Damage Calculation

[ferg]

Done a few runs at 8.7 defense always 343

26 runs
Atk 595, average damage 54, min 52, max 54, variance ±2.
5% variance 2.7 so seems OK.
Exact numbers average 54.04

82 runs
Atk 761, average damage 72, min 69, max 75, variance ±3.
5% variance 3.6, seems OK
Exact numbers, average damage 72.22 variance + 2.8 / - 3.2

108 runs
Atk 885, average damage 86, min 82, max 90, variance ±4.
5% variance 4.28 seems OK.
Exact numbers, average damage 85.79, variance +4.21 / - 3.79

I’m not sure if that’s what you really want, if not just say what should be different, I’m not always doing 8.7 and I don’t always have the time to record it, but if I have I can probably try other combinations in the future.

Some other funny information, probably not useful for damage calculation, but with 108 stones I had a single crit hit from the 2% class talent. So I would say taking the crit node there is pretty much useless…

[u2371]

@Zack

Maybe we can use the bosses of S1 8-7 with their fixed 343DEF for another highly accurate damage curve that we then use to tune our Z-U formula? Any volunteers?

These are summary of data against 744 def at low ADR (ADR<k). This will be helpful for 343 def test.

Average Dmg	Minimum Atk/Def
5	0.188172043
6	0.22983871
7	0.271505376
8	0.314516129
9	0.345430108
10	0.385752688
11	0.428763441
12	0.471774194
13	0.514784946
14	0.557795699
15	0.586021505
16	0.629032258
17	0.672043011
18	0.715053763
19	0.758064516
20	0.786290323
21	0.829301075
22	0.872311828
23	0.915322581

“Minimum Atk/Def” mean minimum Atk/Def that you need to get that Average Damage.

I also collect data for my new project call “Order of Action” (each action in each turn step by step). So, I don’t have enough time to test this.

[Zack]

@Sam-I-Am

ok.if it doesn’t matter what the Attack values are, what i have available to test ranges from 988 (Kadilen +17 + 25% ninja troop) to 267 (Brienne 1/1 + 4% 1* troop).

All data is welcome.
It might be hard for Aife, but her efforts will be fully appreciated

@u2371

Not me. I still try to catch S3 and S4 stage and usually fill my monster chest at 7-4 instead. And Ninja Tower make me tired to play any map stage

Same here, although I’m finished with S3. Oh right, I have to do Oni tower now…

@UroSecondo

So, trying to understund if I did it in a good way. Out of curiosity I’ve recorded stage 8.7 for ten times.

maxed purple Prisca, ATT 491. 64 tiles with no buff or combos involved, simple 3-matches.
Average damage: 42 (42.1 rounded down) with a variance of 2.038.
5% of 42 is 2. Then if my tiles dataset has min (40) and max (edit: 44) I can safely write that

343DEF/491ATK/42/2 ?

Yes. thank you, that is correct.
343DEF/491ASTK/42/2 it is then.

When you get the first damage data for a new ATK value, you can check the 5% (rounded down, but minimum 1) and get a very good impression on the variance that you will find with more data.
For example, you get 47 damage. The 5% give you a variance of ±2. As soon as you get enough data that fits with this range, e.g. 44-48 (=> [44+48]/2=46 as average value), you are finished and can record: “343DEF/XYZATK/46/2”

@Sam-I-Am

as luck would have it i have to fill a nature chest today, so i won’t be back in 8-7 until tomorrow…

No worries. It also takes quite some time for me for this data collection (I’m even recording videos for my battles against my alliance member). This is a tedious task, it takes a lot of time to record and analyse and when it’s very stressful at work, it becomes hard to motivate myself for this…

@ferg

26 runs
Atk 595, average damage 54, min 52, max 54, variance ±2.
5% variance 2.7 so seems OK.
Exact numbers average 54.04

Thank you for the data.
Is the “max 54” correct, or should it be “56”?

