Sharding possibilities

Thrasymachus - Sanctuary

Joshcja - Sanctuary wrote: »

doublepost sorry

point is by the time you get to frenzy+jones adding a DoT will give 1/150 total damage or a .6% increase to their total damage

1% of base=/= 1% damage

No, the point is that going from attack level +50 to attack level +51 will add exactly the same amount of damage (not percentage, amount) as going from +0 to +1, everything else being equal. If you get 246 additional damage from jones, then each attack level gives you 8.2 additional damage, each time. Adding frenzy will give you 164 more damage, which is what you got. Adding another +20 will give you the same 164 more damage. Constant damage increase for additional levels is not diminishing returns.

Joshcja - Sanctuary

Thrasymachus - Sanctuary wrote: »

No, the point is that going from attack level +50 to attack level +51 will add exactly the same amount of damage (not percentage, amount) as going from +0 to +1, everything else being equal. If you get 246 additional damage from jones, then each attack level gives you 8.2 additional damage, each time. Adding frenzy will give you 164 more damage, which is what you got. Adding another +20 will give you the same 164 more damage. Constant damage increase for additional levels is not diminishing returns.

percentage wise it is

Adroit - Lost City

Just like everything in this game.. it is added up and then applied. Just because atk level doesn't compound on top of itself doesn't mean it has diminishing returns.

Thrasymachus - Sanctuary

Joshcja - Sanctuary wrote: »

percentage wise it is

But that's an arbitrary standard that's unreflective of other established examples of diminishing returns. For example, take the damage reduction from defense. The formula for this is damage reduction = 100*def / (def + 40*lvl). At level 100, your first 1000 def, for example will reduce a hit that would do 100 damage to a target with no defense to 80 (20% reduction). Your next 1000 def will reduce a 100 base damage hit to 67 (33% reduction). To put it another way, your first 1000 def will absorb 20 damage from a 100 damage hit, your next 1000 def will only absorb 13 damage from a 100 damage hit. THIS is diminishing returns, both as a percentage and absolutely.

+ Attack level appears to have diminishing returns because you're comparing it to a growing pool of damage while ignoring the fact that it is the + attack level that's making the pool of damage grow. It's an illusion caused by trying to measure a moving target with a stationary yardstick.

Adroit - Lost City

Thrasymachus - Sanctuary wrote: »

But that's an arbitrary standard that's unreflective of other established examples of diminishing returns. For example, take the damage reduction from defense. The formula for this is damage reduction = 100*def / (def + 40*lvl). At level 100, your first 1000 def, for example will reduce a hit that would do 100 damage to a target with no defense to 80 (20% reduction). Your next 1000 def will reduce a 100 base damage hit to 67 (33% reduction). To put it another way, your first 1000 def will absorb 20 damage from a 100 damage hit, your next 1000 def will only absorb 13 damage from a 100 damage hit. THIS is diminishing returns, both as a percentage and absolutely.

+ Attack level appears to have diminishing returns because you're comparing it to a growing pool of damage while ignoring the fact that it is the + attack level that's making the pool of damage grow. It's an illusion caused by trying to measure a moving target with a stationary yardstick.

*Stamp of Approval*
Welcome to the wizard forums b:cute

(We need more people that think logically xD)

MageFizban - Lost City

See how long he sticks around in the forums. hahah.

RAMPANT IGNORANCEEEE YESSS

Adroit - Lost City

MageFizban - Lost City wrote: »

See how long he sticks around in the forums. hahah.

RAMPANT IGNORANCEEEE YESSS

LOL prof reference?
I love it. b:chuckle

Evanera - Heavens Tear

You know what's cute? I haven't seen him yet since that one rage thread at all haha.

Adroit - Lost City

Evanera - Heavens Tear wrote: »

You know what's cute? I haven't seen him yet since that one rage thread at all haha.

lmfao I know.. that was great b:cute
(and his post count hasn't changed.. 774 xD)

Mumintroll - Heavens Tear

Joshcja - Sanctuary wrote: »

seriously...why do you still post here?

you have absolutely 0 usefull knowledge about the game and your posts reek of Q.Qfail nobody likes you (god i pitty them if they do) and you patents wanted a puppy but got you from the pound by accident

Seriously I still don't understand why BM posting on wizard forum. About game knowledge or mechanic tell pls. What I didn't know? Except these 2% stones. You are you just another "smart" moron? So prove it. What I wrote and it wasn't true? Of course now you will be quiet. Because you have nothing against me.

