Stick Online Forums

Here is the final and 100% accurate guide.

(http://img402.imageshack.us/img402/4500/newprospersguidetovithp.png) (http://www.imagehosting.com/)

* Special thanks to FOG, Fabi619 and ARTgames  :D for contributing precious DEF/DAM data. And Seifer  :D for giving me a few good hints and finaly confirming the formula : baseDamage*(.22+(1-.22)/(1+defense*.1))=

Without them I couldn't have made this table as accurate as it is now.

EDIT : since people seem to be discussing whats best VIT or STR I've decided to add these grids. Basicaly they have been calculated taking for granted both players are using GS as weapon. First grid is lvl 99 with no hat. Second grid is lvl 100 both wearing DKH.

What you can see is, without DKH VIT is more viable. With DKH STR evens out with VIT as far as hit-for-hit is concerned BUT its much more easy and fun to play PvE.

PS : The 'Hits' column means how many hits needed to kill the other player. NOT the amount of hits it can take.

(http://img405.imageshack.us/img405/8058/strvsvit.png) (http://img405.imageshack.us/i/strvsvit.png/)   (http://img816.imageshack.us/img816/201/strvsvitplusdkh.png) (http://img816.imageshack.us/i/strvsvitplusdkh.png/)

EDIT : I had nothing to do one night so I decided to sit down and reverse the def formula :

Damage = baseDamage*(.22+(1-.22)/(1+defense*.1))
baseDamage = Damage/(.22+(1-.22)/(1+defense*.1)) [this one was pretty straight forward]
defense = 10*((1-.22)/((Damage/baseDamage)-.22))-10 [this one took me like ... 1 hour to figure out]

Now giving one has accurate wep attack data we can reverse calculate anyone's STR, DEF and VIT just by knowing 2 of the 3 above data. As we know Jesusland has bad wep attack data so using them gives false results.

Here are closer results based on my own testing and calculations. Since damage is rounded up It gives results +/- 1 from true stat you are trying to figure out. Also the more powerfull the attack is the more accurate the results are.

Here is more accurate data on weapons :

Damage = (1+((STR*4))/100)*Weapon Attack

Snowball 5
Punch 8
Candy Canes 10
Kick 12
Branch 13
Whip 13
Dark Gauntlet 13
Hatchet 14
Dagger 14
Katana 15
Lantern 15
Spire Dagger 19
Short Sword 20
Scythe 25
Wooden Hammer 31
Great Sword 40
Inferno Sword 47
Stone Hammer 50

I wasn't able to test Slasher and LSS damage yet.

Quote-Every DEF reduces by 4.5% the damage you used to receive

100(max of a %) / 4.5(% reduces by def) = 22.2222222 (how much def you need to block 100%)
22.2222222 is the amount of DEF you need so 100% of your dmg is reduces.
so
22.2222222(def you need for 100%) * 3(3 vit is 1 def) = 66.6666666 (how mutch vit you need)
so about 67 vit you need to get so you can never take a hit if 4.5% is that amount reduces for 1 def.

All I'm saying is 4.5% is a really ruff estment. Im not sure how you got the rest of your data.

edit:
everything in this post i did is old. Just wanted to make sure you know know that.

I don't think this is true, because I beleive seifer and meiun both said there is a softcap for defense(?). Every defense point after a certain point it slowly becomes less useful, well at least I think thats what I heard.

Quote from: JoEL on January 06, 2010, 12:29:53 AM
I don't think this is true, because I beleive seifer and meiun both said there is a softcap for defense(?). Every defense point after a certain point it slowly becomes less useful, well at least I think thats what I heard.

He's got it. And unless you have the Defense formula, you won't be able to calculate it.

the most funny of all is that you cannot have 100 vit. (gm's excluded)

I've edited my first post so the first few replies no longer make sense.

The point is, the more vit you get, the less effective it becomes towards Defense. So maybe at 20 vit your getting 4.5% but at 60 vit it would be maybe... 2%.. Who knows, i dont know the percentages, but you get the idea.

Quote from: Seifer on January 06, 2010, 06:36:36 AM
The point is, the more vit you get, the less effective it becomes towards Defense. So maybe at 20 vit your getting 4.5% but at 60 vit it would be maybe... 2%.. Who knows, i dont know the percentages, but you get the idea.

You were right Seifer I found the exact caps.

Where did you get that information. Is it just based on seeing how much damage you receive at different defense levels? Or do you actually have the defense formula? I find it hard to believe that you reverse engineered a complex formula such as this...

Quote from: Lingus on January 06, 2010, 03:36:18 PM
Where did you get that information. Is it just based on seeing how much damage you receive at different defense levels? Or do you actually have the defense formula? I find it hard to believe that you reverse engineered a complex formula such as this...

Well I think I just did reverse engeneer it with FOG's help I got the missing data and with Seifers 'tip' He put me on the right track.

Anyone who notices that the info here is not exact by  ~1 damage (because I truncate the decimals) may post it here with his DEF and Damage taken from Sand fiend.

If I'm off now it won't be by much.

Alright, yea I guess.

I do have to say you should try it out with a different monster as well. In fact, as many as you can. The percentages might be off if you check it based on a different initial damage.

I have all regular monster damages in my excel sheet.. I guess ima have to make this table yet bigger..

It would be nice if Jesusland.co.cc people could just create a calculator on their web site using the data I just provided here.

Yea, I mean actually getting people with different defense levels to get hit by different monsters and see how much damage they actually receive. Then compare that to the percentages you have for their given defense levels. If they match up then you're graph is accurate. If not, you've done something wrong with your calculation.

Well I won't bother people to get more info because im pretty sure about the data I have now. If anyone finds an error he can let me know and I will fix it.

I've added a excel sheet with all common monster damage with all possible DEF.

By the way, I believe that the Sand Golem's base attack is 100... That could be extremely useful.
~Aqua

Quote from: Prosper on January 05, 2010, 11:13:01 PM
From 0 to 7 DEF (4.5%)
From 8 to 15 DEF (3%) - Soft cap #1
From 16 to 24 DEF (2%) - Soft cap #2
From 25+ DEF (1%) - Sof cap #3

Ok that makes sense. i see now.


edit:

Quote
1                203          0                  0                    
3                209          1                  4.50                
6                218          2                  8.80                  
9                227          3                  12.90                

well 4.50, 8.80, 12.90, is not growing linearly like you make it seem like in your above text. If its 4.5% for each def before the first softcap wouldn't 2 def give you 9%? your text shows 8.80%. which one more accurate?

I'm not sure how you're getting your numbers. Even based on the numbers you have here, not even looking at actual data, there are errors. Now this may just be rounding issues, but it seems unlikely. For instance, for 1 def, you say it is a 4.5% reduction. Yet you claim the damage taken will be 53. Taking 4.5% of 58 gives you 2.61. Subtract that from the initial damage of 58 gives you 55.39. Even rounding, you're 2 damage off. Which, since each subsequent level is based on the previous level's damage taken, doesn't that kind of screw everything up?

It's hard to explain in words I guess.

The 4.5%, 3%, 2%, 1% are not to be always calculated on the BASE DAMAGE i.e. 56 but on the current damage you are receiving from a specific enemy.

56 is the damage you receive when you have 0 DEF.

56 - (56*4.5%) = 53.48

This means that with 1 DEF you get hit approx 53 damage, if you want to know how much you get hit with 2 DEF you dont take it off the 56 again.

you take the current damage you receive : 53.48 - (53.48*4.5%) = 51.07

Now the % absorption is obtained by calculating (51.07*100)/56 = 91.20% (this means that you are being hit 91.20% of the BASE damage)

meaning that you absorbed : 100 - 91.20 = 8.80% of the damage.

Same applies for the rest of the table.

If you dont want to calculate at all, download my excel sheet there is a place to input ANY custom damage and see how hard it will hit you for real at any DEF you would have.

Quote
you take the current damage you receive : 53.48 - (53.48*4.5%) = 51.07

Now the % absorption is obtained by calculating (51.07*100)/56 = 91.20% (this means that you are being hit 91.20% of the BASE damage)

meaning that you absorbed : 100 - 91.20 = 8.80% of the damage.

Same applies for the rest of the table.

is this for taking 2 def?

Quotex = Current damage I am taking
y = Next level of DEF damage I will receive

x - (x*4.5%) = y

so the "Current damage I am taking" is not the BASE DAMAGE?

Yes it's for 2 DEF.

and,

No its not the base damage.