@ferg

82 runs
Atk 761, average damage 72, min 69, max 75, variance ±3.
5% variance 3.6, seems OK
Exact numbers, average damage 72.22 variance + 2.8 / - 3.2

@u2371 and I are taking the easy route here and use the average value of the complete damage range as the “average damage”.
For this data point we take 72 as the average damage and ±3 for the variance. For convenience we put all of this in one line:
343DEF/76ATK/72/3

@ferg

I’m not sure if that’s what you really want, if not just say what should be different, I’m not always doing 8.7 and I don’t always have the time to record it, but if I have I can probably try other combinations in the future.

That would great as this data collection goes much faster (and easier) if several players help. It will still take a while.
As a side effect of more players helping with the data collection, the resulting, fine-tuned formula will have been tested much more than just by 1-2 players and is more robust/trustworthy/what-is-the-correct-word?.

@ferg

Some other funny information, probably not useful for damage calculation, but with 108 stones I had a single crit hit from the 2% class talent. So I would say taking the crit node there is pretty much useless…

Haha, yeah, 2% is really low. I think this makes more sense when this hero also has a crit troop, but minions will profit even from the 2%

@u2371

I also collect data for my new project call “Order of Action” (each action in each turn step by step). So, I don’t have enough time to test this.

Something that will look like the following (purely hypothetical) sequence?

1. attacker specials
2. tile attack
3. minion attack
4. DoT
5. fiend attack
6. equalizer
7. defender specials from left to right
   … and so on

[ferg]

@Zack

Is the “max 54” correct, or should it be “56”?

Should be 56

@Zack

average value of the complete damage range as the “average damage”

OK, so you don’t need a “real” average, just the middle of the damage range? That makes it a lot easier to collect if I just have to look for the maximum and minimum damage.

[u2371]

@Zack

Something that will look like the following (purely hypothetical) sequence?

1. attacker specials
2. tile attack
3. minion attack
4. DoT
5. fiend attack
6. equalizer
7. defender specials from left to right
   … and so on

Yes, for now it look like this

Summary - Order of Action

Turn Start

• (?) Raid overtime damage increase

• (?) Fighter Talent active and revive from Buff on your heroes (E.g. Tyr, Atomos)

• Druid, Paladin Talent on your heroes (Druid summon minion, Paladin get buff)

• S4’s Biome Effect & Aether Quest’s Buff Effect

• Your Turn

  • Auto “Special Skill-like” effect (E.g. Mindness Attack, Baldur’s buff, Stonecleave buff) and Spell Slayer (E.g. Hansel’s ailment) on your heroes. (Multiple Check ?)
  • “The battle end here”
  • Special Skill & Battle Item (Multiple Check)
  • Gem Match & Cascade
  • Minion & Fiend (on your heroes) attack
  • Buff and Ailment on your heroes (E.g. Heal over Turn, Damage over Turn) and (?) second Spell Slayer active
  • (?) Counter turn of any status effect that cast by enemy reduce by 1 (Buff on enemy and Ailment on your heroes)
  • Your S4 Gem attack.
  • (?) Starfall Family effect (on your heroes)

• (?) Sorceror Talent from your heroes active

• Fighter Talent active and revive from Buff on Enemy (E.g. Tyr, Atomos)

• Druid, Paladin Talent on Enemy active (Druid summon minion, Paladin get buff)

• War Effect active (Undead Horde, Atteck Boost, Arrow Barrage, War Equaliser)

• Enemy (defense team) Turn

  • Auto “Special Skill-like” effect (E.g. Mindness Attack, Baldur’s buff, Stonecleave buff) and Spell Slayer (E.g. Hansel’s ailment) on Enemy. (Multiple Check ?)
  • Special Skill (Multiple Check)
  • Slash Attack
  • Mana Regen each turn
  • Minion & Fiend (on enemy) attack
  • Buff and Ailment on enemy (E.g. Heal over Turn, Damage over Turn) and second Spell Slayer active
  • (?) Counter turn of any status effect that cast by your heroes reduce by 1 (Buff on your heroes and Ailment enemy)
  • Enemy S4 Gem attack.
  • (?) Starfall Family effect (on enemy)
  • (?) Sorceror Talent from enemy active

