Forums-->Queries and help-->
| Author | Leap damage |
|---|
# Leap:
Activated special ability.
This creature can attack any hostile creature within the interval [2; 2*Speed] tiles, ignoring obstacles, dealing 10% extra damage per tile leapt this way. If the target retaliates, it will deal 200% damage on retaliation.
Now here's the thing, in my last battle against them there's a part when they did 11 damage to my monks.
https://www.lordswm.com/warlog.php?lt=-1&warid=28052619
(It's a really short one don't worry)
My question is how is that possible?
The way I do the math is like this, there were 14 of them, their attack was 4, my def is 19. They leapt 8 tiles, so that makes an additional 80% damage.
Their calculated min dmg = 1/[(19-4)*0.05+1]*1*14*1.8 = 14.4
But they did 11. What's the scoop? | | Faction Resistance !? | | That's not supposed to affect hunts isn't it? Even if it did, 14.4 x (1-0.03*6) = 11.8. Nope, still too high. | | you should think this as a big elephant you surely know so no need to explain | if def is more than attack it's not lineal dependence with real dmg
for example if def more attack
on 2 factor is 0.9
on 4 factor is 0.81
on 6 factor is 0.73
.....
on 15 factor is 0.35 | For aremum:
His math is correct. Yours isn't. | I very much doubt this is the answer, but possibly it's 10% per "double tile", so a factor of 1.4 instead of 1.8.
Then min damage = 1/1.75 * 14 * 1.4 = 11.2 = 11 damage.
But I doubt that this is the reason for the low damage, it just seems too unlikely. | funny & impressive as well:)=
some ppl are amazing how they bother with irrelevancies:)=
grif def 12, monk 17, dmg various, spec ability factor formula on top of it, i guess overall formula can go either way, why bothering, is it really matters?
i saw this post, had to lough!:))
if theres a hole of possibilities, at the end, luck will decide the winner!:>>
p.s. not meant luck as param, luck as dmg range dealer:))
fiends dmg range 1-4??! | | Here's another remote theory. I admit it's extremely unlikely, but I wonder if the game treats the fiends' leap attack as a range attack, so the monks benefited from the guardians' ability. | https://www.lordswm.com/warlog.php?warid=495837467<=-1
(Don't worry, it's right in the beginning).
104 fiends leap 8 tiles, attack 3, do 92 damage to vampires, defense 9.
Expected min damage = 1/1.3 * 1 * 1.8 * 104 = 144
Even using only 40% extra damage, expected min damage = 1/1.3 * 1.4 * 104 = 112, so my theory is wrong. Also, Geryon's theory can't be right either.
It seems that fiends are consistently doing low damage, this was the first combat I looked at, and the first damage they did was very low.
Another even more remote theory is that it could be a range attack out of range. | Yes, they seem to be consistently doing low damage. In my last fight against them, and the one before, they did 'below minimum damage' and I was wondering why. Well it seems right now not many people know about this. Maybe with more data we can figure out their real damage range using reverse engineering. (Am I using the right word?)
Interesting theories. I'll keep them in mind. For now their min dmg is 64.2% of what we calculate it to be. I'm wondering if their additional leap damage has not been programmed right yet? If their expected min dmg is 100%, then without leap it will be 55.6%, which looks correct so far. But to make any progress we have to see how it fits with maximum damage.
for whatabusta:
Oh how is this irrelevant? These guys are doing two-thirds of their expected min damage, of course it matters. It's like an angel whose damage keeps fluctuating. Something is really wrong here; either with the game mechanics or our understanding of the game mechanics. It could even be a bug. Furthermore this is not just a neutral unit, it is a alt upggrade. One day (hopefully soon) we will get to use fiends too. :) | | [Post deleted by moderator DarkSooth // Flood.] | Here are my exact calculations for this battle:
https://www.lordswm.com/warlog.php?lt=-1&warid=28052619
14 Fiends against 17 Griffins:
att-def: 3-16 = -13 (dmg penalty: 13*0.05 = 0.65, i.e. multiplier: 1/1.65)
leap: 8 (dmg bonus: 8*0.1 = 0.8, i.e. multiplier: 1.8)
Demon: 6 (dmg reduction: 6*0.03 = 0.18, i.e. multiplier: 0.82)
min_dmg: 14*1*(1/1.65)*0.82*1.8 = 12.52363636
max_dmg: 14*4*(1/1.65)*0.82*1.8 = 50.09454545
Damage done: 17 (indeed between 12.52363636 and 50.09454545)
14 Fiends against 5 Monks:
att-def: 4-19 = -15 (dmg penalty: 15*0.05 = 0.75, i.e. multiplier: 1/1.75)
leap: 8 (dmg bonus: 8*0.1 = 0.8, i.e. multiplier: 1.8)
Demon: 6 (dmg reduction: 6*0.03 = 0.18, i.e. multiplier: 0.82)
min_dmg: 14*1*(1/1.75)*0.82*1.8 = 11.808
max_dmg: 14*4*(1/1.75)*0.82*1.8 = 47.232
Damage done: 11 (indeed between 11.808 and 47.232, because truncated values are 11 and 47, i.e. it probably was damage 11.8, but it was shown only 11) | I'm not sure if Fiends are considered as Demon faction.