Evanera - Heavens Tear

Mumintroll - Heavens Tear wrote: »

Seriously I still don't understand why BM posting on wizard forum. About game knowledge or mechanic tell pls. What I didn't know? Except these 2% stones. You are you just another "smart" moron? So prove it. What I wrote and it wasn't true? Of course now you will be quiet. Because you have nothing against me.

I post on the BM forums when I see something interesting. There's no class restrictions on the forums xP

And to be quite honest, most of your posts are just talking about how terrible the game has become, and how *awful* wizards have become. You really do not provide legitimate responses. You're basically just a *tag along*.

You failed miserably as a PvP wizard when you played and every time I confront you on the forums about it, I mysteriously get ignored.

Of course now you will be quiet? xP

Thrasymachus - Sanctuary

Now now, people, let's be nice. There is something of a point behind Mumin's ranting, though it does get old having those complaints injected into every possible thread. The game does suffer from a lack of developer attention, and that lack of attention has resulted in the sad state of affairs for wizards being largely shunned in PvE and mediocre in PvP except for TW. Despite that, wizards are still the most fun class to play (imo). And Josh has contributed positively in both this thread and others in the wizard forums. He provided an additional set of data regarding attack levels, and laid out the theory of diminishing returns so that it could be examined and finally refuted.

Now, what I would like to see is some reports of the damage reduction of +def level, so we can see if and how it suffers from diminishing returns as well.

Joshcja - Sanctuary

Thrasymachus - Sanctuary wrote: »

Now now, people, let's be nice. There is something of a point behind Mumin's ranting, though it does get old having those complaints injected into every possible thread. The game does suffer from a lack of developer attention, and that lack of attention has resulted in the sad state of affairs for wizards being largely shunned in PvE and mediocre in PvP except for TW. Despite that, wizards are still the most fun class to play (imo). And Josh has contributed positively in both this thread and others in the wizard forums. He provided an additional set of data regarding attack levels, and laid out the theory of diminishing returns so that it could be examined and finally refuted.

Now, what I would like to see is some reports of the damage reduction of +def level, so we can see if and how it suffers from diminishing returns as well.

suffers the same diminished return as attack level

however due to jones attack levels hit noticeable diminished returns at 1 DoT while DoD's require 30+ to hit the point of sharply diminished returns

the shards work the same you cannot claim one has straight returns then ask about diminished on the next and worse your tagging the one that has imediate and noticeable diminished returns (attack) as straight while claiming diminishing on def

btw as posted in bm forums for real returns phys and mag def have no true diminishing returns precent per point/required def wise, hp def attack level or in fact any fixed stat added does have diminishing returns

for future referance def given by shards is as follows

phys/mag= reduction gained/(100-current%)= real reduction
hp = hp added/current hp = real hp % added
def/attack level = added stat level/(100+current) = real % damage/reduction gained

any and all static increases to your char will suffer diminished returns percentage wise yes you get the same amount per point however each point has a lesser effect than the previous one, only adds like +% hp or phys/mag def offer straight returns

it is an abstract concept but is far more usefull for tuneing a build than looking at stat adds...

for example on a 8k hp charecter at 73% phys reduction with say 12 open sockets,useing flawless shards... you can get 480 hp (6% hp) or 948 self buffed phys def adding 3% or 3/27= 11.1% more phys def

so by looking at straight stats you get a flawed veiw of what each added point per stat will give your charecter, for example in the above scenario it looks like hp is the better option untill you compare relative stats (the more you know)

@ mumintroll i'm makeing a wizzie out of boredom and i thought your forum could use less Q.Q and more math

@ Evenara *ear scratch* good wizzie you gets a cookie

sorry if my spelling fails

Adroit - Lost City

Joshcja - just stop. Atk level does not suffer from diminishing returns.

