Guide- Weapon Power and Multiple Weapon Damage Scaling
View Single Post
Join Date: Dec 2007
11-30-2010, 08:14 PM
Originally Posted by
He is not using powers, but I assume he is skilled in the weapons he is used, so the middle term is not removed.
What I am currently not sure about - what's the difference between "Base" and "SI"? Aren't they the same value?
Base and SI are different as BigBadB has described them. SI is the theoretical damage of a mark zero weapon before it is adjusted for mark. Base is the number you see on the weapon after adjustment for mark. What this means is that skill and powers are not effected by the mark of the weapon directly. Yes He has skill in the weapon, but the effect will be a constant rather than a variable, so what I was pointing out is that a constant shouldn't cause the relative differences we see between 100 power and 125.
Originally Posted by
You made two huge errors.
No, you made two unwarranted assumptions, though I won't trade insults with you for it, because people often don't pay attention to the details when confronted with a wall of text.
- First, I am aware that the purpose of the work is to determine the finer points of how weapon power effects damage. I want that to continue, which is why I was hesitant to post anything that might put a damper on it. But the fluctuations of timing in weapon fire and the 2% per point of power ratio implied by the formula should not produce such different shaped graphs at different power levels.
- Secondly, I am aware of the math. Yes it works out to the same value, if that is all that is involved. I haven't seen the rest of his analysis, so I don't know. It's just that when applying percentages to additional calculations it is important to make certain you are using the same unit value, so I made a suggestion as to where he could check... as he himself pointed out, it is confusing that it behaves the way it does at different power levels. That means there is an unknown... either a mistake, or an undetermined effect. A good mathematician first checks for mistakes. If it double checks clear, then we can try and determine the unknown factor(s).
You may note that I never accused Nagorath of being wrong. I simply concluded that there is something we haven't explained yet.