Maybe they are neutrals?
For example, Frenzied Griffins are considered as Neutrals, not Knight faction.
(unless the last updates changed that) | | Okay Robai, but how do you explain the combat which I posted above? He didn't have any demon faction skill points. | for qulows:
Ok, calculating here:
https://www.lordswm.com/warlog.php?warid=495837467<=-1
104 Fiends against 7 Vampires:
att-def: 3-9 = -6 (dmg penalty: 6*0.05 = 0.3, i.e. multiplier: 1/1.3)
leap: 8 (dmg bonus: 8*0.1 = 0.8, i.e. multiplier: 1.8)
Demon: 0 (dmg reduction: 0*0.03 = 0, i.e. multiplier: 1)
min_dmg: 104*1*(1/1.35)*1*1.8 = 138.6666667
max_dmg: 104*4*(1/1.35)*1*1.8 = 554.6666666
Damage done: 92 (not between 138.6666667 and 554.6666666)
Hmm, strange.
Just a theory:
- maybe they didn't leap all 8 tiles, maybe they walked 4 tiles + leap 4 tiles?
If so then:
leap: 4 (dmg bonus: 4*0.1 = 0.4, i.e. multiplier: 1.4)
min_dmg: 104*1*(1/1.35)*1*1.4 = 107.8518518
max_dmg: 104*4*(1/1.35)*1*1.4 = 431.4074073
Damage done: 92 (still not between 107.8518518 and 431.4074073)
Definitely a bug!
Ok, let's try to ignore any leap:
min_dmg: 104*1*(1/1.35)*1*1 = 77.03703703
max_dmg: 104*4*(1/1.35)*1*1 = 308.1481481
Damage done: 92 (finally, 92 is between 77.03703703 and 308.1481481) | Lol, somehow I put there 1.35 instead of 1.3 :)
Corrected values:
leap: 8
min_dmg: 104*1*(1/1.3)*1*1.8 = 144
max_dmg: 104*4*(1/1.3)*1*1.8 = 576
leap: 4
min_dmg: 104*1*(1/1.3)*1*1.4 = 112
max_dmg: 104*4*(1/1.3)*1*1.4 = 448
leap: 0
min_dmg: 104*1*(1/1.3)*1*1 = 80
max_dmg: 104*4*(1/1.3)*1*1 = 320
Still the same conclusion - a bug. | qulows:
Another even more remote theory is that it could be a range attack out of range.
Yes, that would be probably the only logical explanation.
In that case:
min_dmg: 104*1*(1/1.3)*1*1.8*0.5 = 72
max_dmg: 104*4*(1/1.3)*1*1.8*0.5 = 288
And 92 is indeed between 72 and 288.
This probably correct, because later 93 Fiends attacked 5 Vampires (with leap 4) and did 233 damage
min_dmg: 93*1*(1/1.3)*1*1.4 = 100.1538462
max_dmg: 93*4*(1/1.3)*1*1.4 = 400.6153845
and 233 is indeed between 100.1538462 and 400.6153845.
They did full damage this time (they were in range), i.e. not half damage
min_dmg: 93*1*(1/1.3)*1*1.4*0.5 = 50.07692310
max_dmg: 93*4*(1/1.3)*1*1.4*0.5 = 200.3076922
because 233 is NOT between 50.07692310 and 200.3076922. | | Interesting... Then the question is, is it affected by large shield and shield allies? |
This topic is long since last update and considered obsolete for further discussions.
Back to topics list
|