Joshcja - Sanctuary

Adroit - Lost City wrote: »

Joshcja - just stop. Atk level does not suffer from diminishing returns.

attack and def levels work the same

you claim def levels suffer diminished returns and attack levels do not

Adriot: make up your mind

Adroit - Lost City

Attack levels are not the same as defense level. I wasn't aware there was some law of physics that required them to be the same.

When you look at attack level.. if you have lets say.. 50 atk level, that means you do 50% more damage than if you 0 atk level. Pretty straight forward (obviously if the target had defense level it would complicate things.. but you get the idea). It's also not too difficult to test def level as someone with 50 def level does not reduce damage by 50%.. and it kinda makes sense defense level does not work that way. If it did, psychics with 100+ def level would in theory be immune to damage.. but as any end game psychic can tell you, they most certainly are not.

edit: /inb4profcja

Joshcja - Sanctuary

Adroit - Lost City wrote: »

Attack levels are not the same as defense level. I wasn't aware there was some law of physics that required them to be the same.

When you look at attack level.. if you have lets say.. 50 atk level, that means you do 50% more damage than if you 0 atk level. Pretty straight forward (obviously if the target had defense level it would complicate things.. but you get the idea). It's also not too difficult to test def level as someone with 50 def level does not reduce damage by 50%.. and it kinda makes sense defense level does not work that way. If it did, psychics with 100+ def level would in theory be immune to damage.. but as any end game psychic can tell you, they most certainly are not.

def level caps at 99 any added after that serve only to reduce attack level (got that from a gm hell if i remember what one)

let me rephrase they stack at the same effective rate

def will always reduce your current damage by 1-2% attack will always give 1% of base

now as you add more of either the base begins to become smaller relative to the amp/reduction

and any psy will tell you that black voodo does not raise their damage by 20% with a jones on

def/attack level math is from the old archer forum thread so argue it with them not me

Adroit - Lost City

Joshcja - Sanctuary wrote: »

def level caps at 99 any added after that serve only to reduce attack level (got that from a gm hell if i remember what one)

let me rephrase they stack at the same effective rate

def will always reduce your current damage by 1-2% attack will always give 1% of base

now as you add more of either the base begins to become smaller relative to the amp/reduction

and any psy will tell you that black voodo does not raise their damage by 20% with a jones on

def/attack level math is from the old archer forum thread so argue it with them not me

If you want me to argue with the sources you need to provide them.

Few things I'd like to point out however.. def level was changed in the Rising Tide expansion, so your information may be outdated (see offering you a way to save face.. maybe you should use it).

"def will always reduce your current damage by 1-2%" - really? Care to rephrase or give some evidence?

As any informed forum-goer will tell you, black voodoo + jones (52 atk level for lvl 10 voodoo) will give you 52% extra damage than if you had neither on.

*rolls eyes* feels like I'm talking to my little brother when he knows he's wrong.

Joshcja - Sanctuary

Adroit - Lost City wrote: »

If you want me to argue with the sources you need to provide them.

Few things I'd like to point out however.. def level was changed in the Rising Tide expansion, so your information may be outdated (see offering you a way to save face.. maybe you should use it).

"def will always reduce your current damage by 1-2%" - really? Care to rephrase or give some evidence?

As any informed forum-goer will tell you, black voodoo + jones (52 atk level for lvl 10 voodoo) will give you 52% extra damage than if you had neither on.

*rolls eyes* feels like I'm talking to my little brother when he knows he's wrong.

1-2% = DoD-JosD..was argueing 50 attack level +1 =/= 1% total damage not 1% attack = 1% base...the math listed is a way to find the effect of a shard on a person with gear already in place...because i doublt a level 100 char has 0 phys def hp attack and def level

the def level math was from after RT hit

meh will leave it at this and wait for somone to use the math later... then laugh at them

Thrasymachus - Sanctuary

Joshcja - Sanctuary wrote: »

suffers the same diminished return as attack level

however due to jones attack levels hit noticeable diminished returns at 1 DoT while DoD's require 30+ to hit the point of sharply diminished returns

the shards work the same you cannot claim one has straight returns then ask about diminished on the next and worse your tagging the one that has imediate and noticeable diminished returns (attack) as straight while claiming diminishing on def

