# Damage Formula and Mechanics

44 replies to this topic

### #1 Doctor Mog

Doctor Mog

Contributor

• Community Member
• 809 posts

Posted 27 June 2013 - 04:49 AM

Read the source and upvote this guy for his work:

http://www.reddit.co...chanics_enmity/

Introduction

Understanding the mechanics of melee damage is the most sought after knowledge among every endgame LS...

Methods

The first step in assessing the damage mechanics with the new battle algorithms involved establishing which type of number generation system FFXIV:ARR used. In FFXI they used a normal distribution (think bell curve) where the majority of damage followed a midpoint with slight variations of increased and decreased damage. In FFXIV 1.20, we established that there existed a random non-normal distribution. This means that the damage numbers are drawn at random with equal probability from a pre-determined set. The pre-determined set included an 8% variation from a midpoint value. For example, I am averaging 100 damage. The minimum damage I will do is 92. The maximum damage I will do is 108. The odds of doing damage for any number between 92 and 108 is equal. FFXIV:ARR follows the FFXIV 1.0 system. The only change I noticed is that they reduced the variation to +/- 5% instead of 8%. It is because of the equal probability and fixed set that allows my testing method to work.

The method I used to test the stats is similar to the method I used in my 1.20 testing. I first established a base stat-line while naked. Based off of the beta testing manual information, only Strength (STR) and Determination (DTR) affect the damage output of PLD, WAR, MNK, and DRG. To test the influence of these stats, I held one stat constant while I increased the others. I did not hold any other stat constant, and I believe this did not alter the results (I will explain later).

For WAR, I tested on a Level 50 Water Sprite. For DRG, I tested on 2 mobs, a Level 50 Water Sprite for only dDMG/dSTR, and a Level 40 Earth Sprite for dDMG/dSTR and dDMG/dDTR.

Results

• Dragoon Testing with Mogfork

Influence of Strength on Auto-Attack (AA), True Thrust (150 Pot), and Vorpal Thrust (100 Pot) on a Level 50 Water Sprite

http://i.imgur.com/IZTCFl3.png * STR ranged from 268-378. The slope of the line indicates how many points of damage are added per point of strength added (dDMG/dSTR). The R-squared value indicates the linearity and how well a linear line "fits" the data.

Raw Data for DRG on Level 50 Water Sprite

http://i.imgur.com/PDm6MUl.png

Influence of Determination and Strength on Auto-Attack(AA) on a Level 40 Earth Sprite http://i.imgur.com/vVkDYJe.png *DTR ranged from 202-266. STR ranged from 302-344.

• Warrior Testing with Moogle Axe

Influence of Strength on Auto-Attack (AA), Maim Buff with AA, Maim Buff/Storm's Eye Debuff AA, Heavy Swing (150 Pot), and Skull Sunder (100 Pot) on a Level 50 Water Sprite http://i.imgur.com/wEBgIIW.png *STR ranged from 254-354. The +10% indicates the 10% damage buff from Maim. The +10/10% buff indicates the +10% Maim buff and the 10% Slashing Debuff.

Raw Data for WAR on a Level 50 Water Sprite http://i.imgur.com/nvdVu8n.png *Maim % refers to the buff on Auto-attack, not the weaponskill damage. Similarly for Maim+Storm's Eye %.

Discussion

First lets begin by talking about the linear nature of all of the graphs. This is an important concept to grasp. Stat scaling in FFXIV:ARR is linear. That implies that your return on investment will be equal at any given stat value. There is no diminishing return on stat investment until you hit the cap. Also as I mentioned before, I only held STR and DTR constant. Since I had such a high degree of linearity with all the other stats varying greatly, we can safely assume that all other stats have no influence on damage output for auto-attack and weaponskills.

Next let's discuss the difference in efficiency between Strength and Determination. As you can see from the Dragoon Testing graph on the Level 40 Earth Sprite, Strength was nearly twice as efficient in increasing damage point-per-point. While this wasn't tested on a higher level mob, I would expect the results to translate fairly well, although I will retest this on a Level 50 mob this weekend. This makes sense considering Determination influences every class's damage and healing potency. So to make it on par with or greater than STR/DEX/INT would be unbalanced.

