[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
For, a Superman homage though I was thinking either Fire Melee or Nrgy melee.
[/ QUOTE ]
Just
On the one hand, with the BS level amounts of S/L resistance the devs gave every two bit mob in this game, I can see exactly why a statement like this gets made.
The fact it got made in the first place, and the reasons why should be a red flag to the developers if they knew what they were doing.
.
[/ QUOTE ]
While I'm not so sure about Fire Melee I think that Energy Melee is a perfectly acceptable choice for an homage to Superman. It wouldn't work for a Superman clone but for an homage Invy/EM works just fine.
"I am a Tank. I am your first choice, I am your last hope." -- Rune Bull
"Durability is the quintessential super-power. " -- Sailboat
For the love of Zod, please refrain from feeding the EFFING TROLL.
[ QUOTE ]
So, that ends up being a net DPS of ~40.79. That'd take roughly 11.5 minutes to kill an AV. Of course, that's impossible using small reds, since you'd only have room for 5 minutes worth. So, over the course of 5 minutes, my calculations say I could bring an AV down to roughly 57% health.
Since these calculations are for a lvl50 non resisting AV, I chose Romulus (no resistance at all).
Results (lots of screenshots for the interim)
Screenshot 1 - Start of the test
Screenshot 2
Screenshot 3
Screenshot 4
Screenshot 5
Screenshot 6
Screenshot 7
Screenshot 8
Screenshot 9
Screenshot 10 - End of the test
I don't think I'd consider my understanding of the formula in practical applications to be suspect.
[/ QUOTE ]
That is simply beautiful.
[ QUOTE ]
For the love of Zod, please refrain from feeding the EFFING TROLL.
[/ QUOTE ]
You're right. But I don't believe in Zod. I use him to slot my rune words yo 
.
Ok, because it's friday and I have a little feed...
Whether or not the decrease of scrapper/brute survivability is a viable arguement in order to distinguish a tanker's role in this game is not one I want to address. Oh god did I just say nurf scrappers/brutes so tanks can be teh awesomesauce? But in essence this is half of what your statement implies.
[ QUOTE ]
The developers don't want Tankers "taking down" anyone.
[/ QUOTE ]
Fortunately for tankers that want to take down some bad guys, it doesn't matter what the developers want. It only matters what the sets are capable of achieving.
"That's because Werner can't do maths." - BunnyAnomaly
"Four hours in, and I was no longer making mistakes, no longer detoggling. I was a machine." - Werner
Videos of Other Stupid Scrapper Tricks
Which is what I'm looking for here. Which tanks are good for dps soloing.
I'm trying my hand with SD/Dark so we'll see what happens. (though I secretly want to try SD/Mace to see if I can or if it is even viable)
Oh, and even though I'm not a numbers guy, I enjoy seeing this back and forth, and the number crunching. It gives the tanker community a chance to see if we are able to accomplish some of the things solo that other sets are able to do. So please, keep crunching.
[ QUOTE ]
Oh god did I just say nurf scrappers/brutes so tanks can be teh awesomesauce? But in essence this is half of what your statement implies.
[/ QUOTE ]
What would that accomplish?
It wouldn't make Tankers more fun to play, and it wouldn't make Scrappers or Brutes happier.
The issue isn't that Scrappers and Brutes can obtain more survivability. Every AT can fairly easily. The issue is that the AT with the most survivability already can't obtain a comparable increase in damage as easily. In a game where more survivability is easy to get, and more damage is much harder to get, an AT with medium damage and high survivability is at a disadvantage to ATs with high damage and medium survivability. That is simply how the system works. Nerfing those two latter ATs wont change that.
That being said, that doesn't change the status quo from being unfair to Tankers. Everyone being tougher diminishes their primary role on teams and they see less return for building to cover their weak area.
I say the remedy to this dispairity is giving them better damage out of the box and expanding on their secondary role as damage dealers. Scrappers and Brutes really shouldn't complain because the alternative would be nerfs to their survivability.