• S2’s Poison Mist and Underwater Effect & Ninja Tower’s Toxic Vapor and some Blessing Effect

Turn End

The problem for now is there are still some pair that I don’t know the exact position because they are hard to test and I don’t have enough time too add detail since this will be my first “player guide” topic.

[Zack]

update on the bosses of S1 8-7 with their 343DEF:
Z-U formula now with the following updated parameters (until further improvement):
a = 25
b = 0.0392
k = 0.93
c = 0.0116 (or 0.29, if c is added directly without multiplying it with a, i.e. 0.29 = 25 x 0.0116)

“avg damage” and “variance” are the actual values.

DEF	ATK	ATK/DEF	avg damage	variance	updated Z-U	Z-U variance
343	161	0,469387755102041	11	1	12	1
343	171	0,498542274052478	12	1	12	1
343	190	0,553935860058309	13	1	14	1
343	208	0,606413994169096	15	1	15	1
343	231	0,673469387755102	17	1	17	1
343	249	0,725947521865889	18	1	18	1
343	269	0,784256559766764	19	1	19	1
343	284	0,82798833819242	20	1	20	1
343	300	0,874635568513119	22	1	22	1
343	315	0,918367346938775	23	1	23	1
343	326	0,950437317784257	23	1	24	1
343	344	1,00291545189504	26	1	26	1
343	360	1,04956268221574	27	1	28	1
343	431	1,25655976676385	35	1	36	1
343	491	1,43148688046647	41	1	42	2
343	595	1,73469387755102	54	2	54	2
343	637	1,85714285714286	58	2	59	2
343	761	2,21865889212828	72	3	73	3
343	848	2,47230320699708	82	4	82	4
343	885	2,5801749271137	86	4	86	4
343	917	2,6734693877551	90	4	90	4
343	921	2,68513119533528	90	4	91	4
343	986	2,87463556851312	98	4	98	4
343	1049	3,05830903790087	105	5	105	5
343	1068	3,11370262390671	107	5	107	5
343	1301	3,7930029154519	133	6	133	6
343	1539	4,4868804664723	160	8	160	8
343	1854	5,40524781341108	195	9	195	9
343	2110	6,15160349854227	223	11	224	11
343	2722	7,93586005830904	292	14	292	14
343	2981	8,69096209912536	320	16	321	16
343	4869	14,1953352769679	533	26	533	26

Let’s take look a the diagrams. First, tile damage over ADR (attack/defense ratio) - Z-U formula is only shown for the 343DEF :

All of the collected data here has a 5% variance around the average damage. The first linear part of the damage curves for 343DEF and 744DEF aligns. As soon as the second linear part kicks in they separate and drift apart further and further.
We are very close to the actual tile damage values with our current bi-linear Z-U formula.

A different way to show the very same data uses damage over (total) attack:

@u2371 please optimize our bi-linear formula some more with this new data on 343DEF

We are assuming here that this tile damage formula works not just for raid and the S1 8-7 mission, but also for all other missions and quests. If anybody finds evidence to the contrary, please post it here, so we can check and adapt, if necessary.

[Sam-I-Am]

So, here’s some data I compiled:

Aife: 343/174/12/1 (21 attacks)
Brienne: 343/276/19/1 (21 attacks)
cHu Tao: 343/627/56.5/1.5 (15 attacks, max 59, min 55)
Kadilen: 343/989/98/2 (10 attacks)

I happened to have a few numbers for 773 and 833 that i caught on video and they line up with what you have above, but i need to collect a few more maybe. there was one attack each by Hu Tao and cCaedmon, and pretty sure both were from dragon bombs, where all the tiles hit quite a bit harder than in other attacks. is there some kind of bonus for tiles that come from a dragon bomb?

anyway, happy to keep collecting, i’m in 8/7 most days. let me know if you want any specific range for attack. and Aife was actually no problem, if she dies before or during the bosses, the green tiles still count as her attack…

[Zack]

Thanks!
I’ve added the data in my file.