• Take home points: Strength has nearly twice the return on investment as compared to Determination.

Next let's take a look at the raw data charts. Looking at the difference in the Average Damage across Auto-Attack, a 150 Potency WS, and a 100 Potency WS, we can notice several trends. First off, Auto-attack is nearly equivalent to the 100 Potency WS. This should translate to Relic weapons and future content weapons. Also notice the difference in Average Damage for the 150 potency WS and the 100 potency WS for both WAR and DRG. For both jobs the ratio of WS damage for the 150pot and 100pot WSs is ~1.5. This implies that potency is a linear scaling modifer. A 200 potency WS will do EXACTLY twice the damage as a 100 pot weaponskill. There is no exponential scaling.

• Take home points: Auto-attack is roughly equivalent to 100 potency for endgame gear (WAR ~110-115, DRG ~95-100). Weaponskill potency scaling is linear.

dLVL

dLVL is an important concept to grasp. The term simply refers to the "difference in level" between a user and a target. I use the terms dSTR and dDMG a lot. All the little "d" means is "difference between 2 values (subtraction)". You might also see the Greek symbol delta to refer to this.

dLVL in 1.0 played the biggest role in determining damage. And many of you are intuitively familiar with this concept. Consider Thundara doing 6k+ on a L1 Marmot as to doing only 500 on a L50 Amal' Ja. dLVL afffected every aspect of the game from defense, crit damage, to the influence of every WS and spell. It also made stat testing a pain as each difference in level produced entirely different results when testing. However, it appears that FFXIV:ARR will NOT have dLVL be a determinant in stat algorithms. Here is the evidence as to why we think this:

You can no longer one-shot many low level mobs.

If dLVL played any type of significant role in damage calculations, your damage output on a lvl 8 mob as compared to a level 50 mob should be very noticeable. The very fact that you can no longer one-shot these lower level mobs is strong evidence that dLVL is no longer in the game and that damage instead is based solely on attack/defense modifiers.

My testing on L40 and L50 Elemental Sprites

I only did brief stat testing, but what I found on L40 and L50 elemental sprites was quite surprising. Not only are the rate of return of dDMG/dSTR almost equal, but the actual damage numbers are incredibly close. For 323 STR and 202 DTR with Mogfork, I did 89.5 dmg on average to a L40 Earth Sprite. For 316 STR and 202 DTR with Mogfork, I did 88.5 dmg on average to a L50 Water Sprite. You wouldn't find numbers this close with a Lvl 49 and Lvl 50 mob in 1.0, and we're talking a dLVL of 10 here!

Why is this important? Consider the Critical Damage stat. In 1.0, this stat became slightly useless because dLVL often caused crit damage to floor (opposite of cap) at 15%. Your crit rate also floored. This made investing in the stats have an incredibly painful return on investment in 1.0. However with dLVL no longer being a strong factor, Critical Damage builds are now a real possibility. I don't have many hard numbers on this, but luckily I did record some of the Critical Damage values. On an L40 Earth Sprite I did 85.5 damage on average, while I Crit'd for 130 damage on average. This is roughly a 1.5x return. Now it is yet to be seen how this translates to higher level mobs and there could be a "hidden" stat that affects Critical Damage taken. One piece of evidence for this is the GLA ability awareness that reduces Critical Damage taken by 25%. This could either be increasing a stat or simply be an external modifier (if attack = crit, then dmg = attack x 0.75. Or something like that). The point remains that Critical Damage builds could be very powerful builds. We will have to do some more testing this weekend.

