So where does defensive equipment factor into all this? Is that part of Damage Absorption, or something else? - The Wrassedragon 19:11, 28 May 2006 (CDT)
I believe that the ranged weapon damage uses moxie in some way. I do know that when I buff my moxie above my muscle, ranged weapons seem to do more damage than melee.--Stik guy 15:11, 18 June 2006 (CDT)
That's right, ranged weapons use MOXIE, not muscle. --¨¨¨¨
Ranged weapons use Moxie to determine whether you HIT, but still use Muscle to determine damage done. Armor Power and Damage Absorbtion are suspected to have the same net effect, but aren't properly accounted for in this calculation. See Damage Absorption and its associated talk page for more information. I'm somewhat opposed to "Power" being redirected here, as this focuses on Weapon Power, and not properly accounting for Armor Power. Maybe a seperate "Power" page should be created? --Iason 17:06, 4 July 2006 (CDT)
So Monster damage has nothing to do with the players armor? I find that hard to believe...--Kenshin8671 12:24, 1 October 2006 (CDT)
The power of your hat and pants definitely have something to do about it:
|58||100||70||0||Booze Giant||Skin of the Leatherback||23,24,23,24,22,24|
|58||0||0||0||Booze Giant||Skin of the Leatherback||36,37,37,36|
|58||0||0||5||Booze Giant||Skin of the Leatherback||40,41,42|
|58||100||70||5||Booze Giant||Skin of the Leatherback||26,28,28,26,28,28|
|58||100||70||10||Booze Giant||Skin of the Leatherback||32,32,30,32|
|58||0||0||10||Booze Giant||Skin of the Leatherback||41,39,44,43,42|
- The hat and pants differences are exactly accounted for by DA, using Crawly's sqrt()-based DA formula. The Leatherback reduction seems to be DR based on level; see the HCO leatherback spading for the partial attempts to unravel that mystery.--DirkDiggler 20:43, 2 November 2006 (CST)
- Soo, I see "Monster Attack", "Player Moxie", and "Monster XP"...where's the DA? Also the DA equation only has "absoption" as a variable; where do I plug in my defensive equipment power values if I were to theoretically calculate damage done to me?--Dehstil (t|c) 16:20, 3 November 2006 (CST)
- The raw damage is as given on this page, as
rawdamage = (diff + 1*XP) to (diff + 1.25*XP),
diff = monsterattack - moxie
or for Heroes of the Half-Shell with a shield and more muscle than moxie:
diff = monsterattack - muscle.
Then damage is reduced by Damage Reduction -- just add up the DR of your shields, bottlecap, wakizashi, Brawnee's and Leatherback, and deduct that amount from the damage.
dr = (sum of all DR's)
Next, apply a discount for Damage Absorption: add the power of your hat, shirt and pants; add hat and pants again if you have Tao; toss in any extra DA from effects (Hides, etc) or items (stainless steel suspenders, miner's pants, etc); cap at 1000, and convert to a fraction as follows:
for DA>10, dafraction = ((sqrt(this.dmgabsorb/10) - 1)/10) (Max 90% @ DA=1000) for DA<10, dafraction = 0
Finally, if the monster uses an elemental attack, take your appropriate elemental resistance (from 0-8), and make that into a fraction:
elementalfraction = (elementalresistance)/10
Then the damage you take is
damagetoplayer = (rawdamage - dr) * (1-dafraction) * (1-elementalfraction)
- Just to be clear -- the 'damage from monster' formula is well-understood (tho it may require a minor tweak), but Brawnee's and Leatherback are still fairly large mysteries. We know they have something to do with DR, but a poor idea of how much each contributes. See spading threads on Brawnee's and Leatherback for more info.--DirkDiggler 17:54, 3 November 2006 (CST)
- Ah, thank you, but one clarification: if I have 0 damage reduction, my 'dafraction' becomes -1/10, giving me more than the supposed raw damage given by the current equation on the page? So, to actually get my "raw damage", I'd need 10 damage reduction to get a 'dafraction' of 1 or did I interpret this wrong?--Dehstil (t|c) 13:15, 4 November 2006 (CST)
- Fixed -- DA of 0 through 10 is no DA at all. --DirkDiggler 13:57, 4 November 2006 (CST)
- Is there minimum for the expression "Player Muscle/n - Monster Defense" at zero?--Dehstil (t|c) 17:21, 9 November 2006 (CST)