@Sam-I-Am

cHu Tao: 343/627/56.5/1.5 (15 attacks, max 59, min 55)

5% of 59 is 2.95. rounded down it is 2.
5% of 55 is 2.75. rounded down it is 2.
=> that looks good as 343/627/57/2

@Sam-I-Am

Kadilen: 343/989/98/2 (10 attacks)

5% of 96 is 4.8. rounded down it is 4
5% of 100 is 5.
Our current data has the data point 343/986/98/4, so the 989ATK will give either 98±4 or 99±4.
=> we need more data for this 989ATK. Please continue gathering data for this

[Sam-I-Am]

@Zack

989ATK will give either 98±4 or 99±4.
=> we need more data for this 989ATK. Please continue gathering data for this

yes, will do. the attacks were all quite tight in range, all 97-100 with one outlier at 95. i have not seen anything above 100 yet, but the sample size is quite small. for the next couple of days i’ll just collect for this, it will be easy.

[u2371]

@Zack

please optimize our bi-linear formula some more with this new data on 343DEF

I still have no idea For now, I use table to predict extremely accurate average damage for low ADR (ADR < k). Here is a new pdate table

Average Dmg	Min Known Atk/Def	Max Known Atk/Def	Min Known Atk for 343 Def	Max Known Atk for 343 Def
5	0.188172043	0.228494624	64.543	78.374
6	0.22983871	0.27016129	78.835	92.665
7	0.271505376	0.313172043	93.126	107.418
8	0.314516129	0.344086022	107.879	118.022
9	0.345430108	0.384408602	118.483	131.852
10	0.385752688	0.427419355	132.313	146.605
11	0.428763441	0.470430108	147.066	161.358
12	0.471774194	0.51344086	161.819	176.110
13	0.514784946	0.556451613	176.571	190.863
14	0.557795699	0.584677419	191.324	200.544
15	0.586021505	0.627688172	201.005	215.297
16	0.629032258	0.670698925	215.758	230.050
17	0.672043011	0.713709677	230.511	244.802
18	0.715053763	0.75672043	245.263	259.555
19	0.758064516	0.784946237	260.016	269.237
20	0.786290323	0.827988338	269.698	284.000
21	0.829301075	0.870967742	284.450	298.742
22	0.872311828	0.913978495	299.203	313.495
23	0.915322581	N/A	313.956	N/A

The 284 Atk vs 343 Def data is the only data that improve this table. But all new data make we know that “At low ADR (ADR < k), same ADR always give exactly same average damage”

The attack that can improve this table and more than 140 are 147, 191, 201, 245, 260 and 299.

I think if we can’t make our formula give 100% correct average damage value at low ADR (ADR < k), we will not be able to improve our formula at high ADR. That is why I focus on only low ADR for now.

[Zack]

more data:
343DEF/201ATK/15/1
343DEF/245ATK/18/1
343DEF/260ATK/19/1
343DEF/299ATK/22/1

Can’t provide data on 140ATK, 147ATK and 191ATK as I have no matching set of neutral hero+troops for those.

Maybe someone has a purple troop with +12%ATK and an unleveled Silthus 1-1 and some time to help out here?

@u2371

But all new data make we know that “ At low ADR (ADR < k), same ADR always give exactly same average damage ”

Doesn’t that mean that we could get an accurate “k” when we investigate several DEF values and get data for the area at k=0.93? The moment the damage values for the same ADR deviate from each other, we are beyond “k”?