Damage Formula

Much of what we discussed were hypotheticals, however we already have a lot of data that could back our assertions. First let's talk about

• Auto-Attack Potency

As I have mentioned several times before, auto-attack seemed to have around the 100 potency mark for DRG and WAR. Now we realized that there might be a very simple determinant for this. Consider the auto-attack stat and the physical damage stat on weapons. Take for example the Mogaxe and the Mogfork

If you divide the auto-attack value by the physical damage value you get 40.45/41 or 98.6% for the DRG Mogfork and 45.92/41 or 112% for the WAR Mogaxe. Compare this to the hard numbers I got from my WAR and DRG testing. For DRG's Mogfork I got anywhere from 97-99% and for the WAR I got anywhere from 111.8-113% when I compared auto-attack damage to a 100 potency WS. This seems to be too close to be a coincidence. Thus I think we are at the point where our current belief is that Auto-Attack potency is equal to the Auto-Attack stat on weapons divided by the Physical Damage, then multiplied by 100.

• The important modifiers

When thinking about a formula it is important to keep in mind which modifiers are contant, which are linear, and which are external to an equation. Here are some of our current thoughts.

Potency is a linear modifier. 200 potency will do 2x 100 potency in terms of damage

Stats are linear modifiers. They follow a slope equation of dDMG/dSTAT

The slope for stats is a non-constant modifier. It appears to be influenced by Physical/Magical Damage.

The +10% damage type of stats appear to be external modifiers. They multiply the final damage calculation

So we can come up with

Damage = [(Potency * some scaling modifer(?)) + (STR * dDMG/dSTR) + (DTR * dDMG/dDTR)] * External Modifiers

(I believe the scaling modifier is determined by the weapon's Physical Damage) (Where dDMG/dSTR and dDMG/dDTR is dependent on Physical Damage of the weapon)

What we really need to see is how Potency scales with Physical Damage on weapons. This should give us a much better idea on the formula. Now we also need to understand that there is no way to influence the potency of a WS outside of choosing a different weapon; however, depending on the influence of the weapon's Physical Damage stat, there could arise a situation where a P DMG 100 weapon with 20 STR is worse than a P DMG 95 weapon with +50 STR. It really depends on the scaling. *Continuing to write. Just want to submit so I don't lose anything~

The Importance of Stats

This is more of a subjective topic, but it is important nonetheless. Compare my data for DRG while fighting a L50 Water Sprite:

• Naked at 267STR, 202DTR = 77.5 dmg Auto-Attack

• Geared 378 STR, 202 DTR = 102.5 dmg Auto-Attack

That is a 102.5/77.5 or 32% increase by just adding 111 STR. I know that I am undergeared compared to other players and I think Miko said he could get his STR up to ~410. This would come out as a 42% increase compared to naked gear. Now keep translating this with materia and future dungeon drops and I believe we are going to start seeing up to 500 STR (assuming it doesn't cap). Also keep in mind that I head DTR to its base value of 202 for my testing. This stat will also be increasing. All in all, I can imagine a fully geared player doing somewhere between 1.50-1.75x more damage than a naked player with the same weapon. The reason this turns out to be the case is because SE decided to scale down damage to smaller values and the use of linear stat modifiers. Adding 1 more point of damage when your base is 100 is much more potent than adding 1 damage when your base is 500.

I think this is a reflection on the complaint that stats were "meaningless" in 1.0 (whether that is a true statement or not). So SE decided to go with a system where players fully geared are going to be doing 1.5-1.75x more damage (and with faster GCD) making the difference much more appreciable. While there is still a lot of speculation in what I have wrote, I believe I can justify it in my mind considering what SE's goals were towards altering the damage/stats algorithms.

Final Note: Please don't take the damage formula I proposed as 100% correct. There are tons of things I left out for simplicity such as defense of the enemy mob, elemental resistances, slashing/piercing/blunt resistance, etc. This is just a more simple formula for things that we as players can change to increase our damage.

Buffs

Shield Oath is a PLD buff that grants +enmity to all actions. This is preliminary, but it appears that Shield Oath doubles the enmity generated from each action.

2 Flashes (no Shield Oath) = 1 Flash (Shield Oath)

Buffs themselves give hate.