The Absorption is based on the base damage.

why don't you just give the % of dmg my def is taking away now. So i can say "hey i got x def. that means y% will be taken from the base damage hit of this monster". Or can i easily figer that out?

edit:
as you see. Im not too good with math. :P

edit:
this is what i want to do. I want to give you my vit and how much the base damage this monster going to do and i want you to give me how much damage it will subtract from my health. how will this chart help me get there?

Thats what the absorption is.

56 BASE DAMAGE = 100% of the DAMAGE you would receive at 0 DEF.

Let's say you have 4 DEF this means you will absorb 16.82% of 56. In this case you would get hit 46.

I am giving you the absorb % so you don't need to calculate it by yourself. I explained in depth HOW i get to that absorption % so that people understand how it works.

If you dont want to understand the maths behind it just take the Absorption % thats all that counts.

Or even simpler, download my excel sheet which will do the math for you.

Quote from: Prosper on January 06, 2010, 06:26:53 PM
It's hard to explain in words I guess.

The 4.5%, 3%, 2%, 1% are not to be always calculated on the BASE DAMAGE i.e. 56 but on the current damage you are receiving from a specific enemy.

56 is the damage you receive when you have 0 DEF.

56 - (56*4.5%) = 53.48

This means that with 1 DEF you get hit approx 53 damage, if you want to know how much you get hit with 2 DEF you dont take it off the 56 again.

you take the current damage you receive : 53.48 - (53.48*4.5%) = 51.07

Now the % absorption is obtained by calculating (51.07*100)/56 = 91.20% (this means that you are being hit 91.20% of the BASE damage)

meaning that you absorbed : 100 - 91.20 = 8.80% of the damage.

Same applies for the rest of the table.

If you dont want to calculate at all, download my excel sheet there is a place to input ANY custom damage and see how hard it will hit you for real at any DEF you would have.

This is exactly how I understood it to be... The problem: Your graph states that the base damage at 0 def is 58. Not 56. I guess that's a typo? If so disregard my earlier post. All of my calculations were based on 58 since that's what you had.

Corrected the Typo.. sorry. It was 56 on the excel sheet. I guess the rest makes sense now  :)

I give up. I dont have excel. Is there a way for me to find out how mutch dmg something will take away after def without your excel sheet?

I use this free office suite http://www.openoffice.org/ (http://www.openoffice.org/).

And honestly.. with a 4th grade math course, a calculator and IQ above 80 should be sufficient to calculate what you need..

How old are you ?

Thank you. I'm 16 but I'm slow on the uptake some times. :P

I'm level 99 with 202 hp and 1 vit. No hats or weps equipted. If i get hit by an sf i should have 146 hp according to your graph. But when i get hit by an sf my hp goes down to 143 hp. What am i donting wrong?

Well I haven't confirmed MYSELF that 56 WAS the base damage with 0 DEF from SF. according to what your saying it would be 59.

Can anyone confirm that it IS 59 ?

If so I just need to review the 4.5%.

Are you getting hit 38 by cactus ?

nope i tryed it twice with no cac. But some one else can confirm that would be nice.

edit:
also is this true?
100 - (53 / 56 * 100) = the DAM ABSORBED % with 1 def

im gonna go to bed but I'd be curious to see if you are getting also 38 damage from cactus.

Could you put on a wiz hat to get 1 def and see how much you get hit by both sf and cactus with 1 def ?

ok. with wizzy on i got -55hp from sf and -35hp from a cac. good night and thank you. This tool your making will be super usefull.

also is this true?
100 - (53 / 56 * 100) = the DAM ABSORBED % with 1 def

That formula looks right art.

Btw, how much damage do you take from a cactus with 0def? You stated 35 with 1def, but not with 0def.

Well 100 - ((53 / 56) * 100) = 5.35714286% not 4.5%. I'm missing something.

Also i loged on and took a look. I get -38hp from cac with no def.

I'm becoming more and more curious how Prosper actually got these numbers. After getting real world data from Art on two different monsters, here is what we have:

100 - ((55 / 59) * 100) = 6.779~
100 - ((35 / 38) * 100) = 7.894~

Let me know if we have the calculation wrong to figure out the percentage. But I think it's right.

If so, it shows that you can't figure out a damage reduction formula based on this data. It would also depend on the initial damage taken as well as the amount of defense you have. In other words, the more damage you take, the less of a percentage your defense will reduce the damage.

I imagine with a larger body of data you could find out if they are actually the same. If I read that equation correctly, you only took the differences from 2 levels of defense. It may happen that the cacti's lower hit caused it to round differently after calculations. Try to test further, I'm just speculating because it seems like a waste to calculate damage differently for each enemy.

I also think its the same equation for all monsters.

ARTgames is currently gathering exact data for def 0 1 2 3

And me for 4 5 7

Also I think its not rounded up or down but truncated.

as instead of 16.99 giving 17 it just truncs the decimals and dam would still be 16.

Still not absolutely 100% positive on that.

I'm pretty sure about the 3% 2% and 1% part.. but the 4.5% is not right yet... I am processing by trial and error after all.

Also I had data for DEF 4 5 7 14 15 17 23 29. Since all those are currently correct I assume the ones inbetween are correct also.

Here is 0 - 3 for all normal monster

blob:
0:def -11hp
1:def -10hp
2:def -10hp
3:def -9np

RB:
0:def -33hp
1:def -31hp
2:def -29hp
3:def -27hp

bandit:
0:def -20hp
1:def -19hp
2:def -17hp
3:def -16hp

cac:
0:def -38hp
1:def -35hp
2:def -33hp
3:def -31hp

skelly:
0:def -29hp
1:def -27hp
2:def -25hp
3:def -24hp

sf:
0:def -59hp
1:def -55hp
2:def -51hp
3:def -48hp

By the way, if your defense formula is correct, you can use Substitution/Elimination to know any monster's HP and Defense.
~Aqua

I'm not looking into your specifics, but there isn't "three" softcaps. The softcap is simply that as your defense goes higher, it's effectiveness becomes less. It doesn't hit increments or stages, but is constantly moving.

Also, your getting close, but i cross referenced some of your numbers with those that the formula put out, and there not right. Close though.

Also, I'd like to mention that you shoulden't be counting in terms of Damage absorbed, but damage taken. That is how the game calculates it anyways. Simpler that way. Because than it's just (Base damage)*(% of damage you take)

Quote from: Seifer on January 07, 2010, 09:32:33 AM
I'm not looking into your specifics, but there isn't "three" softcaps. The softcap is simply that as your defense goes higher, it's effectiveness becomes less. It doesn't hit increments or stages, but is constantly moving.

Also, your getting close, but i cross referenced some of your numbers with those that the formula put out, and there not right. Close though.

Also, I'd like to mention that you shoulden't be counting in terms of Damage absorbed, but damage taken. That is how the game calculates it anyways. Simpler that way. Because than it's just (Base damage)*(% of damage you take)

;D Cool !

With ART's new data I'ma give it another shot today and I will try to find out the exact decrement in the DEF % change.. I already feel its more gonna be something like 6% 5.9% 5.8% etc.. 

It's not a constant. Theres no pattern.

I'm inclined to believe that it's using some parabolic equation: such as a square root with some coefficient. 1 gives you 1, 4 gives you 2, 9 gives you 3, 16 gives you 4, et cetera.
~Aqua

Quote from: Aqua on January 06, 2010, 11:46:27 PM
By the way, if your defense formula is correct, you can use Substitution/Elimination to know any monster's HP and Defense.
~Aqua

Not exactly. Remember, you have the issue of having 1 too many variables in the equation. You need to know either how much HP or how much defense the monster has. The only thing you know is how much initial damage you do, and how many hits it takes to kill the monster. That's not enough data for an accurate result.

I'm starting to think the same is going to be true about finding out an accurate defense formula. With the data art provided we can only come up with a range of percentages for each defense level. This is due to the fact that you don't know the exact damage being dealt because the decimals are being truncated or rounded (and not knowing which of those is the case also adds to the confusion.)

Here's just the first issue I run into with the numbers. When I throw in different percentages, there is nothing that provides me with the damages received at def 1 for all monsters (this is assuming you truncate the decimals rather than round). At 5%, the blob, RB, bandit, and skelly match, but the cactus and sf do not. If I go up even a tenth of a percent to 5.1% the bandit is off. This means there is no one percentage that works in every case (again, if you assume you truncate the decimals).

Now, assuming we don't truncate but round, we still can't figure out an exact percentage. At any percentage from 6.6% up to 7.5% the numbers will round correctly to the damage received at def 1. This means there will never be enough data to accurately determine the exact percentages.

And to bring up another pretty major issue, we may not be using the exact base damage. I imagine the base damage could potentially be calculated using the damage formula for monsters. It's possible that Meiun hard codes the monsters exact damage rather than giving them strength and calculating their damage based on that... but we don't know. So the base damage might contain decimals that are used in the calculation that we aren't seeing. We can assume that there aren't any, but then if we are wrong our numbers would be off.