- Yes: the "diff" component of player weapon damage is capped at zero. I added the term for offhand damage, TS/LTS, and critical damage. HOWEVER! I'm not sure how critical and LTS interact -- does a critical hit double the mainhand contribution (making it 2*(tsfactor)*power) or does a critical hit add again the mainhand contribution (making it (tsfactor+1)*power)? I lack LTS, so I can't check this -- maybe someone else can. Also, I don't know how critical hits interact with barehanded attacks.--DirkDiggler 16:43, 10 November 2006 (CST)
- Answering my own question -- if I understand the section on criticals right the formula I put up is correct. --DirkDiggler 21:28, 10 November 2006 (CST)
- On second thought, isn't it more likely that the whole melee damage portion's minimum is at one, instead of just that one diff portion at zero?--Dehstil (t|c) 23:42, 10 November 2006 (CST)
- There's some confusion actually about where the "/rangeadj" part of the character action formula goes -- whether it's under 'muscle' or under awesomeness (muscle-def). The equation as written was wrong for moxie attacks, but we'll need to do some checking that it's as I just rewrote it. In any case, don't go bettin' the bank on exactly how much awesomeness damage your disco banjo will do...--DirkDiggler 23:53, 22 January 2007 (CST)
Monster Damage Formula?
I am a level 10 Turtle Tamer with 31 Moxie (Furry Outfit) and was adventuring with at the Orcish Frat House (~ML 40). My total ML increase is +5 and I have no damage reducing abilities or buffs. I've been getting hit for 12-14 damage, usually, which does not seem to follow the Monster Damage formula provided on this page, even when including the +5 ML. By the following formula: ((Diff + 20 to 25% of MAtk - DR) * (1-AbsorbFrac) * (1-ElementalFrac) where Diff = (40+5) - 31 = 45 - 31 = 14 (as that's the minimum), DR = 0, MAtk = 40 + 5 = 45, AbsorbFrac = 0, and ElementalFrac = 0.
When substituted: (14 + .225 * 45 - 0) * 1 * 1 = 24.125.
How does it get from approximately 24 damage to a consistent 12-14? --Ilikerps 05:21, 8 April 2007 (CDT)
Unarmed Damage vs. Armed Damage
I haven't kept track of these data perfectly, but when adventuring in a number of locations I've noticed that fighting with Fingers/Fists/Forehead/Feet of Fury produces WAY WAY less damage than even the simplest weapons (e.g. Seal-Clubbing Club). I'm talking like doing 5-30 damage points versus 100-150 damage points. I suspect there's a modifier missing from this formula, e.g. a cap on weaponless damage? --Mis2027 15:17, 14 June 2007 (CDT)
Is it possible that the "0 or 1" comes from rounding down, while the game rounds up, or something like that? --PsyMar 13:58, 17 August 2007 (CDT)
Does anyone know if the off-hand damage modifier listed for dual wielding still applies when using a two-handed weapon so as to cause it to do a higher base damage? Does 10% to 20% of Weapon Power and + 10% to 20% of Offhand Weapon Power = 20% to 40% for base damage? Does a two-handed weapon do more damage than a 1-handed weapon of equal power?
According to the formula it should but no one has made any mention of it. --Xclockwatcher 10:36, 7 September 2007 (CDT)
- No, and to be honest I wouldn't say that the formula even implies that. :) --Starwed 02:11, 27 November 2007 (CST)
According to the formula, Diff is equal to min(Monster Attack - Player Moxie,0). This seems incorrect, as that means my player with a 300 moxie fighting an erudite gremlin should have a difference of -132. Should this be max(Monster Attack - Player Moxie,0)? --Foggy 12:04, 27 September 2007 (CDT)
- What's on the page is perhaps phrased unclearly; what you're quoting above does not match what's on the article: "Diff = (Monster Attack - Player Moxie), minimum 0" says "the difference, with a lower cap of zero," at least to me. Your max(...) formulation is certainly less prone to misinterpretation. --Bagatelle 17:35, 27 September 2007 (CDT)
I noticed this while spading something else out: using the Wand of Nagamar in my offhand, I saw it do 3-7 damage. Since the wand is power 30, the current formula predicts it adding 3-6 damage. So perhaps the rather arbitrary +0-1 actually applies to each weapon's damage?