Roughly 5.5 uses of Sword Oath will equal the hate generated from Flash (without Shield Oath) Roughly 11 uses of Sword Oath will equal the hate generated from Flash (with Shield Oath)

Weaponskills

The +enmity attribute present on weaponskills such as Skull Sunder and Savage Blade appear to be multipliers of hate damage and not just a strict + X amount of hate.

Damage over Time (DoT) abilities continue to generate hate with every tick. A 20 potency 30s DoT will generate 200 potency worth of hate over the 30 seconds and not all at once.

Abilities

Provoke is a GLA ability that instantly ties you with the player who has the highest enmity and places aggro on you. As long as the person you are tied with does no further actions, he will forever remain below you on the enmity list. The skill essentially "catches you up"

Example: Aki the BLM has 5000000 points of enmity on Ifrit

```           Miko the PLD died and got raised. He currently only has 1000 points of Ifrit.

Miko uses Provoke.

Miko now has 5000001 points of enmity and is at the top of the hate list.

(Note: This is permanent hate)
```

Cure Hate

Overcuring does not appear to generate hate. Also

1 Flash (no Shield Oath) = ~750 Cure (Aque healed on WHM 300/heal, took 3 heals to steal hate)

1 Flash (Sheld Oath) = ~1500 Cure (Aque healed about 1500 on 5 cures)

Skill Speed and the Special 341 Stat

Based on this I would expect the formula to actually be this:

Global Cooldown = 2.5 - 0.01 x roundup(speed/10)

But would obviously have to verify the rounding part. Easiest way to do this is equip +1 skill speed and see if the GCD changes to 2.49. If so, can fairly safely assume it's a rounding change. This would be somewhat important to min-maxing as you would attempt to always get a value where the 1's digit was 1 (no point in say getting 9 skillspeed). This formula may only apply to R50 though.

The testing on greased lightning would conclude: - Greased Lightnining is flat -5% current GCD after gear enhancement (stacking up to -15%) - not sure on rounding error but didn't take that deep a look

Interesting question here is for spell speed, does this decrease the casting speed similarly but subtracting 0.01 second increments for every 10 speed or is there some proportional effect. Like if you have 200 spell skill and compare Raise (8 sec) vs Cure (2 sec), do you shave more seconds off the casting time of Raise than Cure b/c it's longer casting time? Very easy to look in game next time.

The other obvious question here is is there a cap to this effect. That may be hard to show though.

Based on this person's testing, skill speed is obviously shaving 0.01 second increments in a linear fashion and looks to be a static return; however, it is technically an increasing return only noticeable at extremely high amounts of speed. Since for every 10 more you add, you are shaving 0.01 off a progressively smaller base number. For instance shaving 0.01 off 2.5 is a 2.5/2.49 x100% - 100% = 0.4% increase in efficiency. As you increase to say 500 skill speed and the GCD is 2.0, adding another 10 is now a 2.0/1.9 x100%-100%= 0.5% increase in efficiency. To use an extreme example, say you have 2480 skill speed w/o presence of a cap and your GCD is 0.02 seconds. Adding another 10 speed brings your GCD to 0.01 seconds, or a 50% increase in efficiency. Here's a graphical version that illustrates this well.

Essentially this is an increasing return mechanic, but might as well be linear. The increasing return is only seen at extreme amounts of speed. You're likely to hit a supposed gap long before this.

I was talking to Valk last night about the significance of the Spell Speed, Skill Speed, Accuracy, Critical Hit Rating, and Parry skills all having the same basic value (with a 341 value at 50). I ended up just looking up the beta Lodestone and found a character of every level 1-50 documenting what the base amount of this was. I then graphed it and got this:

http://imgbox.com/ace31EHt

This had a very good best fit with polynomial even just eyeballing it. The interesting thing here is that if you just take the best fit curve excel gives you and plug in level 99, you end up with 1037.97. This is actually really close to 1024 which holds the significance of being 210 in coding. I'm not sure if this was coincidence or not. Anyways, I fiddled with the curve a bit to try to account for rounding error a bit more and ultimately got the equation of:

Base Statistic = rounddown{0.083625x[Level]2 + 1.5x[Level] + 55.4}

With this, you can predict how the statistic will scale at future levels:

http://imgbox.com/acmRYWuG

This is pretty much it for the actual testing, but what's really potentially interesting here is the fact that so many viewable stats have this same number. What I really think is going on here is that this 341 value at R50 is the new representation of dLVL in 2.0. The only reason the game is allowing you to view it in these 5 instances is that these 5 stats can actually be modified by gear; however, this value being tied to your level likely plays an additional role in a number of calculations.

Looking at critical hit rating, there has to be a critical hit defense stat to compare things to. This is supported by the fact that awful GLD ability that increases critical hit defense exists. We were asking well if it exists what is it? It's likely just this basic value tied to your level (aka at R50 341). So if you are a naked R50 w/ critical hit rating 341 and fight an R50 mob, they cancel and the critical hit % is some baseline value. You fight an R1 mob with level stat 56, you get a huge critical hit bonus of 285.

Going with the idea of accuracy and evasion, Soge and Will were saying how in WoW, every mob of some level has the exact same evasion. In fact there's like a table of accuracy benchmarks you have to hit to ensure 100% accuracy and you just slot enough accuracy to hit the necessary level of the mob you're fighting and then ignore accuracy after you hit it. Compare this to XI where you can have 2 enemies of the same level with wildly different evasion rates. If the 2.0 system goes with evasion as a stat that cannot be modified and is simply tied to the level, then a similar table of accuracy benchmarks could technically be made eventually. If true, this system would be far more simplistic than FFXI, and essentially mimic WoW.

Basically to test this, would need to fight an R50 mob at +0 accuracy and collect a large # of swings to get a % hit rate. This establishes a set hit % when accuracy and a supposedly hidden evasion stat tied solely to your level are the exact same. We could then repeat with a lower level mob, say randomly an R45 w/ level stat 292 (49 less). Fight different level mobs and keep repeating and eventually you will develop a curve that shows how changing difference in ACC-base stat affects the hit rate. You could alternatively increase your own accuracy and keep the R50 mob as well.

Spell and skill speed would be more interesting. It appeared odd that your GCD was 2.5 regardless of level, yet your skill and spell speed kept increasing. What I suspect is happening is when you're talking about criticals and accuracy, you are comparing to mob level, but for these 2 stats, you're actually just comparing it to your own. So at level 50, your skill speed is 341, and your level statistic is also 341. So you end up with 341-341 = 0 meaning you're stuck at the basic GCD of 2.5 seconds. This would imply though, that the rate or return for spell speed / skill speed is static throughout all levels. This would require validation with a non-R50 character to see if the rate of return is greater than 10 speed for -0.01 seconds. If it actually is greater, then the balance check may involve division.

• Kaeno Asura likes this

### #2 Chlymera

Chlymera
• Free Company Member
• 110 posts
• LocationRocketTown

Posted 27 June 2013 - 06:10 AM

I'm not smart enough to understand this calculus.

"I know not with what weapons WWIII will be fought, but WWIV will be fought with sticks and stones." ~ Einstein

### #3 Tirion Crey

Tirion Crey
• Free Company Member
• 208 posts
• LocationGermany - Stuttgart

Posted 27 June 2013 - 06:16 AM

The whole Potency thing being tied to your AA dmg was pretty obvious even w/o testing. But the rest is pretty neat information so far. Especially interested in the hate thing obviously^^

He used the approach that I was gonna try in phase 4. Using abilities and let another person use abilities to make sort of a "efficiency" list which hate abilities cause the most and which cause less hate, based on how much the other person has to do to grab hate.

### #4 Setsuna

Setsuna

Contributor

• Guests
• 113 posts
• LocationNew York, NY

Posted 27 June 2013 - 06:28 AM

Was reading through this last night. Good stuff indeed.