That assumes the devs want to fix the dispairity. They likely don't care either way.
.
[ QUOTE ]
I'm saying MIDs is averaging the damage wrong. This is what its doing:
FinalDamage = BaseDamage + (TotalDotDamage * 0.8)
That is incorrect, because the dot isn't 80% chance for all of it, it's 80% per tick. It could stop after 3 ticks, or 2, or 1. In other words, it's giving you inflated damage numbers. As mentioned above, the proper way to do it is:
FinalDamage = BaseDamage + (TotalDotDamage * (0.8^NumTicks))
[/ QUOTE ]
If each DoT has an 80% chance, and the first failure cancels the rest, wouldn't it look like this?
BaseDamage + DotDamage*0.8 + DotDamage*0.8^2 + ... + DotDamage*0.8^NumTicks
That's more than your:
BaseDamage + NumTicks * DotDamage * 0.8^NumTicks
And less than Mids':
BaseDamage + NumTicks * DotDamage * 0.8
Also, is that how all Fire DoTs work? I want to make sure I'm doing this right, and I haven't fiddled much with Fire in the past.
"That's because Werner can't do maths." - BunnyAnomaly
"Four hours in, and I was no longer making mistakes, no longer detoggling. I was a machine." - Werner
Videos of Other Stupid Scrapper Tricks
For my recent FM calcs, I used the (0.8 * total dot damage) + (regular damage) method.
[ QUOTE ]
Also, is that how all Fire DoTs work? I want to make sure I'm doing this right, and I haven't fiddled much with Fire in the past.
[/ QUOTE ]
There are a few DoTs in the game that have a Cancel On Miss trait. Fire and Toxic DoTs fall on that category.
This off course only applies to DoTs without 100% chance to happen. Katana's Bleeding DoTs are "safe and sure."
[ QUOTE ]
If each DoT has an 80% chance, and the first failure cancels the rest, wouldn't it look like this?
BaseDamage + DotDamage*0.8 + DotDamage*0.8^2 + ... + DotDamage*0.8^NumTicks
[/ QUOTE ]
My algebra sort of sucks, I would go the long way and prepare a lookup table for this... where is Arcanaville when you need her? I know there is a quick way to calculate this, not sure if Sarrate's is the right one but due to current brain deadness I am willing to incline that way.
[ QUOTE ]
For my recent FM calcs, I used the (0.8 * total dot damage) + (regular damage) method.
[/ QUOTE ]
That will drastically overstate the impact of the DoTs. I would suggest to use Sarrate's formula.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If each DoT has an 80% chance, and the first failure cancels the rest, wouldn't it look like this?
BaseDamage + DotDamage*0.8 + DotDamage*0.8^2 + ... + DotDamage*0.8^NumTicks
[/ QUOTE ]
My algebra sort of sucks, I would go the long way and prepare a lookup table for this... where is Arcanaville when you need her? I know there is a quick way to calculate this, not sure if Sarrate's is the right one but due to current brain deadness I am willing to incline that way.
[/ QUOTE ]
Probability is something I tend to fumble with, so Werner's method may be the correct one. Intuitively it makes more sense to me, too.
<font class="small">Code:[/color]<hr /><pre>My method:
# ticks mult mult*TotalDot
3 ticks 0.512 6.8352 (Scorch)
4 ticks 0.4096 7.29088 (Fire Sword)
5 ticks 0.32768 14.58176 (GFS)
Werner's method*:
# ticks mult mult*DotTick
3 ticks 1.952 8.6864 (Scorch)
4 ticks 2.3616 10.50912 (Fire Sword)
5 ticks 2.68928 23.934592 (GFS)
MID's method (wrong):
#ticks 0.8*TotalDot
3 ticks 10.68 (Scorch)
4 ticks 14.24 (Fire Sword)
5 ticks 35.6 (GFS)</pre><hr />
Second opinion?
