A Brief Introduction to Damage in zOMG!

[Myrielle]

Valheita

I thought that too, but apparently it's only C.L. variations which do it.

At the very least, it's been confirmed mathematically that Barnacle Fluffs and Brain Clams take the same damage.

Too many years of D&D make us assume some RPG rules are universal.

[Lobotryas]

The only monsters that I remember being modified so their stats go off the regular scaling charts are the Thunder Gods a player encounters during the Gauntlet quest.

[Valheita]

Cheating Storms of Chaloc

mad

[EmperorZensekai]

(watches you guys talk)

I thought Endboss had armor?

[Myrielle]

Valheita

Cheating Storms of Chaloc

mad

God mode Hax.

[Kiyanga]

Myrielle

Maybe they should put an absolute value to the equation to avoid negative damage.

You can't add absolute value signs because when the calculated amount is negative, you will be doing 1 damage. Adding absolute value signs to the equation would give you:

D = | (1 + [YourCL - TargetCL ] / 2) * (RingDamage) |

Taking the example that SolarInvictus used that can now be found under FAQ (but note that I have added the absolute value signs and final answer in red):

SolarInvictus

Let's take the classic example of a 4.5 walking on to GB and then encounters a 6.6 golem, and since we know that they should at least have a GGG lets use that as the ring they are using.
Damage = | (1 + [ YourCL - TargetCL ] / 2) * (Ring's Damage) |
D = | (1 + [4.5 - 6.6] /2) * (70) |
D = | (1 + [-2.1] /2) * (70) |
D = | (1 + [-1.05]) * (70) |
D = | (-.05) * (70) |
D = | -3.5 |
D= 3.5

The problem with this is that a CL 4.5 will only do 1 damage using GGG, not 3.5 damage.

In other words, the damage rounds to the nearest positive whole number (keep in mind that zero is not a positive number), not the absolute value.

[EmperorZensekai]

Myrielle

Valheita

Cheating Storms of Chaloc

mad

God mode Hax.

psh not fair, like mr fluff xD

nice avi kiyanga!

[Myrielle]

Kiyanga

Myrielle

Maybe they should put an absolute value to the equation to avoid negative damage.

You can't add absolute value signs because when the calculated amount is negative, you will be doing 1 damage. Adding absolute value signs to the equation would give you:

D = | (1 + [YourCL - TargetCL ] / 2) * (RingDamage) |

Taking the example that SolarInvictus used that can now be found under FAQ (but note that I have added the absolute value signs and final answer in red):

SolarInvictus

Let's take the classic example of a 4.5 walking on to GB and then encounters a 6.6 golem, and since we know that they should at least have a GGG lets use that as the ring they are using.
Damage = | (1 + [ YourCL - TargetCL ] / 2) * (Ring's Damage) |
D = | (1 + [4.5 - 6.6] /2) * (70) |
D = | (1 + [-2.1] /2) * (70) |
D = | (1 + [-1.05]) * (70) |
D = | (-.05) * (70) |
D = | -3.5 |
D= 3.5

The problem with this is that a CL 4.5 will only do 1 damage using GGG, not 3.5 damage.

In other words, the damage rounds to the nearest positive whole number (keep in mind that zero is not a positive number), not the absolute value.

Been away math for too long. What function makes it so that the number always comes out positive? Anyway, the equation should only hold true for CLs with a 2.0 or less difference from the attacker and target or the value automatically becomes 1.

[gataka]

Val, I think you should mention that "Ring's Damage" is:
Ring'sBaseDamage * CL
Like RR1Adrenaline being 4*CL.
Or RR1G3 being 7*CL.
Or something.
>.>

[Fr33d0m4ever]

Myrielle: When you take the absolute value of a number, the difference in the math makes it appear as if you're always above your target's CL.

Absolute value (in this case) basically takes any number and makes it a positive.

Edit: gataka: but not even the ring guide says that ;3

and it's math~ XD;

[Myrielle]

Fr33d0m4ever

Myrielle: When you take the absolute value of a number, the difference in the math makes it appear as if you're always above your target's CL.

Absolute value basically takes any number and makes it a positive.

That was my main intent. I wanted the outcome always a positive integer. Anyway, we digress. This tangent was spurred because of a miscalculation a few pages back so it is probably moot.

[Kiyanga]

Myrielle

Been away math for too long. What function makes it so that the number always comes out positive? Anyway, the equation should only hold true for CLs with a 2.0 or less difference from the attacker and target or the value automatically becomes 1.

It is the absolute value function that makes the answer always be non-negative. And you're almost right, the equation will only hold true when the CL of the target is less than 2.0 higher than the CL of the attacker (when the difference is exactly 2.0, the result will be 0, meaning the damage will be 1). But in the cases for which the equation holds true, the absolute value signs are unneeded, because the result will already be positive.

You really need a system of equations to make it always be true, but since the point was to make it as non-mathy as possible, I won't go into that...

& thank you EmperorZensekai smile

[Thard_Verad]

So the first of our guides has been published, eh? Looks good!

I hope people take a second look at this and congratulate Taylor and his Hive Crew. Reaching levels with CL 14.6 Animated is impressive enough without knowing the Shift equation. But when you realize that after 12.0, the players' attacks drop to 1, going all those extra waves is even more astounding. Viva la Reflect!

[gataka]

Thard_Verad

So the first of our guides has been published, eh? Looks good!

I hope people take a second look at this and congratulate Taylor and his Hive Crew. Reaching levels with CL 14.6 Animated is impressive enough without knowing the Shift equation. But when you realize that after 12.0, the players' attacks drop to 1, going all those extra waves is even more astounding. Viva la Reflect!

._O
Hadn't thought about that... Holy Carpet Bombing!

[Valheita]

gataka

Val, I think you should mention that "Ring's Damage" is:
Ring'sBaseDamage * CL
Like RR1Adrenaline being 4*CL.
Or RR1G3 being 7*CL.
Or something.
>.>

Hmm. I'll dump it in the FAQ.