I guess another point of interest is whether TS and LTS multiply that +0-1. That would indicate whether it should just be included in the weapon damage formula. --Starwed 02:09, 27 November 2007 (CST)
I'm also not seeing criticals multiply the off-hand weapon damage. It's always in the same range, and I've seen minimum damage when a crit is scored. --Starwed 02:25, 27 November 2007 (CST)
After some more testing, I'm pretty sure that:
- The +0-1 is treated as weapon damage, and applied seperately to each weapon.
- It is multiplied by both crits and LTS.
- Offhand damage is not multiplied by crits.
To test this, I equipped a bar whip, used gremlin juice, and fought monsters with defense quite a bit higher than my muscle. The result was that:
- On normal hits, I saw damage (1,2,3).
- On critical hits, I saw damage (2,4,6).
- On LTSs, I saw damage (3,6,9).
- On LTSs which were crits, I saw damage (6,12,18).
Calculating the base damage from normal and crits, I saw a distribution of 30 1s, 60 2s, and 26 3s. This is exactly what you would expect if the base damage is being calculated as 1d2 + (1d2-1).
Equipping a second bar whip made no difference to the regular damage, and added an additional 1-3 regardless of the type of attack I made, with the same type of distribution.
I'm going to edit the damage formula accordingly. --Starwed 03:46, 27 November 2007 (CST)
Sooner or later I'm going to make some minor adjustments in this same vein, based on scripted (and therefore especially repeatable) observations I've made. I don't expect to find anything major enough to put link to the spading thread on the actual weapon damage page though. Nworbetan 00:22, 8 June 2012 (CEST)
+% weapon damage?
someone needs to spade how exactly +% weapon damage works, and given that we have a phycho sweater to give non weapon base +% weapon damage....--Brion thenotgiant 21:05, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
- Copy pasting from the sweater, since it probably belongs here more. On Lakal, with buffed muscle of 5049, and two bar whips [10 power] equipped, he did 5045 (+3) without the sweater to a fluffy bunny. With the same stats, and weapons, but with the shirt equipped, he did 6054 (+3). It increases total damage with a weapon [does not work with moxious manuever], it needs further testing to see if it affects elemental damages and offhand too. Also would be good to see if it affects damage after or before the application of resistances and defenses. --Val 21:58, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
Got a hobo stoogie and with a muscle of 428 buffed and the +damage TT buff, i got 372crit? 296 276 296 302 280 264 362crit, spooky bindle didn't multiply with the damage, I only got 50 damage because I was fighting sleazy hobos. I had 11 MCD and ur-kel's on. Unfortuntely, sleaze zone is know done, but the crit infomation is useful. --Brion thenotgiant 18:45, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
% Weapon Bonus
Okay, this was relatively easy to determie. Some basic notes:
- I used two muscle class characters, one of whom was a Seal Clubber with Eye of Stoat; the other was a Turtle Tamer.
- I used the ganger bandana to give myself a 15% Weapon Bonus. (This also gives a muscle bonus, whiech was accounted for in my calculations)
- I tried the following configurations:
- Barehanded, no modifiers
- Weak weapon (bar whip), moderate weapon (bokuto), ranged weapon (disco ball)
- Absolute Weapon Bonus (Deadly flashing blade, cyborg stompon' boots)
- Elemental Damage Bonus (fake blood)
- Off-hand weapon (antique spear, Seal Clubber only)
- Ranged weapon bonus (sweet and yellow)
Monsters engaged were the fluffy bunny (ML 1) and Wormwood monsters (ML 125), as neither have any variance in their ML Damage was computed based on the existing formula to see if the +15% was reflected in that total. It did not affect antique spear (off-hand damage was observed doing +20 damage...any bonus to that would have raised the lower limit) nor the fake blood bonus (at +50, a 15% increase should have yielded 57-58 damage instead).
I've added the pctbonus multiplier in, which necessitated rearranging the elements of the damage formula. But it does make it a little more confusing, and I wonder what others think of radically redoing the format to better reflect what is happening in the equation?--Foggy 18:09, 20 September 2009 (UTC)