* Note, I modified Werner's from this:
BaseDamage + DotDamage*0.8 + DotDamage*0.8^2 + ... + DotDamage*0.8^NumTicks
To This:
BaseDamage + DotDamage*(0.8 + 0.8^2 + ... + 0.8^n)
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If each DoT has an 80% chance, and the first failure cancels the rest, wouldn't it look like this?
BaseDamage + DotDamage*0.8 + DotDamage*0.8^2 + ... + DotDamage*0.8^NumTicks
[/ QUOTE ]
My algebra sort of sucks, I would go the long way and prepare a lookup table for this... where is Arcanaville when you need her? I know there is a quick way to calculate this, not sure if Sarrate's is the right one but due to current brain deadness I am willing to incline that way.
[/ QUOTE ]
I've got this almost worked out using the formula for a geometric series, but I need to run. Be back later with the final answer.
"That's because Werner can't do maths." - BunnyAnomaly
"Four hours in, and I was no longer making mistakes, no longer detoggling. I was a machine." - Werner
Videos of Other Stupid Scrapper Tricks
[ QUOTE ]
I've got this almost worked out using the formula for a geometric series, but I need to run. Be back later with the final answer.
[/ QUOTE ]
If you have a hit chance of H over N ticks of dot damage then your dot will land an average of:
(1 - H ^ (N+1)) / (1 - H) - 1
times. For example with H=.8 and N = 8 you'd hit an average of (1-.8^9) / (1 - .8) - 1 = 3.329 times.
For a base damage of D1 and a dot damage of D2 the total formula would be:
Total Damage = D1 + D2 * (1-(H^(N+1)) / (1-H) - 1)
If that helps. :-)
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I've got this almost worked out using the formula for a geometric series, but I need to run. Be back later with the final answer.
[/ QUOTE ]
If you have a hit chance of H over N ticks of dot damage then your dot will land an average of:
(1 - H ^ (N+1)) / (1 - H) - 1
times. For example with H=.8 and N = 8 you'd hit an average of (1-.8^9) / (1 - .8) - 1 = 3.329 times.
For a base damage of D1 and a dot damage of D2 the total formula would be:
Total Damage = D1 + D2 * (1-(H^(N+1)) / (1-H) - 1)
If that helps. :-)
[/ QUOTE ]
It would have been helpful if I hadn't already looked up the formula. Actually, it's helpful anyway, since you've basically double-checked what I was thinking, which I was otherwise going to have to ask for. 
Here's what I was working on...
OK, I'll back up a little further. Let's say you only have 2 ticks of the DoT. The first one has an 80% chance of hitting, and a 20% chance of failure. Only if it hits do you even get to roll for the second one. So there's only an 80% chance of an 80% chance of hitting with the second one. This pattern continues if there are more ticks. Written out differently, the pattern is this:
AverageDamage
= BaseDamage + 80% * (DotDamage + 80% * (DotDamage + ... ))
= BaseDamage + 80% * DotDamage + 80% * 80% * DotDamage + ...
= BaseDamage + 80% * DotDamage + 80%^2 * DotDamage + ...
= BaseDamage + DotDamage * (80%^1 + 80%^2 + ... + 80%^NumTicks)
= BaseDamage + DotDamage * (0.8^1 + 0.8^2 + ... + 0.8^NumTicks)
Further simplification requires the formula for the series. Let's see, it's just a simple power series, except for the fact that it isn't infinite, but only has N terms. Hmmm, looks like that makes it a geometric series. Ah, here we are:
sum from k = 0 to n of r^k = (1 r^(n+1))/(1-r)
So...
