test content
Logo
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc
erroneous tooltip for Tetryon Beam Array
dratikus
Member Posts: 120 Arc User
I am looking at the Tetryon Beam Array Mk XI [Acc].
The tooltip says: "to target: 2.5% Chance: -336.3 damage to All Shields"
I think they meant "+336.3 damage" because why would I want to do 336.3 less damage to my target?
If I have a 2.5% chance to do more damage to my target then that is + damage. No?
The tooltip says: "to target: 2.5% Chance: -336.3 damage to All Shields"
I think they meant "+336.3 damage" because why would I want to do 336.3 less damage to my target?
If I have a 2.5% chance to do more damage to my target then that is + damage. No?
Post edited by Unknown User on
0
Comments
So it's accurate.
The tool tips show a reduction effect of a specific type not related to your basic damage. The proc is an additional effect and is calculated separately from the basic damage, so it needs to be a negative number showing a reduction in value not an addition to basic generic damage as it is a specific effect. Got it?
That wasn't very nice
Just because you can't wrap your head around how these stats works dosen't mean you have to become childish (unless you're 12 of cause... then by all means, be a child).
It's really simple to understand. It adds a minus stat to your enemy... Works just the same as with all the other stats.
I can make it easier to understand even futher if you need me to... Just continue acting like a kid, and I will know it's a signal to make it even easier to understand.
There is an erroneous part to this tooltip, but it isn't the negative value. The error is that it says "damage." The tetryon proc is not extra damage, it's a shield drain; and -x shield is the typical tooltip notation for shield drains.
More significantly, the tooltip stating damage instead of drain also means some people aren't utilizing the right consoles/skills to buff/resist the proc. Flow Capacitors instead the magintude of the drain, tetyron pulse generators do not; Power Insulators resists the tetryon proc, shield damage resist does not.
"If this will be our end, then I will have them make SUCH an end as to be worthy of rememberance! Out of torpedos you say?! Find me the ferengi!".
The OP is technically correct about the tool-tip typo, though his snide follow-up was unnecessary.
Dealing Damage(x) is a subtraction function, so dealing Damage(1000) to a target's shields subtracts 1000 value from the target's shields. As a result, dealing Damage(-1000) subtracts -1000 damage from shields, basically adding +1000 to its current value if the tetryon proc tool-tip description was accurate..
1 + 1 = 2
1 + (-1) = 0
1 - 1 = 0
1 - (-1) = 2
Easy enough to see what the OP is referring to, but it is borderline nit-picking.
That's why the tool tip proc description should be updated to something like this:
"to target: 2.5% Chance to drain 336.3 shields from each shield facing"
Some of you have stepped over the line that represents a forum rule violation.
Flaming and/or Trolling
You may not post content which contains insults to other users or Perfect World Entertainment Staff, are specifically made to create undue discontent on the forums, disturbances in forum threads, pick fights or otherwise promote unfriendly conversation.
Please go back and edit your posts, before a Mod does.
Link: How to PM - Twitter @STOMod_Bluegeek
Arent you a mod?
I believe this can possibly be construed as "straighten your selves out before I do".
One of my Mom's favorite sayings to her five children when we acted up. Most things we could handle ourselves, and if we didn't, she handled in a way that made us wish we had.
No.
You're conflating two things.
Damage to shields and general damage.
First off, the general case.
Base damage is expressed without either plus or minus signs.
It can be added to, of course. Such a bonus would be expressed with a plus sign.
Factors that reduce damage are expressed, as you surmise, with a minus sign.
Shields are treated differently.
-X damage to shields, reduces shields by the amount noted.
That proc will have no effect on hull whatsoever, thus is NOT base damage.
Instead, it is a specialised effect that only impacts shields.
Thus the minus sign and the word 'damage' are correct.
The proc will subtract the specified amount from shields and shields only.
It is not damage, TRIBBLE.
Actually it was more like "kick us while you can"... The blue-fella knows this... Him and I... we poke each other on a regular basis.
HOWEVER: Proc stats always display the effect it has on the enemy... Not the reverse of the effect it has.
So... Still accurate. it adds a "-336.3 Damage". It dosen't damage them directly... It sucks it out of them.
Which would make sense if shields and HP were part of the same pool.
But they're not.
The description is not accurate if a negative value is being subtracted as an absolute quantity. This falls on the same semantics as dividing a value by one-half and not expecting twice the original amount as a final result.
It's easy to fix the tool tip text anyway
2.5% chance to drain -X shields
It's a shield drain, not shield damage.
Easy answer: NERD RAGE FTL.
But that isn't correct. You're draining a negative amount from the shields. Subtracting a negative is the same as adding. Adding a negative is the same as subtracting. Placing a negative value after an operator always inverts the result.
So the correct phrasing is "2.5% chance to drain X from all shields", which means it will drain that amount. Saying "2.5% chance to drain -X shields" means it will add to the shields. It's a simple rule of math. Using the words "drain" or "damage" is irrelevant. The intended result is a subtraction. If you subtract a negative value, it adds it. End of discussion. Look it up, if you would prefer.
I actually see this error often in RPG's and it's mathematically wrong. I guarantee you that Cryptic's code doesn't look like this: %shields=%shields - -336 because I promise you that would increase the shield points by 336. It actually looks like this: %shields = %shields - 336. In truth, they wouldn't use an explicit value, they'd use a variable like %tetproc and that would hold the value 336.