Nice to see you guys are doing a lot of serious work figuring out all the details. I still wonder what the "monster health multiplier is for". Also, are there other shrines in the game besides the 4 you list? Or is that it?
I'm pretty sure the monster health multiplier determines how much health enemies have vs party size.
i totally agree with the Blizz dev's on this one... the best way to go, and i fully support this idea... i would not want my Wiz. to be a level based damage character... weapon based damage gives the incentive to always look for upgrades on your weapons...
"Level based"?? When was that ever a consideration? The way they had it before, skills scaled with +damage to Wizard only bonuses.
Oh I don't know, maybe to get more damage reduction perhaps? You know, that's kinda what shields are nominally for? Maybe a little extra damage too if you only have one good 1h weapon?
Looks like I was buffed actually, my bad. But it is odd to note that battle rage boosts my dps but not my +% damage...
Attack's damage increase % and +% dmg are two differents modifiers that's why.
Even if they help the same purpose in the same manner but it's important calculation wise
What I'm concerned about is the Details page of my stats. It has an overall Damage Increase (the first one), and it's just exactly the same as my ATK. It doesn't say "Bonus damage from ATK", hovering over ATK does that, it just says "Damage Increase". If I'm buffed by Battle Rage, it should show higher than simply 22% percent (which is my ATK).
Whether it's 22% + Battle Rage's %, or rage multiplied by 1.22 is another matter. Point being, it should be > 22 regardless, but it's not, but I am definitely buffed by looking at the crit chance.
It looks to me like the +damage% bonus is reserved for +Attack, and possibly +damage% item bonuses. The listed DPS, however, is correct.
First of all, there's a known bug that the character sheet calculates DPS with +100% more critical damage than you actually have. So your +159% critical damage is actually +259% as far as the character sheet is concerned.
Here I'll verify that. So first we calculate the DPS bonus from that +4% crit chance.
What I mean is that your DPS doesn't immediately go to 2300% weapon damage/second when you shoot that first arrow. As you continue to shoot arrows and get more of them airborne, your actual damage/second goes up, but won't hit 2300%/second until you have 20 arrows in the air. Under those circumstances, that won't happen until at least 20 seconds into the fight.
The same thing is true of any damage over time ability. Each time you cast a new DoT, your damage per second goes up, eventually reaching the point where all your DoTs are applied. But until then, you're not doing full DPS.
I completely agree with that statement. I would like to point out that I ran my simulation for No Rune, Gold, and Obsidian. Given the changes to the hatred cost (there is none) obsidian comes out as the best damage dealing rune for hungering arrow. This also assumes a minimum amount of movement, because the more you move the less DPS means, and the more total damage per cast means.
These simulations ran firing 20 arrows each, and each one ran 10,000 times. Here are the results:
No Rune
-------------------------------
Average Total Damage: 6,999.88%
Average DPS: 308.16%
Gold Rune
-------------------------------
Average Total Damage: 56,058.66%
Average DPS: 690.20%
Obsidian Rune
-------------------------------
Average Total Damage: 17,375.03%
Average DPS: 766.85%
How can you say that Obsidian is the best rune when you never even considered Indigo, which has the second most raw damage behind golden? And how does this calculation prove anything? Against large groups of enemies, Hungering Arrow will hit multiple times in quick succession, much faster than 1 hit per second. Against bosses where the 1/second is more applicable, you will be able to fire much more than 20 shots and most every shot will deal its full damage.
The problem is that +APS bonuses benefit 2h weapons more, and flat +damage bonuses benefit dual wielding more. That alone should tell Blizzard something is wrong because they've explicitly said they want your choice of 1h or 2h to be aesthetic. However, at least looking at the current test items, +damage bonuses are much more rare than +APS which means 2h weapons will be getting bigger DPS bonuses. My rough estimates of the DPS disparity between dual wielding and 2h weapons is that with all the best +APS bonuses listed on the item database, a 2h weapon will do about 55% more DPS than dual wielding, and that's before you even take the lower hatred costs of 2h weapons into consideration. I hope +flat damage and +elemental damage bonuses end up being a lot more common later on to balance things out.
I'm pretty sure Bash or one of the other CMs said:
1. Hatred still regens, but at a slower rate than before (to balance the fact that there are generators now)
2. The DH calculator is currently incorrect. Impale is not the intended starting skill.
I could dig up the blue post, but I'm lazy. It was one made on Thursday or Friday I think.
You've got your parentheses mixed up, but it's just another way of writing the damage multiplier from pierce chance.