= BaseDamage + DotDamage * (sum from k = 1 to NumTicks of 0.8^k)
Since 0.8^0 = 1
= BaseDamage + DotDamage * ((sum from k = 0 to NumTicks of 0.8^k ) - 1)
= BaseDamage + DotDamage * (((1-0.8^(NumTicks+1))/(1-0.8))-1)
= BaseDamage + DotDamage * (((1-0.8^(NumTicks+1))/0.2)-1)
= BaseDamage + DotDamage * ((1/0.2 0.8^(NumTicks+1)/0.2)-1)
= BaseDamage + DotDamage * ((5 0.8^(NumTicks+1)/0.2)-1)
= BaseDamage + DotDamage * (5 0.8^(NumTicks+1)/0.2 - 1)
= BaseDamage + DotDamage * (4 0.8^(NumTicks+1)/0.2)
= BaseDamage + DotDamage * (4 5 * 0.8^(NumTicks + 1))
= BaseDamage + DotDamage * (4 5 * 0.8 * 0.8^NumTicks)
= BaseDamage + DotDamage * (4 4 * 0.8^NumTicks)
= BaseDamage + DotDamage * 4 * (1 0.8^NumTicks)
Now, for the example with two ticks, we have 80% chance of the first tick and 64% chance of the second tick, so to formula above should give us BaseDamage + DotDamage * 1.44.
AverageDamage
= BaseDamage + DotDamage * 4 * (1-0.8^2)
= BaseDamage + DotDamage * 4 * (1-0.64)
= BaseDamage + DotDamage * 4 * 0.36
= BaseDamage + DotDamage * 1.44
And for your example:
Average Damage
= BaseDamage + DotDamage * 4 * (1-0.8^8)
= BaseDamage + DotDamage * 4 * (1-.16777216)
= BaseDamage + DotDamage * 4 * 0.83222784
= BaseDamage + DotDamage * 3.32891136
So it looks like it checks out.
"That's because Werner can't do maths." - BunnyAnomaly
"Four hours in, and I was no longer making mistakes, no longer detoggling. I was a machine." - Werner
Videos of Other Stupid Scrapper Tricks
[QR]
Yep, that's the correct formula. Actually, Kosmos (if memory serves) posted the correct closed form formula for the finite power series summation a while back in one of the dominator threads: its basically p/(1-p) * (1-p^n) which basically agrees with your expression. Its been so long since I've had to handle finite series summation that frankly I'd forgotten how to derive this one directly.
[Guide to Defense] [Scrapper Secondaries Comparison] [Archetype Popularity Analysis]
In one little corner of the universe, there's nothing more irritating than a misfile...
(Please support the best webcomic about a cosmic universal realignment by impaired angelic interference resulting in identity crisis angst. Or I release the pigmy water thieves.)
[/ QUOTE ] First big question - what is your budget? Top end DPS typically happens at very high levels of recharge, and very high levels of recharge are very expensive. Even if I show, say, that Super Strength does significantly better DPS, it won't matter to you if it only does so at +287% recharge, and you don't have or don't want to spend the influence to get there.
[/ QUOTE ]
Thanks for reading my post 
Ok, I don't care about money, but for the sake of argument and if you don't mind, give me a Balls to the Wall build, and a more achievable priced build (not cheap or economy, but a still very Nice build just not over a billion nice.)
Also, can I get some numbers (DPS) for both SS and Energy, please for those builds? If you don't have the time or are tired of doing the math for this multi-level thread, I completly understand. I suck at math or else I'd do it myself. So, if anyone wants to throw me some help I'd be much appreciative, thanks in advance all.
[ QUOTE ]
Thanks for reading my post Ok, I don't care about money, but for the sake of argument and if you don't mind, give me a Balls to the Wall build, and a more achievable priced build (not cheap or economy, but a still very Nice build just not over a billion nice.)
[/ QUOTE ]
One of the main questions I'd ask is what sets/ancillary pools have the best DPS.
Fire melee, Dark Melee, War Mace and Stone Melee seem like the current contenders - what's the max attack chain possible with those (++ ancils)?
Keep in mind a dark, ice, or fire secondary* adds more damage.
Ed: * - primary. Too used to scrappers.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
First big question - what is your budget? Top end DPS typically happens at very high levels of recharge, and very high levels of recharge are very expensive. Even if I show, say, that Super Strength does significantly better DPS, it won't matter to you if it only does so at +287% recharge, and you don't have or don't want to spend the influence to get there.