[u2371]

@Zack

more data:
343DEF/201ATK/15/1
343DEF/245ATK/18/1
343DEF/260ATK/19/1
343DEF/299ATK/22/1

Thank you. This is new update table.

Average Dmg	Min Known Atk/Def	Max Known Atk/Def	Min Known Atk for 343 Def	Max Known Atk for 343 Def
5	0.188172043	0.228494624	64.543	78.374
6	0.22983871	0.27016129	78.835	92.665
7	0.271505376	0.313172043	93.126	107.418
8	0.314516129	0.344086022	107.879	118.022
9	0.345430108	0.384408602	118.483	131.852
10	0.385752688	0.427419355	132.313	146.605
11	0.428763441	0.470430108	147.066	161.358
12	0.471774194	0.51344086	161.819	176.110
13	0.514784946	0.556451613	176.571	190.863
14	0.557795699	0.584677419	191.324	200.544
15	0.586005831	0.627688172	201.000	215.297
16	0.629032258	0.670698925	215.758	230.050
17	0.672043011	0.713709677	230.511	244.802
18	0.714285714	0.75672043	245.000	259.555
19	0.758017493	0.784946237	260.000	269.237
20	0.786290323	0.827988338	269.698	284.000
21	0.829301075	0.870967742	284.450	298.742
22	0.871720117	0.913978495	299.000	313.495
23	0.915322581	N/A	313.956	N/A

@Zack

Doesn’t that mean that we could get an accurate “k” when we investigate several DEF values and get data for the area at k=0.93? The moment the damage values for the same ADR deviate from each other, we are beyond “k”?

I think no. “k” is in between 23 and 24 average damage. Investigate at the point that change 23 to 24 average damage might able to find accurate “k” but the problem is the bonus damage may have irregular gap like “21 32 32 32 32” at low ADR. Anyway, we have to understand the “21 32 32 32 32” first if we want 100% accurate. But I still have no idea

Could you set up exactlyt 500 or 750 defense for test ?

[UroSecondo]

@Zack

Maybe someone has a purple troop with +12%ATK and an unleveled Silthus 1-1 and some time to help out here?

a quick attempt

first damage recorded is 15. 5% of 15 is 0,75 (rounded down 0, but minimum 1)
17 tiles recorded in the range from 15 to 13. then is correct saying that

343DEF/199ATK/14/1 ?

[u2371]

@Zack

Can’t provide data on 140ATK, 147ATK and 191ATK as I have no matching set of neutral hero+troops for those.

Maybe someone has a purple troop with +12%ATK and an unleveled Silthus 1-1 and some time to help out here?

I didn’t check that Silthus 1-1 (178 atk) with +12%ATK troop will have 199 atk not 191 attack.

@UroSecondo

Thank for your test @UroSecondo but sadly it doesn’t improve the table

[UroSecondo]

Well then… Gan Ju, I choose you!
(Gan Ju level 1.2, ATK 168 + 14% troops)

first damage recorded 13.
32 tiles recorded in the range from 12 to 14.

343DEF/191ATK/13/1

[Zack]

Finally got enough data for the few data points for specials from my blue mono versus my alliance member (friendly raid). Getting the complete min-max range for specials is really taking a long time…

DEF	Special ATK	ATK/DEF	avg damage	variance	current Z-U	Z-U variance
830	1199	1,44457831325301	139	6	143	7
694	1199	1,72766570605187	171	8	175	8
818	2944	3,59902200488998	475	23	474	23
694	3156	4,54755043227666	572	28	573	28
818	4191	5,12347188264059	713	35	709	35

Z-U formula still with the following parameters (until further improvement):
a = 25
b = 0.0392
k = 0.93
c = 0.0116 (or 0.29, if c is added directly without multiplying it with a, i.e. 0.29 = 25 x 0.0116)
For special damage, the calculated damage is currently multiplied with “x3 x90%”

=> Not perfect, but quite close to the actual damage.
@u2371, this data should help with finding improved parameters
=> There is not a single outlier to the 5%, so the 5% variance clearly apply to special damage, as well.