I've said it before, and I know it's disappointing news to people who want to try to figure out all the data... it's just not worth it. You're going to go through tons of testing and data gathering, then tons of complicated calculations to get assumed results that may or may not be accurate depending on the situation. There's no way to figure out the defense formula, just like there's no way to figure out the HP and defense of monsters. Not without additional inside information from someone who knows what they're talking about (ie Meiun.)

The only issue in finding data is that the variables are rounded up or down. With exact decimals, it would be possible to calculate.
~Aqua

Yes. You are correct. If we knew exactly how much the initial base damage the monster deals, and exactly how much damage is received before any rounding or truncating occurs, then we could determine the exact percentages. But... we will never have that data unless either Meiun tells it to us, or someone does some shady things with the games programming, which would just be wrong to do.

I figured we don't need the exact formula. I have edited the post with my latest and probably last calculations.

Seifer you can compare them if you want. I'm pretty sure the results are close to reality.. Close enough for what we need it for, planning our builds knowing exactly what impact VIT has.

I figured that the numbers are probably rounded, NOT truncate.

With this charts data you can now calculate back and forth using your DEF and Damage % vs the DEF and Damage % you want to acheive in order to get exact damage.

Quote from: Lingus on January 07, 2010, 03:47:02 PM
Yes. You are correct. If we knew exactly how much the initial base damage the monster deals, and exactly how much damage is received before any rounding or truncating occurs, then we could determine the exact percentages. But... we will never have that data unless either Meiun tells it to us, or someone does some shady things with the games programming, which would just be wrong to do.

Well, this is where the SG comes in. I'm pretty sure that its base damage is 100, and making that a decimal seems kinda pointless to me. So with that, you could get many defense rounded areas, and create a scatter plot graph. Some of these are likely not to be rounded, and once you find 3 unrounded points, you have your defense formula. Using the defense formula and the strength formula, with 2-4 equations of battles & swings against a certain monster, you have that monster's Defense and HP; using Elimination or Substitution that is.
By the way, the SF base damage is 59, just found out. :(
~Aqua

My head hurts...

Quote from: Aqua on January 07, 2010, 04:05:50 PM
I'm pretty sure

That's where you run into issues. You can't do math on assumptions.

Quote from: Aqua on January 07, 2010, 04:05:50 PMUsing the defense formula and the strength formula, with 2-4 equations of battles & swings against a certain monster, you have that monster's Defense and HP; using Elimination or Substitution that is.

No. You will still end up with a range most likely. That's what I was just doing in my previous post, though for the damage reduction percent, not monster HP and def. In that case we had 6 different points of data and we could barely get within 1 percentage point of a range. And in that case, the only hindrance was that the numbers we were dealing with were rounded. The problem with figuring monster HP and def is much more. You have the issue that your final hit might only be a single point of damage regardless of how much damage your last hit actually does. This is because the monster might be left with a single HP point. In this case, you would have to assume that the monster has either 1 HP or however much damage you are hitting the monster for.

And again, I will not agree with you that you can use "elimination and substitution" to figure out both the HP and Def. You need one or the other to determine both. Or, you would need to know exactly how much damage the monster took (something you can't know as I have related in the above paragraph). The only thing you get by figuring out how many hits it took to kill a monster is the estimated amount of damage the monster took. Estimated. This gives you a range to work with. Then you would have to figure a range for defense, which would give you a range for HP... You can't get an exact number using estimated numbers. It just doesn't work.

Your numbers are deffinatly not close enough to be used as a basis. Most of them are 5% or more off.

Also, I'd like to point out that it would be much easier to test this in pvp, and have someone do the attacking, as opposed to depending on monsters, since if you use the damage formula, you can know exactly what the base damage is.

You would know the exact base damage, but you wouldn't know the exact amount of damage reduction since the only way to get that is by taking your HP before and after getting hit which makes it a rounded number. You get a closer estimate, but still an estimate.

The damage is rounded though. Up i beleive.

You're saying the damage is always rounded up before calculating damage reduction? That would make things easier...

If I recall correctly, when you calculate damage, you round up. So plug your numbers in a damage formula, and if it's 37.4 damage, it's still 38.  And than it rounds up again, so whatever percentage of the damage you take, round that up if it's a decimal.

Quote from: Seifer on January 07, 2010, 07:19:42 PM
Your numbers are deffinatly not close enough to be used as a basis. Most of them are 5% or more off.

Also, I'd like to point out that it would be much easier to test this in pvp, and have someone do the attacking, as opposed to depending on monsters, since if you use the damage formula, you can know exactly what the base damage is.

Im 100% sure of DEF 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 14 15 17 and even some higher values that I will not mention so that foG's stats remain secret. With the current formula I used all of the data I had match the ones I was given by players.

I consider 5% isn't that bad.. For the moment I don't really plan to do more calculations. If you consider this being useless you can just delete the thread. Otherwise.. this is the best I could come up with.

Oh wow. You are on the mark now sir. Everything is easily within 1% of the right number. For example, 16 = .52    and 15= .532.

I think at this rate i may just tell you all the formula.

If you want to know well.. to acheive this I used the following (%) :

1 = 7.5%
2 = 6.5%
3 = 5.5%
4 = 5%
5 = 4.5%
6 = 4.5%
7 = 4.5%
8-15 = 3%
16-24 = 2%
25+ = 1%

This is how you calculate damage vs defense.

Meiun is going to kill me for this...

baseDamage*(.22+(1-.22)/(1+defense*.1))=

Wow I wasn't expecting such results when I first started the subject.  :D kinda glad I contributed something new to the community.

Quote from: Seifer on January 07, 2010, 09:54:27 PM
This is how you calculate damage vs defense.

Meiun is going to kill me for this...

baseDamage*(.22+(1-.22)/(1+defense*.1))=

ZOMG! You just gave plankton the Krabby Patty secret formula!

Quote from: Seifer on January 07, 2010, 09:54:27 PM
This is how you calculate damage vs defense.

Meiun is going to kill me for this...

baseDamage*(.22+(1-.22)/(1+defense*.1))=

The last words Seifer said before we never heard from him agen.

Quote from: Seifer on January 07, 2010, 09:54:27 PM
This is how you calculate damage vs defense.

Meiun is going to kill me for this...

baseDamage*(.22+(1-.22)/(1+defense*.1))=

I have to say, there's no way anyone would have been able to come up with that formula. Prosper may have been close in terms of percentage, but only by trial and error it seems. This formula is a bit more complex than even I was thinking...

Now is your chance to shine. You wanted to find out a monster's HP by elimination/substitution. You have a good piece of puzzle there.

except you can never know a monsters defense.

a SG has only 2000 health, but we all only do 3 damage to it :O jk

Quote from: Seifer on January 07, 2010, 10:30:17 PM
except you can never know a monsters defense.

Right. This is exactly the point I was making to Aqua. You need to know either the health or the def of the monster to figure out the other.

you could have people with different str hit the monster. But theres not way that you can get a accurate number with that.

well, i do know for a blob, it takes 17 str exactly to one hit it with a hammer (wh)

Quote from: DivineLegend on January 08, 2010, 12:20:12 PM
well, i do know for a blob, it takes 17 str exactly to one hit it with a hammer (wh)

Still only gives you a range. You are most likely hitting it for more than it's max HP. So the range of a blobs HP is 1 HP more than the damage you do at 16 str with a WH at the low end, and the high end is the damage you do with a WH with 17 str. And that's assuming it has 0 def (which is likely, but we don't know for sure).

Whatever happened to "shut up and play the game"? You all are taking this way too seriously. Base your vit on what a good def value would be (15-20 would be a good average) and just stop overhyping by getting all "OKAY SO IF I HAVE THIS AND THIS AND THIS FOR STATS THAT MEANS I CAN DO 59 DAMAGE TO SFS AND TAKE 32 DAMAGE FROM THEM UNLESSSSSS..." and whatnot.

Just play the dang game. It's meant to be a game, not the ULTIMATE MATHEMATICAL CHALLENGE OF THE CENTURY.

Quote from: Snakeman on January 12, 2010, 05:49:16 PM
Whatever happened to "shut up and play the game"? You all are taking this way too seriously. Base your vit on what a good def value would be (15-20 would be a good average) and just stop overhyping by getting all "OKAY SO IF I HAVE THIS AND THIS AND THIS FOR STATS THAT MEANS I CAN DO 59 DAMAGE TO SFS AND TAKE 32 DAMAGE FROM THEM UNLESSSSSS..." and whatnot.