### #5 Jackie

Jackie
• Community Member
• 50 posts
• LocationOhio

Posted 27 June 2013 - 06:43 AM

Wow that's Alot to read and test.

### #6 tachi

tachi
• Community Member
• 18 posts

Posted 27 June 2013 - 07:28 AM

YAY crit build is now a possibility, good by dLVL!!!

This just solidified my love of ARR.

STR is 2x as strong as DTR.

Skill Speed appears useless as a whole at the current time.

The only factors to influence damage stat wise are STR + DTR, and weapon stats. (for physical dmg)

### #7 Buju

Buju
• 327 posts
• LocationNorth Bend, WA

Posted 27 June 2013 - 07:32 AM

Good read, damage seems to pretty much be how most people expected.

YAY crit build is now a possibility, good by dLVL!!!

Woot woot!

### #8 tachi

tachi
• Community Member
• 18 posts

Posted 27 June 2013 - 08:38 AM

The Power of PROVOKE

Another really interesting idea that popped into my head is the idea of "team tanking" since provoke instantly gives you 1 more enmity point than who ever had the most enmity prior. You could coordinate the defensive buff skills of 2 main tanks on a very tough monster and be able to maximize the dmg reduction.

Extreme example:  5 main tanks each rotate voke and time it so they Rampart just before voke. This would give you a 100% Rampart up time from the tanks reducing a boss dmg by 20% full time.

1. Pop Rampart

2. Voke to pull hate

repeate

I'm not saying you want 5 tanks but I like the idea of 2 tanks coordinating abilities to really push down the dmg taken on a potentially lethal target. I just hope they develop fights that require this kind of strategy and organization.

### #9 Buju

Buju
• 327 posts
• LocationNorth Bend, WA

Posted 27 June 2013 - 08:45 AM

The Power of PROVOKE

Another really interesting idea that popped into my head is the idea of "team tanking" since provoke instantly gives you 1 more enmity point than who ever had the most enmity prior. You could coordinate the defensive buff skills of 2 main tanks on a very tough monster and be able to maximize the dmg reduction.

Extreme example:  5 main tanks each rotate voke and time it so they Rampart just before voke. This would give you a 100% Rampart up time from the tanks reducing a boss dmg by 20% full time.

1. Pop Rampart

2. Voke to pull hate

repeate

I'm not saying you want 5 tanks but I like the idea of 2 tanks coordinating abilities to really push down the dmg taken on a potentially lethal target. I just hope they develop fights that require this kind of strategy and organization.

We can only hope that the 24 man content calls for such things, will make the fights more interesting.

### #10 Chlymera

Chlymera
• Free Company Member
• 110 posts
• LocationRocketTown

Posted 27 June 2013 - 09:12 AM

The Power of PROVOKE

Another really interesting idea that popped into my head is the idea of "team tanking" since provoke instantly gives you 1 more enmity point than who ever had the most enmity prior. You could coordinate the defensive buff skills of 2 main tanks on a very tough monster and be able to maximize the dmg reduction.

Extreme example:  5 main tanks each rotate voke and time it so they Rampart just before voke. This would give you a 100% Rampart up time from the tanks reducing a boss dmg by 20% full time.

1. Pop Rampart

2. Voke to pull hate

repeate

I'm not saying you want 5 tanks but I like the idea of 2 tanks coordinating abilities to really push down the dmg taken on a potentially lethal target. I just hope they develop fights that require this kind of strategy and organization.

In my experience in other MMOs, this is the norm when most boss encounters require 2 tanks. Generally speaking, the boss would have a large damaging ability or put a debuff on one of the tanks. This would require the other tank (off-tank) to ,"Taunt or Provoke", grabbing the hate so the other tank does not die. There are some really cool mechanics that could be pulled from some of these encounters. It adds just another element to the fight.

Pretty cool. Pretty, pretty, pretty cool.