[/ QUOTE ]
Thanks for reading my post Ok, I don't care about money, but for the sake of argument and if you don't mind, give me a Balls to the Wall build, and a more achievable priced build (not cheap or economy, but a still very Nice build just not over a billion nice.)
[/ QUOTE ]
I'm fiddling with Super Strength first since it seems to me to be the most Superman like (and also because I have an Invulnerability/Super Strength tanker of my own). Looks like the key to DPS is getting Knockout Blow and Haymaker as often as possible, so you'll want high recharge for those two. Fire looks like the most promising Epic with Fire Blast close behind Haymaker on DPS, and Melt Armor as a possible DPS buff.
Looks like a good DPS chain is Knockout Blow -> Haymaker -> Fire Blast -> Punch -> Haymaker -> Fire Blast at +222% recharge in Knockout Blow. I can actually do about 5% better with Ice Blast and then Chillblain replacing Punch, both for DPS and for secondary effects, but I assume you don't want Ice anything since you didn't want the Ice Melee secondary.
Any Super Strength experts want to tell me if there's a better single-target chain out there?
Now, confirming how Rage works, let's say I have it recharging so that I can activate it every 70 seconds. Every 70 seconds, I'm also going to deal with a rage crash and 10 seconds of the attacks doing so little damage that you might as well just stand there, correct? And then Melt Armor doesn't do any damage anyway, we should be using it near the end of the crash. It lasts 40 seconds, so isn't in tune with an achievable Rage cycle, but we could delay it. Hit Melt Armor and Rage, chain six times, Rage crash, Hit Melt Armor and Rage, chain six times, Rage crash, and so on. Might or might not be the best use of Melt Armor. At +222% recharge, we'll also need to have Hasten in the mix, which is going to be on its own strange cycle.
I'm still on very rough approximations, but I'm guessing this is going to come out around 150 DPS when all is said and done. That's pylon soloing territory if so (though terribly slowly), as well as most AVs.
It's going to be crazy expensive if I can work out an example build, so I guess it'll be the balls to the wall build. I'm also no tanker expert, so if I screw up the tankiness of it, my apologies, and hopefully it will at least make a starting point. And if not that, well, we can at least discuss theoretical high end DPS with it.
(Edit: Looks like I'll want to go with Boxing instead of Punch. Slightly lower DPS and slightly higher recharge, but saves a power pick.)
"That's because Werner can't do maths." - BunnyAnomaly
"Four hours in, and I was no longer making mistakes, no longer detoggling. I was a machine." - Werner
Videos of Other Stupid Scrapper Tricks
That's what most people do, trade out Boxing for Punch for that exact reason. I have a Brute SS/Fire Balls to the wall build and toon. I can post it if you like, maybe it will give you ideas. I'm curious as to what EM would look like too. I was thinking the Eye Beams for the APP, but Ice could possible work as well (i.e. Super Breath), to bad that Ice Breath isn't an APP that you can choose.
yeah post your build..yeah...yeah..ah..
[ QUOTE ]
I was thinking the Eye Beams for the APP, but Ice could possible work as well (i.e. Super Breath), to bad that Ice Breath isn't an APP that you can choose.
[/ QUOTE ]
With proper power customization you could do it with Shiver or Chillblain in the Ice APP.
But I doubt customization is going to be done properly.
Eye Beams are overrated. They don't do a heck of a lot of damage and the -def is pointless if you're already Inv. If they had a -res debuff instead, might be another story. And no, the -res Achilles proc isn't worth it.
.
Ok...How do ya'll pull up those nifty AV combat attributes?
[ QUOTE ]
You're right Johnny. By the same token, I want my defenders to outdamage corruptors and blasters while retaining their support capabilities.
[/ QUOTE ]
You mean like how Scrappers and Brutes can obtain enough survivability to stand up to AVs and Hazard sized spawns and retain their damage capabilities to be able to solo them?
Yet the reverse of that for Tankers would be somehow "unbalanced"?
Sorry, I forgot there was a developer bias for a second there.
.