Just play the dang game. It's meant to be a game, not the ULTIMATE MATHEMATICAL CHALLENGE OF THE CENTURY.

Well said o.o..

Quote from: Snakeman on January 12, 2010, 05:49:16 PM
Whatever happened to "shut up and play the game"? You all are taking this way too seriously. Base your vit on what a good def value would be (15-20 would be a good average) and just stop overhyping by getting all "OKAY SO IF I HAVE THIS AND THIS AND THIS FOR STATS THAT MEANS I CAN DO 59 DAMAGE TO SFS AND TAKE 32 DAMAGE FROM THEM UNLESSSSSS..." and whatnot.

Just play the dang game. It's meant to be a game, not the ULTIMATE MATHEMATICAL CHALLENGE OF THE CENTURY.

Agreed. Which I think is why Meiun doesn't like to give out the formulas because then people get hung up on all of these minute details that are really kind of pointless anyways.

Obviously I sound somewhat hypocritical. It might seem that way, but I don't actually care about these numbers when it comes to the game. I only find it fun and interesting to take on a challenging math problem (even though this problem was not so much in coming up with an accurate result, but merely figuring out if coming up with an accurate result is even possible, which I feel I came up with pretty conclusive evidence that it was not... until the actual formula was posted.)

Quote from: Snakeman on January 12, 2010, 05:49:16 PM
Whatever happened to "shut up and play the game"? You all are taking this way too seriously. Base your vit on what a good def value would be (15-20 would be a good average) and just stop overhyping by getting all "OKAY SO IF I HAVE THIS AND THIS AND THIS FOR STATS THAT MEANS I CAN DO 59 DAMAGE TO SFS AND TAKE 32 DAMAGE FROM THEM UNLESSSSSS..." and whatnot.

Just play the dang game. It's meant to be a game, not the ULTIMATE MATHEMATICAL CHALLENGE OF THE CENTURY.

I was just doing it for fun. Who knows, this could make pvp more fun for some people also.

Also something it is fun to some one when they take it more seriously. Your too seriously is not their too seriously in other words. If sports went by my "too seriously" then we would not have sport channels on tv or million dollar stadiums.

Quote from: Snakeman on January 12, 2010, 05:49:16 PM
Whatever happened to "shut up and play the game"? You all are taking this way too seriously. Base your vit on what a good def value would be (15-20 would be a good average) and just stop overhyping by getting all "OKAY SO IF I HAVE THIS AND THIS AND THIS FOR STATS THAT MEANS I CAN DO 59 DAMAGE TO SFS AND TAKE 32 DAMAGE FROM THEM UNLESSSSSS..." and whatnot.

Just play the dang game. It's meant to be a game, not the ULTIMATE MATHEMATICAL CHALLENGE OF THE CENTURY.

And as an addendum, I'd like to add a story about a guy on this other game I've played for a bit. This guy would make the dang game his life, and he went OVERBOARD. We are talking massive poopsocking (playing for HORRENDOUS hours (the term is derived from the act of pooping into a sock to avoid the waste of time of using a bathroom)) and also minmaxing (spending time doing a butt-ton of calculations and plans and all this other mathematical shit to make his character TEH UBERZ) for a loooong time.

Long story short, all the admins (and players) laughed at him. Massively. Although not as much as the person who bought his account for $70. But that's another story.

A word of warning: Don't be this type of guy. Seriously.

If its a waste of time why did you revive this 1 week old post ?

I feel your opinion wasted my time just as much as reading this post wasted yours..

Quote from: Snakeman on January 13, 2010, 07:20:46 PMWe are talking massive poopsocking (playing for HORRENDOUS hours (the term is derived from the act of pooping into a sock to avoid the waste of time of using a bathroom))

Oh man. Tell me no one actually does that...

Quote from: Lingus on January 13, 2010, 07:53:05 PM

Quote from: Snakeman on January 13, 2010, 07:20:46 PMWe are talking massive poopsocking (playing for HORRENDOUS hours (the term is derived from the act of pooping into a sock to avoid the waste of time of using a bathroom))

Oh man. Tell me no one actually does that...

I have no definite proof, but for all I know, there may be someone out there, that is TOO desperate for some grinding time that they will make some... sacrificing.

Perhaps that fat guy playing WOW in that WOW dedicated South Park episode.

Quote from: Prosper on January 13, 2010, 08:09:29 PM
Perhaps that fat guy playing WOW in that WOW dedicated South Park episode.

It wasn't WoW. It's a game more complicated than SO, but FAR less complicated than WoW.

If somebody tried to work out all the formulas and algorithms in WoW... then... GOOD GOD THEY JUST CANNOT BE A HUMAN.

So Snakeman, your the ultimate Justis on how people should live there lives? Really now this is not that big of a deal. You act like some one died trying to find out def. People have wasted more of there lives trying to get a gs or a is than the time placed into this topic.

I may be overreacting.















...Okay, I KNOW I'm overreacting. But at the same time, we really shouldn't let this escalate to the point where it can become this. Not only that but getting a GS or IS is more productive then trying to make a universal defense chart! :S



And for the record..... Yes, I am the Ultimate Justice. :3

Fine we wont. And i also bow to you Ultimate Justice.

Quote from: ARTgames on January 13, 2010, 09:25:45 PM
Fine we wont. And i also bow to you Ultimate Justice.

The Ultimate Justice is pleased.

Quote from: ARTgames on January 13, 2010, 09:25:45 PM
Fine we wont.

Why? People can still try to figure this kind of stuff out. I mean seriously I spent maybe 20 minutes in total on doing math for this topic. It's not like we're spending days without rest and taking craps in tube socks or anything... It's not an issue if it's simply a minor distraction from day to day life. It's an issue if it gets you aggitated or starts taking over your life; when you start doing arithmetic in your head while you sleep; when you start plotting the trajectory of a particular knockback arch on paper napkins... that's when it's an issue. This topic, and similar pursuits, is really no big deal.

I still think mapping out defense for every single vitality stat and assigning it to enemies to find out the specific numbers of all of this is going a little too far. I'm just more accustomed to the old skool way of "slap baddies, get goodies".

Quote from: Lingus on January 13, 2010, 09:33:10 PM

Quote from: ARTgames on January 13, 2010, 09:25:45 PM
Fine we wont.

Why? People can still try to figure this kind of stuff out. I mean seriously I spent maybe 20 minutes in total on doing math for this topic. It's not like we're spending days without rest and taking craps in tube socks or anything... It's not an issue if it's simply a minor distraction from day to day life. It's an issue if it gets you aggitated or starts taking over your life; when you start doing arithmetic in your head while you sleep; when you start plotting the trajectory of a particular knockback arch on paper napkins... that's when it's an issue. This topic, and similar pursuits, is really no big deal.

I mean we wont kill some one to get a calculator. Like we will not take it over bord. I dont mean we wont ever do it.

Snakemans just jealous of all of your leet math skills.

Oh, please, I know exactly how one can does this.

I am probably the one who spent the most time on this. I spent a few hours a day for 3 days. I was sick and on vacation from work so.. I'm still pretty proud of the results. And I think its fun to know the % of damage you get with 'x' given DEF.

Snake, i beleive the calcuations aren't for PvE but for PvP.

Snake.. you just inspired me to continue on this post.

Let say we can calculate a monsters DEF by calculating either the distance of knockback or the time it takes for it to fall back down.

We could test on Dipz or Fog for example to see what kind of knock back they have and then hit every monster with different strenght level.

To calculate it we would need like HyperCam to record a hit. Then take of screen shot of before and after, then zoom in and count how many pixels the monster got knocked back.

Then we could have an idea of how many pixels 1 DEF reduces (which is probably going to be in a softcapish decrementation).

If one finds the formula which determines how many pixels each DEF reduces in the knockback, we can definately determine the exact DEF of every monster in the game  :o

We'd probably find out Rock Beast has like 40+ DEF with like 2000hp or something..

If someone wants to try and find out close estimation (as we will never find the absolute values this way), be sure to have a few dozen socks near !  :o

...I'll just be over here, then. Using actual toilets and doing stuff irl. :S

Prosper, I can list quite a few problems with that. The one major flaw I see in using that method to determine monster def is that the display on any given client's screen is not entirely accurate depending on several different factors. So you might see a monster get knocked back so many pixels, when someone else will see it slightly differently on theirs.

Actually a bigger flaw is that you don't have any idea how much knockback is reduced by def. Without that, you might be able to estimate a knockback amount, but you can't get the defense from that. Not to mention how will you know how much the knockback is being reduced by? You have no 0def of that specific monster to get a basis for. You can't use a 0def player because the sprite is a different size.