"I know not with what weapons WWIII will be fought, but WWIV will be fought with sticks and stones." ~ Einstein

### #11 tachi

tachi
• Community Member
• 18 posts

Posted 27 June 2013 - 12:19 PM

I've done lots of team tanking in the past but with ffxiv 1.0 it was IMPOSSIBLE to regain hate when your deep into any long fight because enmity was strait up cumulative. The only way to get it back would be a full wipe so everyone is reset. This Provoke gives you 1 more enmity point than the current max just makes the team tanking thing very easy to manage. And rather than just bouncing hate back and forth you can authoratitively bounce it back and forth every time voke is ready. In other games I've played with a tank there was no skill quite like this version of voke.

### #12 Buju

Buju
• 327 posts
• LocationNorth Bend, WA

Posted 27 June 2013 - 12:26 PM

I've done lots of team tanking in the past but with ffxiv 1.0 it was IMPOSSIBLE to regain hate when your deep into any long fight because enmity was strait up cumulative. The only way to get it back would be a full wipe so everyone is reset. This Provoke gives you 1 more enmity point than the current max just makes the team tanking thing very easy to manage. And rather than just bouncing hate back and forth you can authoratitively bounce it back and forth every time voke is ready. In other games I've played with a tank there was no skill quite like this version of voke.

Exactly it was use everything you can try to get hate fast or just wipe and restart, which with most things doesn't work so well when you were on the clock and someone makes a mistake.

### #13 Tirion Crey

Tirion Crey
• Free Company Member
• 208 posts
• LocationGermany - Stuttgart

Posted 27 June 2013 - 01:17 PM

I would really like the idea of alternating tanks if the encounter requires it. I just hope it won't be as lazy as WoW became in that region. The last few expansions the mechanics of the fight made you switch tanks...in MoP it basically was a debuff everytime for each boss. 3 Stacks and Taunt...3 stacks and Taunt etc. There was no real "reason behind" the switching tanks, other than all boss' had a debuff that forced you too...was pretty lazy on Blizzards end :/

### #14 Amaya Rei

Amaya Rei
• Community Member
• 1 posts
• LocationUnited States

Posted 30 June 2013 - 10:25 PM

Incredible work by all those involved, and after reading this and seeing Doctor Mog's GoogleDoc on the Mechanic Testing P3W3, I had a little to add:

I'm primarily a BRD, I spend about 90% of my time in game playing it, and did a very similar stat test on BRD as DocMog did also using the Artemis Bow, (DocMog's testing found here: https://docs.google....forcehl=1#gid=5)

Though I wanted to elaborate on some of the things that his GoogleDoc doesn't necessarily make plain:

-The 1.5x return on Critical Hits holds steady for BRD as well as the classes mentioned above, and though I didn't take note of my dCritRate, I didn't see any noticeable difference in it from being naked to being fully geared (about 3 crits per 30 AAs)

-DocMogs formula is incredibly accurate for BRD AA DMG. I capped my test at 400 Dex and got an average damage of 119.2, right in line with DocMog's formula. This implies to me that there is no hard cap (yet) on DEX for a BRD's AA DMG, with each point of DEX adding approx. 0.25 points of damage (based on DocMog's data, dAvgDMG/dDEX)

-Two stats that aren't shown -in the DoW BRD testing were DTR. (which was kept constant) and STR. In my testing I held DEX at my naked value and added pure STR ranging from 194 to 256, but noticed absolutely NO CHANGE IN DAMAGE whatsoever. Thus, I personally have concluded that STR has no effect on BRD AA DMG at all.

-I would also assert that the same statement holds true for DTR. Testing at a DEX of 361 and a DTR of 256, considerably higher than the DoW test, I find that my damage values are identical to DocMog's, leading me to believe that DTR hold no effect over BRD AA DMG either.

-Based on the damage values I received from testing the various potency WS, I have concluded that the BRD AA is roughly equivalent to 80. Repelling Shot has this potency as well, and I base my claim on the almost identical damage values I received from both actions.

I realize that BRD is kind of a blah class to most people, but it's easily my favorite, and I hope this helps all my fellow BRDs out there. Talking about BRD gear, setups, builds, hotbar layouts, techniques, or anything else related to the singing snipers is one of my favorite past times, so feel free to hit me up whenever!

