| Author | Art Modifiers: Attack and Increases Melee Damage |
|---|
Hiya all,
You know how some arts have damage modifiers like,
- +X (where 'X' is a number) to Attack,
- Increases melee damage by 10%
So let's say we have 2 arts,
Art 1: +3 to Attack, Increases melee damage by 7%
Art 2: +1 to Attack, Increases melee damage by 10%
My question is
- Which art is 'generally' better?
- At what point is Art 2 better than Art 1 in terms of MELEE attack?
Soz if this is simple, I'm not that good in Maths. :)
Thanks. |
What you need to keep in mind is that attack affects both melee and raged attacks.
In your case, the first art is better than the second on all possible aspects (except the price which you didn't mention). |
@2
Thanks for the reply.
Let's not put cost as an issue. Just purely on MELEE attack.
At what point (Attack stat of a unit?) does the 3% overcome the +2 to Attack? |
| [Post deleted by moderator DarkSooth // Wrong computation.] |
| [Post deleted by moderator DarkSooth // Wrong computation.] |
| [Post deleted by moderator DarkSooth // Wrong computation.] |
| the first art is definitely better. |
This means they never intersect which basically means that the 3% damage never overcomes the +2 attack.
Hmm.. surely at some point, the addition 3% is greater than having +2 more Attack?
So let's say a unit have +1000 Attack, that 3% increase in damage would be better than having +1002 Attack (from wearing the other art), no? If everything else is equal/fixed value? |
Due to some mistakes (0.5 instead of 0.05) in my first research I got some wrong results.
Supposing the two functions are
1) f(x) = damage * (1 + 0.05 * (x + 2)), where x is the difference between the attacking creature's attack and the defending creature's defense.
2) g(x) = (damage * (1 + 0.05 * x)) * 1.03, where x is the difference between the attacking creature's attack and the defending creature's defense.
It seems that the plot of the g function goes above the plot of the f function when the difference in attack and defense is 46.666...
I might be wrong again though. I never trust my math. |
+1 Attack is in most cases +5% of basic damage of a stack(ranged and melee).
+5% melee should work as a modifier to final melee attack after attack-defence evaluation. |
Art 2 is better in melee if:
(Hero Attack + 1)*1.1 > (Hero attack + 3)*1.07 |
woups:
i.e. At hero attack of 71, art 2 is better at melee damage.
I personally prefer art 1, high attack helps ALL units, specially my low-attack skelets will hopefully be high enough to pierce through defence of higher tiers. |
Actually, replace 'Hero attack' with "creature attack'.
Any units with at least 71 attack will benefit more from art 2. |
For Gyver: Damage is calculated not just based on creature attack, but actually more of the difference between the the attacker's attack and the defender's defense (A-D). Also you forget to include the multiplier of 0.05 in (A-D). So you can't use your formula in post #11.
Darksooth:
Supposing the two functions are
1) f(x) = damage * (1 + 0.05 * (x + 2)), where x is the difference between the attacking creature's attack and the defending creature's defense.
2) g(x) = (damage * (1 + 0.05 * x)) * 1.03, where x is the difference between the attacking creature's attack and the defending creature's defense.
1.03 is the absolute difference in melee damage. However we need to compare the percentage difference which is 1.1 / 1.07. (i.e. A weapon that increases melee damage by 21%, is not 11% stronger but only 10% stronger, than another weapon that increases melee damage by 10%.
Below is the correct derivation:
Art 2 > Art 1
1.1[(x+1)(0.05)+1] > 1.07[(x+3)(0.05)+3], where x is (A-D) without the weapon
Solving for x, x = 50.333333
Which is to say when (A-D) is 51 or more, Art 2 is better
When (A-D) is 50 or less, Art 1 is better
*This is comparing only MELEE damage. |
1.1[(x+1)(0.05)+1] > 1.07[(x+3)(0.05)+3]
Sorry, made a typo. No change to final result though.
1.1[(x+1)(0.05)+1] > 1.07[(x+3)(0.05)+1] |
| I would take art 1 myself, especially if I have ranged units in my army ;) |
Interesting thread. I hope more folks read it.
qatc |
| closed by limustudotcom (2011-07-16 00:46:48) |
|---|