There's several other points I could bring up, but I'll leave it here.

See, I like to expend my efforts at trying to see if I could even prove something, before trying to figure out how to prove it. With this, I have actually put some thought into it, and it's not something you can reverse engineer.

Though, I do have to say, you're coming up with some rather inventive ways of getting estimated results.

Quote from: Lingus on January 16, 2010, 02:44:08 AM
Prosper, I can list quite a few problems with that. The one major flaw I see in using that method to determine monster def is that the display on any given client's screen is not entirely accurate depending on several different factors.

What factors? The knock back should look the same to every one. All it is is a number that tells meiun knock back engen to send the monster back that amount. Lag could mess up the time in which it gets hit but does not effect its path it takes in air. Its all part of meiun motion prediction system. Thats why when a laggy monster gets hit it flys so smoothly threw the air.(it might no land as planed if its too laggy. it could tellaport 1/2 threw the knock back.) screen rez does not matter unless your under or have the game in full screen. if you see all of the window and your game is not glitching your seeing all the pixels evey one else can. If you can keep your fps up while recoding at the max of 30 then you should not skip a frame if your recoding every frame from the game.  Those are all the factors i could think of.

Quote from: Lingus on January 16, 2010, 02:44:08 AM
Actually a bigger flaw is that you don't have any idea how much knockback is reduced by def. Without that, you might be able to estimate a knockback amount, but you can't get the defense from that. Not to mention how will you know how much the knockback is being reduced by? You have no 0def of that specific monster to get a basis for. You can't use a 0def player because the sprite is a different size.

Well i dont think the play size matter. All the monsters have a flat "feet". Im not sure about this. I would halft to got on so. But i think when you hit anything the effect should be the same. I dont think it matter how tall the monster is it just takes that as an offset and adds knock back to it. But thats just a guess. you could be right.

But i dont even know why i posted that because i think that way might get too much of a annoying task. Its not imposable to have some sort of rang of def for the monster. I mean def has an outside effect that we can see.

Or in other words def does something and we can see that something. And that's all we care about is the something. And if its not a random something then we could probably find a pattern to predict that something.

But yeah im in favor in finding a new way than recording the screen.

WOW..

This was mainly intended as a *joke* to kinda *poke* Snake. If someone really has tons of hours on his hands.. feel free to proove this right or wrong.

But I guess its ok if you guys took this seriously.

Its half-joke, half-serious.

Quote from: Prosper on January 16, 2010, 12:29:27 PM
WOW..

This was mainly intended as a *joke* to kinda *poke* Snake.

We dont kid around when it comes to math. :P jking of course.

Quote from: Prosper on January 16, 2010, 12:29:27 PM
If someone really has tons of hours on his hands.. feel free to proove this right or wrong.

Quote from: me
But i dont even know why i posted that because i think that way might get too much of a annoying task.

Quote from: Prosper on January 16, 2010, 12:29:27 PM
WOW..

This was mainly intended as a *joke* to kinda *poke* Snake. If someone really has tons of hours on his hands.. feel free to proove this right or wrong.

But I guess its ok if you guys took this seriously.

Its half-joke, half-serious.

Actually I stopped caring. I already threw in a rant and a funny story, so there's not much more to go from there.

Quote from: ARTgames on January 16, 2010, 09:58:57 AM

Quote from: Lingus on January 16, 2010, 02:44:08 AM
Prosper, I can list quite a few problems with that. The one major flaw I see in using that method to determine monster def is that the display on any given client's screen is not entirely accurate depending on several different factors.

What factors? The knock back should look the same to every one. All it is is a number that tells meiun knock back engen to send the monster back that amount. Lag could mess up the time in which it gets hit but does not effect its path it takes in air. Its all part of meiun motion prediction system. Thats why when a laggy monster gets hit it flys so smoothly threw the air.(it might no land as planed if its too laggy. it could tellaport 1/2 threw the knock back.) screen rez does not matter unless your under or have the game in full screen. if you see all of the window and your game is not glitching your seeing all the pixels evey one else can. If you can keep your fps up while recoding at the max of 30 then you should not skip a frame if your recoding every frame from the game.  Those are all the factors i could think of.

The bolded parts both ask and answer each other...

oh that only happens if its really really laggy. 99% of the time that does not happen.

Well, that's only part of it. The other major flaw is that most of the time a monster will be moving. It won't land, stop, and let you count the pixels that it moved. And if you're using a screen recorder to capture it, the quality won't be good enough to get an accurate read on individual pixels.

"And if you're using a screen recorder to capture it, the quality won't be good enough to get an accurate read on individual pixels."
Yeah it would be. Just don't use any compression and make sure your recoding every frame.

Take a look for your self. Pixel perfect i might add.
http://www.mediafire.com/file/gl5dawnzimm/video.rar

Eh, I don't have the codec on this computer.

Anyways, say you could get a pixel perfect read on how many pixels back a monster is hit. Then you'd have to do the same test on another player at every single defense level until you got the same exact knockback.

This would all be based on the assumption that Meiun doesn't alter monster's knockback directly. It assumes that monster's stats work exactly like a player's stats. Which may or may not be an accurate assumption.

This was fun while it lasted.

Quote from: past me
But i dont even know why i posted that because i think that way might get too much of a annoying task.

I have agreed with you i just wanted to play this out.

Haha true. I have fun with this kind of thing.

>:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:(

GO AHEAD AND FLAME ME FOR REVIVING THIS !!!!

>:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:(

Its just that I often refer to it and im sick of having to go to page 2.

>:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:(

bookmarks? do you know yo use them? no its just fine.

Anyway Meiun dosnt mind if you revive topics unless there ontopic which i dont believe this is.

This revival was kind of useless however...

I didnt want to create a new post subject just for this so I put it in here and its not sooo off topic either :

It takes 7900 damage to kill a DS.

Im not saying it has 7900 hp because we can't know that and we dont know its DEF.

Just that it took me 7900 damage to kill a DS :P

And people say DS is hard! Thats only two and a half stam bars for me.

Quote from: Seifer on March 21, 2010, 05:22:22 PM
And people say DS is hard! Thats only two and a half stam bars for me.

Bet he'd kill you first though if he could rest too!

Anyway...

Quote
It takes 7900 damage to kill a DS.

How have you tested this? Have you tested it on many different characters with different amounts of strength? How do you know how much damage you do to a monster? Who is to say damage is calculated differently on monsters?

Also if you plan on using that knock-back idea to find out how much defense a DS has it won't work. Defense is calculated by VIT not Strength (for pvp) and I'm pretty sure monsters don't have stat points, if they do that's cool. I'm pretty sure Meiun said knock-back reduction is seperate for monsters, meaning they probably have a variable that only contributes to knock-back resistance and not to anything else, or something along the lines of that.

But hey, you could be completely right that it takes 7900 damage to kill a DS. But I honestly can't believe anything if theres no visible facts to prove it, so I'm interested, what methods did you use to find this out?

Quote
Just that it took me 7900 damage to kill a DS :P

Isn't enough for me! :)

(sorry if none of this didn't make much sense, I'm kind of rushing)

hehehehe joel joel joel...

I took Celson statmixer and simulated my exact same level str and wep and hat. It gave me a number per hit. And it took me x amounts of hits with my katana to kill it.

I just happened to solo 2 DS today and I counted the number of hits it took just for fun.

I'm not declaring that Its the exact same thing. Im just scaling the monster to the data I have.

I am sure 7900 is nowhere in SO codes its just the amount of damage I deal to it as it is non-officialy stated in Celson statmixer.

That alone is enough to just give a general idea and is a lot better than jesusland 2500+ or something stated as DS hp.

Joel, Prosper clearly stated that he understands that number is not the actual HP of the monster. You can determine how much damage output you perform in order to kill a monster. And as Prosper indicated, that is only one part of the equation. Using a different weapon/str combination, you might have to output more or less damage due to damage reduction per hit.

I'm actually glad someone finally worded their finding in such a way. Typically someone might have said, "A DS has 7900 HP!" which I would have had to say was wrong.

Yay, lets argue about semantics on the internet.

Quote from: Cactuscat222 on March 21, 2010, 10:22:23 PM
Yay, lets argue about semantics on the internet.

It's not semantics I'm talking about. The difference is that the people who say it that way actually mean what they are saying. It's not that we're both talking about the same thing only said differently.

But you're right. We should argue about semantics...

Seriously, wanna?

Theoretically, it would be the same damage from anyone, no matter the weapon. Let's assume the DS has a defense score, and frankly, we don't even know if that's the case, it may just have a large wad of HP. With that being said, say it has 20 defense, which roughly equated to 50% of damage taken is negated.