I've demonstrated how +attack level doesn't suffer from diminishing returns. Below, I'll demonstrate why looking at the absolute increase in damage dealt is more relevant than looking at the ratio of the next increment of damage added to the prior accumulated damage pool.

btw as posted in bm forums for real returns phys and mag def have no true diminishing returns precent per point/required def wise, hp def attack level or in fact any fixed stat added does have diminishing returns

I'm sorry, but what part of

At level 100, your first 1000 def, for example will reduce a hit that would do 100 damage to a target with no defense to 80 (20% reduction). Your next 1000 def will reduce a 100 base damage hit to 67 (33% reduction). To put it another way, your first 1000 def will absorb 20 damage from a 100 damage hit, your next 1000 def will only absorb 13 damage from a 100 damage hit. THIS is diminishing returns, both as a percentage and absolutely.

didn't you understand? Each successive point of pdef or mdef gives diminished returns from the prior one, both absolutely in terms of raw damage absorbed, and as a percentage increase in defense.

Regarding hp, survivability, that is, how much base damage must be thrown at you to just one-shot you through your defense, is given by S = HP / (1 - %damage reduction). As you can see, this equation defines a line. A line is the very definition of a constant return. If increasing your hp by 1 increases your survivability by 1.8 points worth of damage, then increasing your hp by 10 will increase your survivability by 18 points worth of damage, each time.

any and all static increases to your char will suffer diminished returns percentage wise yes you get the same amount per point however each point has a lesser effect than the previous one, only adds like +% hp or phys/mag def offer straight returns

it is an abstract concept but is far more usefull for tuneing a build than looking at stat adds...

for example on a 8k hp charecter at 73% phys reduction with say 12 open sockets,useing flawless shards... you can get 480 hp (6% hp) or 948 self buffed phys def adding 3% or 3/27= 11.1% more phys def

so by looking at straight stats you get a flawed veiw of what each added point per stat will give your charecter, for example in the above scenario it looks like hp is the better option untill you compare relative stats (the more you know)

Ok, here is where we're getting to the heart of the matter. Let's look more closely at your scenario. We have a character that I'm going to assume is lvl 100. He has 8000 hp and 73% self-buffed physical damage reduction. This comes out to a pdef of 10286. We have 12 open sockets and we can use either flawless hp shards or flawless pdef shards. Flawless pdef shards give you +41 pdef each. Flawless hp shards give you 40 hp each. So our choice is between +492 pdef and +480 hp. We buff that pdef, and we get +984 pdef. Our pdef will go from 10286 to 11270, for a pdef increase of 9.57%. However, that 9.47% defense increase will not even absorb 2% more damage. You need +1099 pdef in order to absorb that next 2% physical damage. On the other hand, that additional 480 hp means that someone will have to have to do 1778 more physical damage to you to kill you with your existing pdef. That's how much damage your + pdef would have to absorb on average to be worth as much as the +hp. So for the +pdef to be worth as much as the +hp, you would have to be facing opponents capable of dealing physical damage on the order of 93808 base damage per fight. Such a fight would deal 24390 damage through your pdef, enough to kill you three times over. So if this character, with 8000hp and 74.89% damage reduction routinely has fights against melee where his charm ticks at least six times before he can kill his opponent, then the +pdef would be worth as much as the +hp. If his charm routinely ticks more often than 6 times in 1v1s vs melee, then the +pdef is worth more. If the charm ticks less than that +hp is worth more.

Looking at percentage increases when dealing with damage dealing is looking at the wrong thing. People don't have percentages of hp to kill. In principle, the game mechanics allow one to scale up their base damage to any arbitrarily high amount. In other words, it's always possible according to game mechanics to one-shot anyone, no matter their hp and defense. Diminishing returns in increasing base damage dealt can only mean that you're dealing so much base damage already that almost nobody can survive one of your hits, so you're better off spending your time and money on something else. It certainly doesn't mean you're dealing less damage in each successive increase. It's already been shown that that's not the case.

With defense, however, it is impossible to absorb 100% of the damage of any hit. Pdef and mdef always give diminishing returns for that reason. HP always gives constant returns, which is why you get your pdef and mdef to an acceptable level first, then focus on HP.

