pene, crit 80k combat advantage 130k, so it was much easier to compare shirt with 3% damage and shirt with 5k power, which is better for you at the moment.

Second point: if you got goristro horns + ribcage and can't keep stacks with your at wills or your encounters got long cooldowns, it's rly hard to have 10 stacks all time and solid statistics. In current meta you must looking for all stats, because all of them give you bonus to damage.


I mean see bonus from items in combat log can might be hindered, bcs of that.

rjc9000

rikitaki said:

Anyway, the +x% dmg should be applied in damage formula - not to the shown base damage or any other accessible number. So, it is literally invisible for naked eye. Figuring out what some bonus does is either question of blind faith or rigorous statistics.

You can find those numbers in the damage numbers and check if something is working ... provided you specifically go looking for it with a microscope (and/or calculator/Excel spreadsheet).

rikitaki said:

Since the damage was swapped to magnitudes, we lost any kind of preview what the real damage range actually is - and since the latest combat rework effectively disabled fixed weapon damage on the test server, you no longer can test there any bonuses by a single strike as well.

This is partially incorrect. "Magnitudes" existed in the game before Mod 16, they were invisible and didn't have an officially christened name.

Back in the day, the
Sharpedgelord found out what the "magnitude" of various class abilities were, he just called them "ability coefficients".

kamillosss

Thank you so much, It's very helpful

chaderickrax

This video showed me that it's really not that complicated. They just did a pitiful job communicating what they had done.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lzFbbTDAQiQ&t=1420s

I hope this helps!!!