Player A hits for 40 damage, Player B hits for 80 damage.
Once we factor in the defense of the DS, Player A hits for 20, and Player B hits for 40. Untimely, if we were to calculate the amount of damage each player would have to do, it's the same. Player A simply has to do more hits, but he knows this.

Assuming that the DS has no defense, than the same thing applies, and the amount of damage needed to fell a DS would be the same. The only error in these discussions is the amount of overkill. If you swing for 100 damage, and the DS has 10 hp left, you wont actually know how much he had left, and just assume it was 100, putting your estimate off by 90 hp.

Quote from: Lingus on March 21, 2010, 09:54:04 PM
Joel, Prosper clearly stated that he understands that number is not the actual HP of the monster.

I didn't mean to head into the direction that he said that, I was just curious on what methods he used, I'm not trying to cause problems.

Quote
hehehehe joel joel joel...

I took Celson statmixer and simulated my exact same level str and wep and hat. It gave me a number per hit. And it took me x amounts of hits with my katana to kill it.

I just happened to solo 2 DS today and I counted the number of hits it took just for fun.

I'm not declaring that Its the exact same thing. Im just scaling the monster to the data I have.

I am sure 7900 is nowhere in SO codes its just the amount of damage I deal to it as it is non-officialy stated in Celson statmixer.

That alone is enough to just give a general idea and is a lot better than jesusland 2500+ or something stated as DS hp.

Now that's something I can believe. Thanks for clearing that up for me :)

Quote from: Seifer on March 22, 2010, 01:52:44 AM
Theoretically, it would be the same damage from anyone, no matter the weapon. Let's assume the DS has a defense score, and frankly, we don't even know if that's the case, it may just have a large wad of HP. With that being said, say it has 20 defense, which roughly equated to 50% of damage taken is negated.

Player A hits for 40 damage, Player B hits for 80 damage.
Once we factor in the defense of the DS, Player A hits for 20, and Player B hits for 40. Untimely, if we were to calculate the amount of damage each player would have to do, it's the same. Player A simply has to do more hits, but he knows this.

Assuming that the DS has no defense, than the same thing applies, and the amount of damage needed to fell a DS would be the same. The only error in these discussions is the amount of overkill. If you swing for 100 damage, and the DS has 10 hp left, you wont actually know how much he had left, and just assume it was 100, putting your estimate off by 90 hp.

Yes, you're right about that. The flaw is in assuming that the monster has no Def though. Because we're talking about how much damage you have to deal to the monster, not how much damage you have to output. The only number you know for certain is your damage output. So using the same test that Prosper used, all you know is that you have to output at least 7900 damage, but for someone dealing less damage than he did it might be less.

In other words, the best way to figure out the least amount of damage output required would be to hit a monster with an output of less than 3 damage. Since that is the least amount of damage you can do to a monster per hit, and you know each hit is exactly 3 damage dealt, you can determine the amount of damage required more accurately.

Although, again this gives you a number that relates more to the HP of the monster. If you then take a higher damage str/weapon combination and the amount of damage you output in order to kill the monster is significantly higher, then you know this monster has Def. Presumably, now that we have the damage reduction formula, you could reverse calculate a rough number for the defense of the monster.

But the damage mitigated is relative across the board, no matter what your damage output is, and in the end it equals out. Say a DS really has 4000 HP, but he mitigates 50% of damage. In the end, we would need to have an output of damage equal to 8000, no matter how much your output per hit is.

Right, I get that part. It's a good rough basis to use.

Of course, the problem comes in when you deal too little damage. As soon as your damage dealt to the monster drops below 3, the full defense of the monster is no longer taken into consideration. If your output is actually 3 or less damage, then you only have to output the amount of the monster's HP (to within 2 HP) regardless of defense.

So yes, I agree that what you're saying works for higher damage output, but it doesn't work across the board. But yea, for the most part, it's a good basis.

I doubt anyone actually fights a DS when there damage output is 3.

I will go and find me a DS, and than solo it and see how close my results match that of Prospers.

Quote from: Seifer on March 22, 2010, 03:49:14 PM
I doubt anyone actually fights a DS when there damage output is 3.

I will go and find me a DS, and than solo it and see how close my results match that of Prospers.

Hah, true. I guess it would be more relevant to lower level monsters.

I love you Seifer ! (in a non-erotic way dont worry)

I mean you read my mind.. all of what you explained earlier is exactly what I wanted to say but was too lazy to put it in words.
;D

If only stick online had a skill that took away defences from a monster.

Just solo'd one. Mine was closer to 7000. Somethings not right here.

That's a big gap to be explained by a rounding issue, or even inaccuracies in math and/or hit count.

I'm curious what your and Prosper's damage output was.

it took me 126*63dam to kill it.

Its not impossible that through my mental counting I have made a few errors

so we can say it takes between 7000-8000 dam hehe

That would be like missing 15 out of 126 hits, or about 12%. That's reasonable. Seems like in order to get a more accurate count you'd have to have several people do it several times. You could then take the average of all their counts, or if there's a pervasive number use that.

Heres my damage.

Hyperions base damage is 40. I THINK. I have yet to test it on someone with 0 def, but using the def formula my number should be correct. Due to rounding it could be 39, but I'm fairly certain it's 40.

Str, 89.

((1+((89*4)/100))*40)=182.4

So lets say 182 damage per swing.

Took me 38 swings. May have been 39. I may have hit two skeletons instead of the DS twice in a row, I noticed it the 2nd time, but I wasn't sure about the first.

With 38, that puts me at 6916. Even if the base damage is 39 instead of 40, or it was 38 or 39 swings, that number isn't changing much.

Hmm, yea you're right. At the most, with 40 base damage and 39 hits, you're looking at 7098. Which means Prosper had to have been off on his hit count. His had to have been closer to 112 hits to match up with your number.

Though, if both of your numbers are accurate, it's back to the drawing board.

Quote from: Lingus on March 22, 2010, 07:12:48 PM
Though, if both of your numbers are accurate, it's back to the drawing board.

You sound like Mythbusters hehe.

really though at the end of the day what does all this work accomplish

Quote from: runeskap master117 on March 23, 2010, 07:51:05 PM
really though at the end of the day what does all this work accomplish

The satisfaction of knowing none of this makes sense to 80% of the community, perhaps?

Quote from: runeskap master117 on March 23, 2010, 07:51:05 PM
really though at the end of the day what does all this work accomplish

Well i think they are doing to for fun. Math/problem solving is fun to sum people But you could use it to plain out an account better. Or it could help you know more about what you need to do to kill something.

But its true non of this is needed to play the game.

You guys are all assuming Monsters have HP in the first place, perhaps it is purely based on the amount of damage needed to kill it.

Quote from: NotoriousM4^ on March 23, 2010, 08:14:39 PM
You guys are all assuming Monsters have HP in the first place, perhaps it is purely based on the amount of damage needed to kill it.

Isn't that the same as hp? I don't understand.

Quote from: ARTgames on March 23, 2010, 08:34:15 PM

Quote from: NotoriousM4^ on March 23, 2010, 08:14:39 PM
You guys are all assuming Monsters have HP in the first place, perhaps it is purely based on the amount of damage needed to kill it.

Isn't that the same as hp? I don't understand.

Lol, seriously... what do you mean Notor?

What seems most likely is that the values of each stat is hard coded. There would be a specific number for HP, Def, Base Damage, Run Speed, Attack Speed, Knockback (both how much it does and receives). This way it would be easier for the rest of the code to act as normal. When it hits something, it calculates the same damage formula as when a player hits. When it receives damage it calculates the damage reduction, and then reduces its current HP by the amount of damage it receives, just like when a player receives damage. I would think it would be more difficult to have a completely different system for any interactions dealing with a monster versus with a player. Of course, I may be wrong...

Yeah same here.

Quote from: Lingus on March 23, 2010, 08:55:26 PM

Quote from: ARTgames on March 23, 2010, 08:34:15 PM

Quote from: NotoriousM4^ on March 23, 2010, 08:14:39 PM
You guys are all assuming Monsters have HP in the first place, perhaps it is purely based on the amount of damage needed to kill it.

Isn't that the same as hp? I don't understand.

Lol, seriously... what do you mean Notor?

What seems most likely is that the values of each stat is hard coded. There would be a specific number for HP, Def, Base Damage, Run Speed, Attack Speed, Knockback (both how much it does and receives). This way it would be easier for the rest of the code to act as normal. When it hits something, it calculates the same damage formula as when a player hits. When it receives damage it calculates the damage reduction, and then reduces its current HP by the amount of damage it receives, just like when a player receives damage. I would think it would be more difficult to have a completely different system for any interactions dealing with a monster versus with a player. Of course, I may be wrong...

