The problem stems from the health regen formula, which is valued at:
(Health regeneration per second * time to live without heals)/Total Health
This likely needs to be rethought because it is currently possible to go above 100%, which doesn't make sense, for the time being if you use a health regen multiple of 0 it will stop affecting your vitality figure, but ill try to think of a better way to model health regen at higher values (nearing 100%)
Just thinking about this, health regen persecond * time to live without heals should = additional health provided by health regeneration and should be added to the total health figure rather than its current comparison with armor and such...
Going to think about this a little more before implementing the change, but it is likely to be completely remodeled
Assuming you meant 2.61 for your offhand (which is what it should be given the stats on the spreadsheet you gave me) the value of 2.24 is simply the average between your 1.87 and 2.16 2.61, it isn't used in the damage calculation but it is used for life on hit calculations, It would be fairly easy to change the formula to display the in game number, but because your weapon speed switches between swings averaging it seemed to be a good idea.
It seems dual-wield doesn't work well in the current V4 spreadsheet.
Entering a second weapon in the sheet breaks the new "Relative Stat Values" calculations and some values on the "Marginal Stat Increase" Page.
There was a #Ref! error, thanks. should be fixed now.
For Frenzy I see the numbers 777 and 0.75. I don't see the number 1.3125 anywhere, which from reading earlier posts in this thread is apparently the LoH Coefficient for Frenzy / Sidearm. So how do I compute this number from looking at the table?
The number 777 is the amount each frenzy healed for based on the testers life on hit gear (held constant of course), 1.3125 is a calculation of 0.75 (found on the table) * 1.75 (frenzy increases attack speed by 75%). This is unique to frenzy as it is the only attack that goes quicker then your normal attacks per second (and revenge, which is unmodified by aps)
Marginal stat change has been added on another tab, Ideally I'd like to add it to the main page but unsure where it would "fit" with the current layout...
That marginal increase is really, really, really hard to use imo. You can't compare anything in a easy way.
What I wanted with stat weight was a table where your best stat for increasing "EHP" has the value 1, and then other values like armor, vit, etc etc got other values.
Example (imaginary units):
Stat
Weight
All resistance
1.0
Armor
13.2
Vitality
20.4
This way its really easy to see that, with your current gear, 1 resistance is worth the same "EHP" as 13.2 armor and 20.4 vitality.
That way you can easily estimate if that "600 armor, 20 res all" helmet is as good as your "400 armor, 50 res all" helmet
Cool, I can see how that would definitely be easier, i'll add that in a few hours. Thanks for the clarification.
Something doesn't work right. I have Nerves of Steel and Tough as Nails passives. Also have Enchantress with Focused Mind and Powered Armor. Unbuffed, my armor value reads 8806 (with Enchantress as my active follower). The details panel in game says I have 74.59% reduction from armor.
I use Warcry and my armor goes up to 10,064 and now the details panel says I have 77.04% reduction from armor.
In the spreadsheet, I have entered 8806 in the Current Armor value column, and I have selected
Tough as Nails + Nerves of Steel + Impunity + Powered Armor + Focused Mind = 1
In the Damage Reduction section of the Spreadshet, at the bottom, it says Armor is 77.30%, compared to 77.04% that is shown in the game. Granted the difference is quite small, but given that we're talking about almost a quarter of a percent, it seems significant enough to warrant concern.
When I put in 8806 armor and level 60 mobs it comes out to exactly 77.04 like your in game shows.
When I put in 8806 armor and level 63 mobs and also take off Powered armor i come to 77.30 armor.
I would recheck both your options and your mob level, but can confirm that the calculation is working the same as in game values.
Marginal stat change has been added on another tab, Ideally I'd like to add it to the main page but unsure where it would "fit" with the current layout...
EDIT: Upon further testing, its only changing "tough as nails" from 1 to 0 that seems to increase my effective health by around 20k.
Another thing is that it would be really nice if you could make a stat weigth table for current gear effective health wise.
The change you are seeing is because you are turning off your passive that gives you armor (tough as nails) without changing your character sheet armor value. This is working properly. The plus armor buffs are additive and not multiplactive, so for example if you have a 25% armor buff and a 20% armor buff they would combine to 45% rather than 50% (which you would get by multiplying) because this is the case, each "real" armor value gives you more total armor than the "extra" armor from the passive.
Also, I'll toss in stat weights, they seem pretty straightforward, thanks for the suggestions.
Regarding the argument that reduced damage from ranged attacks only is beneficial in a few scenarios, is that because most projectiles considered as spells? Is it only like the skeleton archers that actually count as ranged attackers?