• Doctor Mog likes this

Amaya Rei
Officer, Primal Carnage Free Company
Balmung Server
primalcarnage.guildwork.com

"There sit the sainted sage, the bard divine, the few, whom genius gave to shine through every unborn age, and undiscovered clime."

### #15 Doctor Mog

Doctor Mog

Contributor

• Community Member
• 809 posts

Posted 01 July 2013 - 05:10 AM

I have to say, we were testing DRG for so long, i didn't get much time to spend on BRD. But the good news is that the damage calculations matched so well, i didn't have to!

### #16 Chlymera

Chlymera
• Free Company Member
• 110 posts
• LocationRocketTown

Posted 01 July 2013 - 08:56 AM

did anyone test BLM?

"I know not with what weapons WWIII will be fought, but WWIV will be fought with sticks and stones." ~ Einstein

### #17 Doctor Mog

Doctor Mog

Contributor

• Community Member
• 809 posts

Posted 01 July 2013 - 09:04 AM

did anyone test BLM?

Nope

### #18 Doctor Mog

Doctor Mog

Contributor

• Community Member
• 809 posts

Posted 01 July 2013 - 09:04 AM

A summary of our weekend of fun!

### #19 Messor

Messor
• Free Company Member
• 217 posts
• LocationWahiawa, HI

Posted 01 July 2013 - 09:05 AM

We will try and test BLM next time the servers are up.

### #20 Gamemako

Gamemako
• Community Member
• 12 posts

Posted 02 July 2013 - 02:28 PM

'Afternoon everyone. Came by as a result of someone linking that YT vid.

Notice that in all weapon descriptions the auto-attack damage is equal to wpndmg*delay/3 -- that is, it is your AA damage value is just scaled to 100% of weapon damage per 3 seconds. All weapons, without exception, do this. The DPS value is just wpndmg/delay; I'm not sure it has any particular meaning in the game. Actual AA damage, however, scales all kinds of jacked-up ways. I highly recommend going to weaponskills for damage formula determintaion as they give a reliable potency number and are more relevant to final output. 150 potency is 150 potency and attacks scale directly with potency every time. 115 potency isn't 69 potency and AA DPS is all over the damn place. AA damage seems to scale close to a 100-potency attack * delay/3, but it's always off by factors unknown (in random directions, no less). Less fudging is better.

Going from DRG data, you're looking at about .245 points of damage per normalized damage added per point of strength (flat average over tested range). For MNK, it's 0.227. Both are in a similar STR range (290-390), so there should be no difference there if strength scales in ranges. 0.245/0.227 = 1.079. Why this ratio? Base weapon damages are identical (44). The weapon DPS difference doesn't scale that way (1.147). If you don't normalize, you're looking at what is just the DPS difference multiplied by the previous ratio, resulting in 1.238 (also meaningless). BRD doesn't scale much differently from DRG, but MNK does. Is there another potency difference contributing to this that we don't see?

Finally, if you're looking at truly linear scaling, the bottoms are equally bizarre. The formula on the spreadsheet is also a linear formula: the entire formula reduces to 0.250432*attackpower + 18.678296. That means you're estimating that the weapon contributes 18.68 damage per attack and that everything else is attackpower-based. Same story with BRD, where the factor comes out to 17.81 weapon damage based on the formula on the spreadsheet. I don't see any particular significance to these values, nor is it apparent how they scale with weapon damage just yet. I'll do some testing next weekend on that.

Regarding BRD's autoattack potency, it seems likely that autoattacks do not benefit from the increased action damage bonus that weaponskills get. The similarity of the approximated damage formula (0.25 * attackpower + weapondamagefactor) would support this. Thus, an autoattack that actually delivers 100 potency would look like one that delivers 83 potency. Not saying that the autoattack is any particular potency, just that you shouldn't forget other bonuses.

• Doctor Mog likes this