It is the same thing, he makes no sense. Lingus has it right though. It would work the same for players and monsters, it's illogical to have two different systems.

Quote from: runeskap master117 on March 23, 2010, 07:51:05 PM
really though at the end of the day what does all this work accomplish

Satisfaction?

What does your comment accomplish? I bet you just scratched your head the whole way through this topic...if you even bothered to read this topic...

lol Notor...

whats the satisfaction of figuring out the defense formula to a stick game i do not comprehend

Quote from: runeskap master117 on March 24, 2010, 10:43:52 AM
whats the satisfaction of figuring out the defense formula to a stick game i do not comprehend

whats the satisfaction to even posting here? wats the satisfaction to even playing on the computer? whats the satisfaction to living when we are gonna die anyways?

Quote from: DivineLegend on March 24, 2010, 11:44:28 AM
whats the satisfaction to living when we are gonna die anyways?

Damn. Now I'm depressed.

Quote from: runeskap master117 on March 24, 2010, 10:43:52 AM
whats the satisfaction of figuring out the defense formula to a stick game i do not comprehend

Honestly, I just see it as something to do to pass the time. It keeps my brain occupied. And the satisfaction is just in knowing that I have solved a complicated problem. It has nothing to do with the result of solving the problem. You are right in that this really serves no other purpose. At least not one that is very practical for the game.

Quote from: Lingus on March 24, 2010, 02:03:30 PM

Quote from: DivineLegend on March 24, 2010, 11:44:28 AM
whats the satisfaction to living when we are gonna die anyways?

Damn. Now I'm depressed.

Quote from: runeskap master117 on March 24, 2010, 10:43:52 AM
whats the satisfaction of figuring out the defense formula to a stick game i do not comprehend

Honestly, I just see it as something to do to pass the time. It keeps my brain occupied. And the satisfaction is just in knowing that I have solved a complicated problem. It has nothing to do with the result of solving the problem. You are right in that this really serves no other purpose. At least not one that is very practical for the game.

lol

Quote from: Seifer on March 23, 2010, 11:05:08 PM

Quote from: Lingus on March 23, 2010, 08:55:26 PM

Quote from: ARTgames on March 23, 2010, 08:34:15 PM

Quote from: NotoriousM4^ on March 23, 2010, 08:14:39 PM
You guys are all assuming Monsters have HP in the first place, perhaps it is purely based on the amount of damage needed to kill it.

Isn't that the same as hp? I don't understand.

Lol, seriously... what do you mean Notor?

What seems most likely is that the values of each stat is hard coded. There would be a specific number for HP, Def, Base Damage, Run Speed, Attack Speed, Knockback (both how much it does and receives). This way it would be easier for the rest of the code to act as normal. When it hits something, it calculates the same damage formula as when a player hits. When it receives damage it calculates the damage reduction, and then reduces its current HP by the amount of damage it receives, just like when a player receives damage. I would think it would be more difficult to have a completely different system for any interactions dealing with a monster versus with a player. Of course, I may be wrong...

It is the same thing, he makes no sense. Lingus has it right though. It would work the same for players and monsters, it's illogical to have two different systems.

(http://www.threadbombing.com/data/media/4/RimshotBadumtsh.jpg)
I didn't think you would take that comment seriously.

Bored, took me 80 hits with WH to solo a DS.. 45str.

That sounds odd...

Anyone have the base damage of the WH?

I used Jesusland's calculator and got 101 damage per hit with 45 str. I'm not sure if I trust that site since it says hits needed for a DS at that damage would be about 25 which is waaaay low.

So the damage needed to kill based on this is 8080. So we're definitely getting a range of around 7000-8000. Something is wrong...

First, lets stop using jesuslands damage calculator. Just use the formula. I don't know if I can trust jesuslands calculator. Secondly, if someone can dig up my old guide, it's still on the old forums, than we know the WH base damage for sure. If not, I need to test it ingame.

Heh, funny you should mention. The only reason I used their calculator was it was the only thing offhand I could think of to use. I realized I had your damage formula (from earlier in this topic) and Jesusland has the base damage of all the weapons (even if they might be inaccurate.) So at least I could test if their damage calculator was accurate. Well, it's not.

Using their base for the WH (31), Seifer's damage formula, and igufed's str (45), I get 86.8 as the damage. Not 101. So now it's a total damage of 6944. Which is more in line with Seifer's number. Actually, if Seifer's hit count was 38 instead of 39, they're within 13 damage or so.

Which seems reasonably closer. And if I recall correctly Prosper also used the calculator.

Yeah, I find it much easier to just put the formula into google search, it'll do the math for you.

He said Celson's statmixer. I don't know what formula that uses.

Prosper, if you wouldn't mind, would you post your Str and weapon at the time of soloing the DS?

WH is 31. Just checked, least that's correct.

Ok good. So it's looking like your theory is standing so far.

Now I want someone to solo a DS with 1 str using no weapon... Good luck.

I used a katana and it took me 126 hits I think it was something like 63 dam per hit. I'm trying to keep my str a secret for the moment.

Oh bother! Just post it, or atleast make sure you use the proper damage formula. Plus anyone with half a brain can work it backwards to find your strength.

i'm curious, do monsters regain any hp over time?

No.

has it been tested? like on a bandit or rock demon? all it would take to test it is to get it secluded, have no1 hit it, and get it to one hit left with a weapon and let it sit over night since no1 goes on at night... maybe i will test it... if i could get a rd over the bridge

Takes me 10 hits on a BA even if i let it sit for awhile, trust me.

kk, i will trust ya on that

Any hint to def of any monster?

Ok I've just tested this. I tested on Ed and his defence without a helmet is 0. So at first I calculated that with me using a short sword, it would do 69 damage to him while he's not wearing a hat, was a success, 69 damage was dealt. Then he wore a froggy hat which gives +3 defence. I calculated that I would hit 53.0769230769231 damage to him, 57 damage was dealt. I would of been satisfied with 52 or 54 damage, but 57 is a difference of 4 and is not close enough to satisfy me. Are you sure this formula is correct?

Btw, if anyone was curious to know, I had 61 strength (not wearing any hats).

Quote from: Celson on September 01, 2010, 11:41:17 AM
I calculated that I would hit 53.0769230769231 damage to him, 57 damage was dealt.

You calculated wrong. I just typed the formulae in an excel spreadsheet and it gave 56.58 damage. Base being 69 and def being 3.

If you type 69*(.22+(1-.22)/(1+3*.1) on a calculator you might get it wrong.

Quote from: Prosper on September 01, 2010, 02:49:56 PM

Quote from: Celson on September 01, 2010, 11:41:17 AM
I calculated that I would hit 53.0769230769231 damage to him, 57 damage was dealt.

You calculated wrong. I just typed the formulae in an excel spreadsheet and it gave 56.58 damage. Base being 69 and def being 3.

If you type 69*(.22+(1-.22)/(1+3*.1) on a calculator you might get it wrong.

I'm doing it in slow steps, and I'm using the formula... 69*(1/(1+3*.1)  since it is shorter and outputs the same result.

3*0.1 = 0.3
+ 1 = 1.3

1/1.3 = 0.7692307692307692

69 * 0.7692307692307692 = 53.07692...


I'm doubting that a calculator is wrong when doing it in those slow steps.

QuoteIf you type 69*(.22+(1-.22)/(1+3*.1) on a calculator you might get it wrong.

I actually typed it wrong in this reply I forgot 1 ")" at the end. Maybe thats why you kept getting it wrong. But in the original post its typed correctly. Here is the RIGHT way to calculate in slow steps.

69*(.22+(1-.22)/(1+3*.1))
69*(.22+(1-.22)/(1.3))
69*(.22+(.78)/(1.3))
69*(.22+0.6)
69*(0.82)
56.58

Type the formula into google and see what happens.  ;)

Quote from: Seifer on September 01, 2010, 05:12:37 PM
Type the formula into google and see what happens.  ;)

69 * (.22 + ((1 - .22) / (1 + (3 * .1)))) = 56.58

Quote from: Prosper on September 01, 2010, 05:24:11 PM

Quote from: Seifer on September 01, 2010, 05:12:37 PM
Type the formula into google and see what happens.  ;)

69 * (.22 + ((1 - .22) / (1 + (3 * .1)))) = 56.58

EDIT: Eugh nevermind. It appears google doesn't like me either. I try and type 69 * (.22 + (1 - .22) / (1 + 3 * .1)) into there calculator and they keep adding extra brackets, which is weird, because by adding those extra brackets it changes the sum. Anyway, yeah your right, my mistake.