Bonus: Grimm special versus Chao (for minor damage = -50% damage): 830 DEF / 1070 ATK x 295% = 3156 ATK

DEF	Special ATK	ATK/DEF	avg damage	variance
830	3156	3,80240963855422	255,5	12,5

This looks like the variance is actually added here before the damage factors kick in, then everything is rounded down.
The numbers fit with the following sequence

1. calculation of average special damage: 511 damage
2. calculation of 5% variance: ±25
3. min damage for this is 486 and max damage is 536
4. now the -50% damage reduction for minor damage then gives: min damage = 243 and max damage = 268
   which is exactly the range that I found.
   Then again, this doesn’t fit with the minimum variance of ±1 in some cases, so there must be more to this.

data:

Vela special versus Chao: 830 DEF / 923 ATK x 130% = 1199 ATK - 67 data points - 135, 143, 144, 143, 142, 135, 135, 134, 136, 145, 138, 141, 134, 143, 140, 141, 138, 137, 141, 136, 138, 138, 142, 139, 139, 140, 139, 137, 140, 140, 139, 140, 142, 137, 145, 136, 141, 135, 133, 138, 139, 136, 139, 133, 137, 134, 135, 145, 143, 139, 133, 139, 142, 145, 134, 145, 145, 140, 145, 138, 144, 141, 135, 140, 133, 141, 136

Vela special versus Little John: 694 DEF / 923 ATK x 130% = 1199 ATK - 66 data points - 166, 166, 178, 170, 173, 171, 171, 164, 178, 173, 170, 178, 175, 176, 169, 169, 176, 168, 176, 173, 169, 177, 176, 171, 174, 166, 179, 167, 169, 165, 173, 163, 175, 176, 164, 177, 168, 165, 165, 164, 164, 172, 164, 175, 176, 173, 174, 169, 179, 171, 178, 176, 165, 175, 169, 177, 174, 178, 171, 167, 164, 177, 168, 169, 172, 176

Grimm special versus Little John: 694 DEF / 1070 ATK x 295% = 3156 ATK - 61 data points - 568, 586, 547, 562, 597, 600, 562, 552, 546, 574, 551, 598, 573, 555, 593, 566, 546, 567, 554, 598, 576, 566, 551, 547, 550, 571, 572, 598, 559, 593, 559, 550, 575, 557, 596, 593, 575, 545, 567, 563, 557, 600, 594, 569, 563, 587, 546, 593, 575, 572, 552, 559, 544, 585, 547, 545, 574, 574, 562, 551, 592

Fenrir special versus Kiril: 818 DEF / 920 ATK x 320% = 2944 ATK - 59 data points - 489, 455, 493, 494, 492, 459, 482, 462, 473, 478, 461, 454, 480, 484, 459, 492, 486, 481, 472, 472, 472, 453, 478, 498, 479, 476, 463, 483, 471, 471, 465, 483, 480, 491, 496, 486, 472, 455, 468, 483, 461, 492, 473, 487, 458, 477, 470, 495, 472, 490, 495, 459, 478, 484, 454, 478, 452, 492, 467

Magni special versus Kiril: 818 DEF / 998 ATK x 420% = 4191 ATK - 65 data points - 693, 736, 705, 721, 737, 694, 742, 705, 708, 734, 736, 718, 704, 722, 748, 707, 679, 687, 688, 728, 697, 693, 735, 678, 731, 748, 721, 746, 720, 684, 710, 708, 708, 744, 714, 695, 692, 688, 715, 685, 741, 747, 691, 742, 692, 746, 699, 741, 715, 706, 724, 703, 740, 725, 742, 709, 684, 685, 730, 687, 701, 714, 735, 684, 748