I honestly haven't tested reduced damage from ranged attacks, so can't really answer this. My assumption however was that both physical projectiles like arrows, and magic projectiles like fireballs did count towards the reduction however. I just don't see many scenarios where you are gearing for less ranged damage taken specifically, it just doesn't seem to matter nearly as much as the other two % damage reductions which would be close to all (90%-ish) relevant damage sources
1. I didnt realize people used this stat, but yeah I can add it in
2. This stat could really only be beneficial in a few scenarios and would mislead effective health
3. Thats defaulted to frenzy (they are all the same), Id suggest taking a second look at the coefficient table if you are multiplying 777 by anything.
As an example, why doesn't rings just work like the mainhand. If I enter values of 2(bot dmg) & 6 (top dmg) for ring 1, and place a 0 dmg stat ring in as possible switch, shouldn't it just know that the change will be -2 and -6? Like the Weapon 1 section, if i just enter in 200/400 damage weapon, and enter in 0/0 it will then have a change of -200/-400. Basically, why doesn't the column G just work for everything else like it does for Weapon 1. We're already entering in the current stats of the weapon2, ring, amulet in the Column C, why must it be repeated in Column F? Column C and F will always be the same anyway. Sorry if these are dumb questions, I'd like to take a stab at something this intricate someday, and wanted to understand the thought process and mechanics.
It looks to me like Column D (Change) will always be Column G - Column C. So what then is the point of F?
If you were to put in 0's it would work fine, but the problem is I personally think it is too easy to forget to put in zero's.
Iif you personally want to do that, you can just copy the formulas from the top of column D down to cell 20 and white out the column F cells down to the same spot.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
(Health regeneration per second * time to live without heals)/Total Health
This likely needs to be rethought because it is currently possible to go above 100%, which doesn't make sense, for the time being if you use a health regen multiple of 0 it will stop affecting your vitality figure, but ill try to think of a better way to model health regen at higher values (nearing 100%)
Just thinking about this, health regen persecond * time to live without heals should = additional health provided by health regeneration and should be added to the total health figure rather than its current comparison with armor and such...
Going to think about this a little more before implementing the change, but it is likely to be completely remodeled
2.162.61, it isn't used in the damage calculation but it is used for life on hit calculations, It would be fairly easy to change the formula to display the in game number, but because your weapon speed switches between swings averaging it seemed to be a good idea.There was a #Ref! error, thanks. should be fixed now.
The default IAS bonus is included, could you give more information on this problem? Are your in game values different then the spreadsheet?
The number 777 is the amount each frenzy healed for based on the testers life on hit gear (held constant of course), 1.3125 is a calculation of 0.75 (found on the table) * 1.75 (frenzy increases attack speed by 75%). This is unique to frenzy as it is the only attack that goes quicker then your normal attacks per second (and revenge, which is unmodified by aps)
Cool, I can see how that would definitely be easier, i'll add that in a few hours. Thanks for the clarification.
Edit, Added table, should look similar to:
When I put in 8806 armor and level 60 mobs it comes out to exactly 77.04 like your in game shows.
When I put in 8806 armor and level 63 mobs and also take off Powered armor i come to 77.30 armor.
I would recheck both your options and your mob level, but can confirm that the calculation is working the same as in game values.
Do you have any sources of how it works or any testing done on ranged damage reduction?
TY, ill fix this right away
The change you are seeing is because you are turning off your passive that gives you armor (tough as nails) without changing your character sheet armor value. This is working properly. The plus armor buffs are additive and not multiplactive, so for example if you have a 25% armor buff and a 20% armor buff they would combine to 45% rather than 50% (which you would get by multiplying) because this is the case, each "real" armor value gives you more total armor than the "extra" armor from the passive.
Also, I'll toss in stat weights, they seem pretty straightforward, thanks for the suggestions.
I honestly haven't tested reduced damage from ranged attacks, so can't really answer this. My assumption however was that both physical projectiles like arrows, and magic projectiles like fireballs did count towards the reduction however. I just don't see many scenarios where you are gearing for less ranged damage taken specifically, it just doesn't seem to matter nearly as much as the other two % damage reductions which would be close to all (90%-ish) relevant damage sources
2. This stat could really only be beneficial in a few scenarios and would mislead effective health
3. Thats defaulted to frenzy (they are all the same), Id suggest taking a second look at the coefficient table if you are multiplying 777 by anything.
The only way would be to include an input box for average melee swing, which would probably not be very accurate, so not really no, sorry.
If you were to put in 0's it would work fine, but the problem is I personally think it is too easy to forget to put in zero's.
Iif you personally want to do that, you can just copy the formulas from the top of column D down to cell 20 and white out the column F cells down to the same spot.