Just use the origanal formula as is, and google with calculate it properly, I assure you.

Quote from: Celson on September 02, 2010, 12:08:30 AM

Quote from: Prosper on September 01, 2010, 05:24:11 PM

Quote from: Seifer on September 01, 2010, 05:12:37 PM
Type the formula into google and see what happens.  ;)

69 * (.22 + ((1 - .22) / (1 + (3 * .1)))) = 56.58

EDIT: Eugh nevermind. It appears google doesn't like me either. I try and type 69 * (.22 + (1 - .22) / (1 + 3 * .1)) into there calculator and they keep adding extra brackets, which is weird, because by adding those extra brackets it changes the sum. Anyway, yeah your right, my mistake.

The only extra brackets it puts in is around the 3 * .1, and around the division. Basically, it's putting in unnecessary (but not incorrect) brackets that show where the order of operation should take place. You're getting the same result though because based on the order of operations those brackets it adds doesn't change anything.

Seifer, it looks like Celson's formula is the original formula (from the first post?)... same brackets and everything.

Quote from: Celson on September 01, 2010, 03:02:25 PM

Quote from: Prosper on September 01, 2010, 02:49:56 PM

Quote from: Celson on September 01, 2010, 11:41:17 AM
I calculated that I would hit 53.0769230769231 damage to him, 57 damage was dealt.

You calculated wrong. I just typed the formulae in an excel spreadsheet and it gave 56.58 damage. Base being 69 and def being 3.

If you type 69*(.22+(1-.22)/(1+3*.1) on a calculator you might get it wrong.

I'm doing it in slow steps, and I'm using the formula... 69*(1/(1+3*.1)  since it is shorter and outputs the same result.

3*0.1 = 0.3
+ 1 = 1.3

1/1.3 = 0.7692307692307692

69 * 0.7692307692307692 = 53.07692...


I'm doubting that a calculator is wrong when doing it in those slow steps.

Calculators can be plenty wrong when you're utterly failing at math.

69*(1/(1+3*.1) is NOT the same thing as 69 * (.22 + (1 - .22) / (1 + 3 * .1)).

You're completely omitting the .22 and -.22.  Shouldn't those cancel each other out, you ask? 

No.

1-.22 is done, it is DIVIDED BY (1+3*.1), THEN you add .22 to it.  Your 'simplification' isn't following the order of operations, so it doesn't work.

I love how this math is simple order of operations with the four basic operations, but I'm still completely befuddled.

Thanks for the explanations guys, but seriously, I figured it out like 5 posts ago. I don't need 3 GMs to come in and discuss it any further. I already make myself look like a fool, don't really need anyone else to come in and constantly bring it up after I apologised for my mistake already.

Quote from: Celson on September 02, 2010, 04:11:32 PM
Thanks for the explanations guys, but seriously, I figured it out like 5 posts ago. I don't need 3 GMs to come in and discuss it any further. I already make myself look like a fool, don't really need anyone else to come in and constantly bring it up after I apologised for my mistake already.

You knew it didn't work.  I explained WHY.

We could make it a little simpler if we wanted to....

(.78/(.1*defense+1)+.22)*baseDamage

It took me a few years, but I'm pretty sure I've calculated out the formula. Are you ready for it? Are you sure!? Here it is!

Ignorance=Bliss

Holy christ that took forever to figure out, ya'll owe me one.

A little hint. The HP is slightly incorrect and you can't add more than 99 vit either, unless it has been changed lately.

Me and foG just did some testing. I have 73/32. foG can post his stats if he pleases, but he probably won't. Despite that, we all know he is a vittank, and a damned good one, the best.

foG was using his crown, which only gives +2 vit, as opposed to DKH's +4, but it works with his build, as he only needs the 2 added vit to make the helm give him an extra 9 defense. The helm also gives him 2 added str. I would say this is equal to, if not better than a DKH on another vittank.

I actually have 78 str, 5 more than what I would have, if I did not have my extra stats. I took this into account when calculating. It was 4 extra damage a hit.

By math, it takes me 6.6 hits to kill him, and 7.5 hits for him to kill me. This translates into 7 hits to kill him, and 8 hits for me to die.

We tested the GB as well. In the end, it gave each of us an additional hit. For me, it was exactly 1 hit. With the GB on, and my -9 def, I took the exact amount of damage that I got from the GB. So for this test, the GB was useless.

In conclusion, I would like to state that obviously the vittank isn't winning by 1-2 hits, and is in fact losing by a hit. This may be due to foG's build, in that it is more dated. But I could not see such a small differance in stats between foG and the "perfect mathematical Vittank" making a 2-3 hit differance.

One last thing I would like to mention is that Vittanks MUST invest in INT. 6-7. I've never seen a vittank without. A Str'er on the other hand requires no int, as he hits very hard and ends combat quickly. This translates into a free 6-7 stat points.

What would you consider tank? My face account doesn't need int.

Quote from: JoEL on September 03, 2010, 07:44:54 AM
What would you consider tank? My face account doesn't need int.

I assume he means builds with very high vit so you barely have str left. And low str requires int.

Im just supplying data you guys may conclude whatever you want :P. Seifer I think the same as you and I personaly prefer STR over VIT.. that is why I made ATLAS. These tables only compares directly opposite builds .. for example 75str 25vit VS 25str 75vit. This may be why you get varying results.. like.. what would happen if a 80str 20vit faced a 70vit 30str..

This is just for people to see that SO is very well balanced, meiun is a good programmer and that its up to your personal preferance what type of TANK you wanna be. All in all Seifer and Me prefer STR tanks.

Quote from: foG on September 03, 2010, 07:05:33 AM
A little hint. The HP is slightly incorrect and you can't add more than 99 vit either, unless it has been changed lately.

Since it would have been complicated to actualy SHOW 99+4 VIT or any VIT+4. The amount of VIT you see in the DKH table INCLUDES the +4vit from DKH and also already includes the +7 def. thats why I typed 103vit.. to simulate 99+4.

This is probably why you thought there were some incorrect data. Im actually quite sure these numbers are right.

On the other hand I should have given more info on the tables themselves so you guys just didn't know.

and @Seifer thats probably why you found DEF wasn't accurate.. you should actually look at 36 VIT in the table since its 32+4.

Both charts don't display the correct HP because you started off with the wrong ammount of HP in the beginning, meaning all the following levels are also slightly off.

I just added this to the original post :

I had nothing to do one night so I decided to sit down and reverse the def formula :

Damage = baseDamage*(.22+(1-.22)/(1+defense*.1))
baseDamage = Damage/(.22+(1-.22)/(1+defense*.1)) [this one was pretty straight forward]
defense = 10*((1-.22)/((Damage/baseDamage)-.22))-10 [this one took me like ... 1 hour to figure out]

Now giving one has accurate wep attack data we can reverse calculate anyone's STR, DEF and VIT just by knowing 2 of the 3 above data. As we know Jesusland has bad wep attack data so using them gives false results.

Here are closer results based on my own testing and calculations. Since damage is rounded up It gives results +/- 1 from true stat you are trying to figure out. Also the more powerfull the attack is the more accurate the results are.

Here is more accurate data on weapons :

Damage = (1+((STR*4))/100)*Weapon Attack

Punch 7.9
Candy Canes 9.6
Kick 11.5
Whip 12.5
Tree Branch 13.2
Hatchet 14.2
Dagger 14.4
Ghost Lantern 15.3
Katana 15.3
Spire Dagger 20
Short Sword 21
Scythe 25.3
Wooden Hammer 31
Great Sword 39.5
Inferno Sword 47
Stone Hammer 50

I wasn't able to test Slasher and LSS damage yet.

No such thing as a decimal in SO. Everything is rounded.

Quote from: Seifer on September 28, 2010, 01:19:39 AM
No such thing as a decimal in SO. Everything is rounded.

so with agi, your speed goes up by 1?(in game maker speed) every time you level it?

Quote from: Seifer on September 28, 2010, 01:19:39 AM
No such thing as a decimal in SO. Everything is rounded.

test them

Bump.. someone was looking for it and couldnt find so .. thats why I bump it.

Thanks, I've been wondering about this for some time.

Quote from: troyowns on September 28, 2010, 08:08:39 AM

Quote from: Seifer on September 28, 2010, 01:19:39 AM
No such thing as a decimal in SO. Everything is rounded.

so with agi, your speed goes up by 1?(in game maker speed) every time you level it?

Seifer obviously went a bit overboard by saying that. He just meant damage and damage deduction wise, there is no decimal values, it is rounded. Your speed can go up by decimal values.