Hi mates! Now I bring a question about optimice of damage. The question are this. If you have 100 of tactics and put a weapon that increase your tactics by 20, you can reach 120, and increase your damage isnt it? How much anatomy increase your damage? I have a template of lumber and I have 80 in tactics and 100 in anatomy and 30 in magery. Im thinking about increase tactics to gm, down anatomy to 90 and magery to 20 ( enough to recall well) Whats your opinion?
To address your questions here and at Chance to hit? thread: Swords skill calculates your chance to hit a target given swords skill vs. targets armor. Archery has the best chance to hit as bows add archery skill and not tactics. Tactics is a simple damage booster +25% at GM_ ~30% at 125 skill Anatomy is similar with a damage booster +20% at GM. However anatomy is also used to increase heath healed. You also require 90+ anatomy and 90+ weapon skill to use special moves such as para blow.
I dont think its exactly like that here. I think we use a "suggested weapon" damage and % of Combat Ability system, that works out roughly the same. It used to be something like ((BaseDamage * (Tactics*1.5)) + StrBonus + AnatomyBonus) / 2 (If against a monster you dont divide by 2) Dont quote me on the numbers, but I think HERE it goes something like this: CA * Base = Damage (If vs a monster assume 2x CA) Ill use a halberd as an example. Damage with a Vanq halberd should look like 2d23+10 (12-56) So first you tally your "Combat Effectiveness" Str @ 100 is 25% Swords at 100 is 25% Tactics at 100 is 25% Anatomy at 100 is 25% If all skills and STR are GM Your CA is 100% From there its straight Multiplication. 100% of 12 - 56 is 12 -56. Boosting your str above 100 gives a bonus to CA Boosting your Tactics also gives bonus CA (I also believe the +Archery from bows only affects CA so its mathematically the same as a bonus to tactics.) So with 120str and 125 Tactics with GM Swords/Anatomy yould have something like 120% CA. So that would boost the hallys damage from 12 - 56 to 14 - 67 (+20% Damage). Is super tired, so sorry if thats hard to follow... lol
Very rarely, if ever, will you want to lower anatomy below 100. See testing: http://uorforum.com/threads/150-points-between-anatomy-and-tactics.41342/#post-396055
Wow, its better to have anatomy 100 than tactics. Thank you very much mate! Awesome work! Thx keza for your help in the chance to hit
Where does the 2x come from? Is there some forum post or stratics info? What are you trying to imply with this idea that these factors are equally weighted? Also, what do you mean by CA and CombatEffectiveness? Why do you think Swordsmanship impacts your weapon damage? My impression from the stratics archive is that it was just impacting Chance To Hit ( http://www.uorenaissance.com/stratics/combat ). The "UOR Weapon Damage Final 2.0" spreadsheet has some hints: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1ojtDHRtjWtlNvzA2U111tYYoKrhmJLzfE7dNbuuR0P Reading through that spreadsheet, what I come up with is... Code: Base = base weapon damage (like 3d8+2 on a katana) AdjustedForSkill = Base*0.5 + Base*[ 12.5 + tactics/8 + strength/10 + anat/10 + (5 if GM_Anat)]/100 Damage = (AdjustedForSkill + LumberjackingBonus + MagicPropertyBonus) * (2 if slayer) I've separated AdjustedForSkill it into those 2 components to illustrate what Chris has said in the past about skills only impacting half of the damage (although after the changes in Patch 73 that removed the caps and squished tactics, it's now 62.5% of Base for free) With tactics=100, strength=100, anat=100, then AdjustedForSkill = Base (i.e. no adjustment). Although Chris did say in the patch notes that using strength potions and a tactics weapon might give you ~10% damage increase. Here i'd see it as something like (tacticsBonus/8 + strengthBonus/10) % of base weapon damage added, so like adding 5% of base weapon damage if using a +25 tactics weapon and +20 strenght.
I wrote CA instead of CE to stand for combat effectiveness. Im pretty sure my brain was thinking combat ability. Like i said, dont quote me on the numbers. (or apparently the formula) All i was trying to say is its kind of custom here and that i was pretty sure that everything contributes fairly evenly to your CE, and that CE determines what the weapon is supposed to hit like. Im pretty sure that all damage vs people was always halved. I was just assuming that if a weapon is supposed to do 2d10 damage to a person, the only way to make the new formula work as it was was, is to just double the damage vs a mob.
Another consequence of the above formula (if correct) is the tradeoff between tactics and lumberjacking... 1 additional point in Anatomy adds Base/1000 damage --> For a Double Axe (averages 20 base damage), that's 0.02 damage --> Extra 0.05*Base (i.e. 1 damage) if GM Anatomy 1 additional point in Tactics adds Base/800 damage --> For a Double Axe (averages 20 base damage), that's 0.025 damage 1 additional point in Lumberjacking adds 0.1 damage (ignoring rounding) I believe the LJ bonus damage formula is: Code: int( (LJ - 5) / 10 ) - 1 + (1 if GM) In there, the int() function means "round down"/"floor". That's based on some older threads saying that the damage gain is at 45, 55, 65, etc skill, not 40, 50, 60. 45 to 54.9 is +3 95 to 99.9 is +8 GM is +9 Haven't tested that, but those +3, +8, +9 at least agree with the Lumberjacking page on the Compendium website.
How would this apply to archery where weapons increase archery? DPS is already low, so wondering what would be suggested if I need to sacrifice some skill points.