Grimm special versus Chao (for minor damage = -50% damage): 830 DEF / 1070 ATK x 295% = 3156 ATK - 59 data points - 260, 251, 243, 245, 251, 243, 267, 253, 249, 254, 245, 261, 246, 260, 265, 255, 249, 243, 258, 243, 255, 247, 244, 263, 244, 268, 249, 251, 263, 247, 262, 257, 260, 254, 250, 262, 263, 243, 243, 244, 253, 266, 249, 254, 244, 247, 249, 259, 260, 246, 267, 246, 265, 268, 247, 260, 252, 244, 243

[u2371]

@Zack

DEF	Special ATK	ATK/DEF	avg damage	variance	current Z-U	Z-U variance
830	1199	1,44457831325301	139	6	143	7
694	1199	1,72766570605187	171	8	175	8
818	2944	3,59902200488998	475	23	474	23
694	3156	4,54755043227666	572	28	573	28
818	4191	5,12347188264059	713	35	709	35

Z-U formula still with the following parameters (until further improvement):
a = 25
b = 0.0392
k = 0.93
c = 0.0116 (or 0.29, if c is added directly without multiplying it with a, i.e. 0.29 = 25 x 0.0116)
For special damage, the calculated damage is currently multiplied with “x3 x90%”

=> Not perfect, but quite close to the actual damage.
@u2371, this data should help with finding improved parameters

@Zack

Then again, this doesn’t fit with the minimum variance of ±1 in some cases, so there must be more to this.

The different between our function’s average damage and actual average damage look like what happen in tile damage but is larger. I think it doesn’t fit with the minimum variance of ±1 in some cases because of %Atk of special skill which make it larger or special skill really have slightly different a,b,c,k value. I think we might have to solve that low ADR problem before go any further. But special ATK is rarely in low ADR range, so we ,might have to go back to tile damage.

About special skill I have a question, is “1000 Atk with 200%Atk” exactly same to “500 Atk with 400%Atk” against any defense ? I remember that you already test they and they are same but I am not sure if I remember right or not.

@Zack

Bonus: Grimm special versus Chao (for minor damage = -50% damage): 830 DEF / 1070 ATK x 295% = 3156 ATK

DEF	Special ATK	ATK/DEF	avg damage	variance
830	3156	3,80240963855422	255,5	12,5

This looks like the variance is actually added here before the damage factors kick in, then everything is rounded down.
The numbers fit with the following sequence

1. calculation of average special damage: 511 damage
2. calculation of 5% variance: ±25
3. min damage for this is 486 and max damage is 536
4. now the -50% damage reduction for minor damage then gives: min damage = 243 and max damage = 268
   which is exactly the range that I found.

It seem to be like that.

[JustAGuy]

I quickly noticed there was a massive +/- gap in the formula posted by the OP when considering current heros.

For example: Krampus vs Gefjon

Where the Defense and Attack stats are rather large.

So, I definitely agree all of this data mining/mapping is needed to get an actual understanding of how the various stats, buffs, etc affect damage.

That being said, since this new formula was presented like 1/2 through the thread, it’s kind of burried.

It would be beneficial to have an OP that you could update as you evolve your formula. Because, as written, I’m pretty lost on where the variable data is being pulled from (IE: What numbers to plug in where).

If such a thread exists and I simply didn’t see it, then I apologize, and a link would be appreciated.

That all being said, I foind this thread because I was trying to determine if Jotts +atk tile modifier would come out to be more or less damage than Alexandrine’s +Crit % tile modifier.

I started using the original formula in this thread and totaling the damage over 100 tiles with the assumption that, at 54% crit , you would see 54 crit tiles in 100.

But, if the original formula is not reliable for this task … No Clue!!!

[yelnats_24]

@Dudeious.Maximus any idea how to update the outdated formula? @Zack had developed more accurate formula.

[Dudeious.Maximus]

Get @Zack to post the new stuff.