The "random" damage of the attack seems to be the result of this formula:
"Basic Damage" will be added to the result of the "Escalation Status" multiplied by "Scale Factor". If it is critical then the result of this will be multiplied by 975. After the comma appears to me to be the defense formula due to the attack.
Â
In your tutorial made available in the file.
Shows that status has interference in the formula, They can be added as active variables of the function, but the current formula does not show any interfering of the status, because it has no status added to the formula.
Â
A_Attack:Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Attackers attack stat.
A_Defense: Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Attackers defense stat.
A_Speed:Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Attackers speed stat.
A_AbilityPwr         Attackers ability power stat.
A_MagicResist:Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Attackers magic resist stat.
Â
In this case, adding points to any of the statuses, as the player passes level, which would interfere with basic damage such as attack or skill power, will not increase anything in basic damage.
(At least this I tested, added almost 500 points in the attack status and did not increase the physical attack damage)
Â
My question is this:
Have the statuses in question lost their importance in the basic damage formula? (physical, magical, true).
Â
Because the meaning of them exists only for the minimum requirements (Mission, puzzle, item and so on). And it will not add anything to basic damage or basic defense as the player adds points.
Â
Attack and ability power are responsible for the damage formula.
Physical defense and magic resistance in defense formula.
Just as there is a critical chance, speed would be responsible for the chance to "miss".
Â
Of course I do not know if you were going to add these elements in the formula in future versions, if it was part of your plan I'm sorry, but I thought I'd better ask.
Â
Sorry for the mistakes if I'm wrong about something.
Question
Weylon Santana
Well, analyzing the physical attack formula.
Â
Random(((BaseDamage + (ScalingStat * ScaleFactor))) * CritFactor * .975, ((BaseDamage + (ScalingStat * ScaleFactor))) * CritFactor * 1.025) * (100 / (100 + V_Defense))
Â
The "random" damage of the attack seems to be the result of this formula:
"Basic Damage" will be added to the result of the "Escalation Status" multiplied by "Scale Factor". If it is critical then the result of this will be multiplied by 975. After the comma appears to me to be the defense formula due to the attack.
Â
In your tutorial made available in the file.
Shows that status has interference in the formula, They can be added as active variables of the function, but the current formula does not show any interfering of the status, because it has no status added to the formula.
Â
A_Attack:Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Attackers attack stat.
A_Defense: Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Attackers defense stat.
A_Speed:Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Attackers speed stat.
A_AbilityPwr         Attackers ability power stat.
A_MagicResist:Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Attackers magic resist stat.
Â
In this case, adding points to any of the statuses, as the player passes level, which would interfere with basic damage such as attack or skill power, will not increase anything in basic damage.
(At least this I tested, added almost 500 points in the attack status and did not increase the physical attack damage)
Â
My question is this:
Have the statuses in question lost their importance in the basic damage formula? (physical, magical, true).
Â
Because the meaning of them exists only for the minimum requirements (Mission, puzzle, item and so on). And it will not add anything to basic damage or basic defense as the player adds points.
Â
Attack and ability power are responsible for the damage formula.
Physical defense and magic resistance in defense formula.
Just as there is a critical chance, speed would be responsible for the chance to "miss".
Â
Of course I do not know if you were going to add these elements in the formula in future versions, if it was part of your plan I'm sorry, but I thought I'd better ask.
Â
Sorry for the mistakes if I'm wrong about something.
Â
@jcsnider, @Kibbelz.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
2 answers to this question
Recommended Posts