Regarding +def level, if +def level and +att level always exactly cancel each other out for equal level opponents, then it is impossible to tell how much survivability +def level will add. This is because +att level adds a constant amount of damage based on the base damage dealt. Different characters of the same level can have different amounts of base damage, and thus +att level will add different amounts of constant damage. +10 attack levels might add 300 damage on one character and 500 damage on another. +10 defense levels will absorb 300 damage in the first fight and 500 damage in the second. What can be said is that + defense levels will matter more against harder hitting opponents, they will absorb more damage from them than they will from weaker hitting opponents. And of course, it would mean that if you had +100 def level, you would absorb all the damage of a hit from an opponent with no attack levels, which is why there must either be a cap on +def level or diminishing returns unrelated to how +attack levels work must kick in at some point. I'm more inclined to buy diminishing returns than a cap, because a cap at 99% damage reduction gives increasing returns to survivability as you approach the cap. Going from 97% damage reduction to 98% damage reduction increases your survivability by 66%. Going from 98% to 99% increases your survivability by 100%.

Amour - Lost City

Not to offend, but didn't we do tests regarding attack level diminishing returns a while back Adroit? We found it had slight diminishing returns didn't we?

ThanosQRt - Dreamweaver

why dont we define diminishing returns?

for me, having diminishing returns means that F''(X) < 0
where X the parameter we examine and F(X) how it affects the quantity F.
in our case, X = attack levels, F = damage dealing.
F(X) = Base_dmg * (1+X/100) so F''(X) = 0 therefore it doesnt have diminishing returns but the "standard" increase (i have confirmed this formula for a lot of values of X btw...)

gaining more and more would be increasing returns and would require some sort of
F(X) = Base_dmg*1.01^X relationship...

and btw defense level is not capped at 99. there are psys with over 120.... and there are not invincible.

no matter how u define diminishing returns, u have to accept that defense level have stronger diminishing returns that attack level.

Adroit - Lost City

Amour - Lost City wrote: »

Not to offend, but didn't we do tests regarding attack level diminishing returns a while back Adroit? We found it had slight diminishing returns didn't we?

I actually wasn't following the math when we were testing.. But I did some of my own tests later that day where the math worked out that there is not diminishing returns. I'd be happy to run the numbers with you again if you want. (Sry was watching tv when we were talking xD

Amour - Lost City

Adroit - Lost City wrote: »

I actually wasn't following the math when we were testing.. But I did some of my own tests later that day where the math worked out that there is not diminishing returns. I'd be happy to run the numbers with you again if you want. (Sry was watching tv when we were talking xD

Technically I can't get on PWI for about 7 months so I guess we'll never know.

Adroit - Lost City

Amour - Lost City wrote: »

Technically I can't get on PWI for about 7 months so I guess we'll never know.

What.. Why..

Evanera - Heavens Tear

Adroit - Lost City wrote: »

What.. Why..

It's fine..I'll server transfer to LC and be your new Amour? b:cute

Adroit - Lost City

Evanera - Heavens Tear wrote: »

It's fine..I'll server transfer to LC and be your new Amour? b:cute

Do its! I need someone to bug for the 30 secs I'm on every other day when I'm picking up keys that I'll probably never use! b:dirty

Evanera - Heavens Tear

Go out PK'ing sometime today so I can watch you get killed dozens of times


I mean...kill dozens of people o.o

I wanna see some real LC PK.

Adroit - Lost City

Evanera - Heavens Tear wrote: »

Go out PK'ing sometime today so I can watch you get killed dozens of times


I mean...kill dozens of people o.o

I wanna see some real LC PK.

lmao.. it takes hours and hours to get any decent pvp nowadays. When I was making videos I'd have to go pking for several days to put together a 10min video lmao. A whole lot of sitting around watching people trash talk from sz or bad matchups. I don't really consider it pvp when its me vs 3-4 people where any one of them would be a challenge in a 1v1. I could go on and on.. but pvp is basically dead on LC imo.

Evanera - Heavens Tear

Aww..sad face

Should just remove this *PK code* LC has and just do everyone kill whoever you want kinda thing xP And not have to worry about some KoS ****. *OMG THIS GUY KILLED ME PLEASE SOMEONE KILL HIM FOR ME*