1/( 1- 0.6) = 1 + 0.6/(1 - 0.6)
I see where I went wrong. I missed the 60% factor for the 8 extra arrows. That brings it down to 1495 Weapon Damage.
It does average or above-average damage 1/3 times. It does below-average damage 2/3 times. Personally I don't think it matters due to all the +APS bonuses on equipment. If you're firing 3-4 times a second, that's more than enough to make up for the variance.
I still think it's important to consider. I also think the fact that the damage is spread out over time is a pretty important factor, particularly in a game like Diablo. If an arrow takes 1 second to exit a target, turn around, and hit it again, that means it will take an arrow 20 seconds before it even reaches the average damage case. 20 seconds is a pretty long time in Diablo combat terms. The point here is that it takes 20 seconds before you're doing 2300% weapon damage per shot. You'll be ramping up that whole time, but most AOE packs are going to be dead by that point. I don't think bosses are going to let you stand still for that long.
There's a lot we don't know about the skill yet, as well. Like if the arrow hits a wall does it disappear? I'd imagine it would. This means any combat area with obstacles can severely reduce the damage you'd otherwise get. It wouldn't work well at all in close corridors. Or what happens when a mob it's tracking dies? Does it seek a new target or does it keep going straight until it hits something?
Right now I think it's probably still too strong, but I'm just playing Devil's Advocate. Perhaps the limiting factors prevent it from becoming OP in-game. Not to mention that they literally just changed the system. Maybe Hungering Arrow will become a spender instead, or they'll adjust it's damage down now that it can be spammed endlessly. If only we could test with geared 60s in Inferno...
From the videos I've watched, Hungering Arrow does seek out new targets after its current dies, and does keep attacking the same target if there are no others around, or it just feels like attacking one twice.
Although Hungering Arrow is like a damage over time skill, there's nothing to stop it from incidentally hitting several enemies in a tightly packed group. Therefore it will use up its pierces faster against groups of enemies who die quickly, and slower against bosses who die slowly, which is pretty much ideal.
We agree that Golden Hungering is too powerful and scales far too well. The problem isn't that it pierces or that it seeks a target, the problem is that it does both. Now that it's a Hatred generator, I think they should change golden to read each successful hit restores an additional (1-7) hatred.
Another option would simply be to reduce the damage of successive pierces.
I was also looking at your indigo damage and I came out with a different number. I looked at your calculations and I see where we differed, but I'm not sure why you calculated it the way you did.
Here's what I did for Indigo:
115% WD for the first hit
+60% chance for 8 new arrows. If the 8 new arrows are all seeking and piercing, then each of them is expected to do 1/(1-.6) = 287.5 damage. 8 arrows would then be (287.5)(8) = 2300% WD. (this is the part where we differed. Your equations showed (1+.6)/(1-.6), and I'm not sure what that equation represents.
You've got your parentheses mixed up, but it's just another way of writing the damage multiplier from pierce chance.
1/( 1- 0.6) = 1 + 0.6/(1 - 0.6)
That comes to 2415% weapon damage total, which is both more damage and more reliable than Hungering (the high expected damage of hungering comes in part from huge damage results from low probability events).
Now that I think about it, the expected damage is not at all the whole tale. How often you reach that expected damage matters too. Imagine you had a skill that did 10,000,000% weapon damage .001% of the time, and 1% weapon damage 99.999% of the time. Would you take that skill? It's expected damage is (10,000,000)(.001)+(1)(99.999)= 10099.99%, far more than any other skill. But usually it's not going to be worth firing. It's an extreme example, sure, but it's meant to illustrate the point. Hungering arrow does less than expected damage most of the time. In game, that matters.
So maybe it's fine as is after all.
It does average or above-average damage 1/3 times. It does below-average damage 2/3 times. Personally I don't think it matters due to all the +APS bonuses on equipment. If you're firing 3-4 times a second, that's more than enough to make up for the variance.
I don't think Golden Hungering Arrow is going to make it in the way it is now. Unless the damage goes down per pierce or there is a pierce cap, it's just way too powerful.
Most of the rune skills do appear to have benefits divisible by seven, so I think it's highly likely that's how they're supposed to work. Hungering Arrow just scales too well with a pierce attack, so it's not a good benchmark for comparison.
For what it's worth though, they don't have to make all rune levels scale linear. It's not important that a level 3 crimson rune is just as powerful as a level 3 indigo rune. It's not even that important that level 7 runes are equal, either. They just have to be close enough to provide the player with a choice. Which currently, Hungering Arrow Golden does not.
Going from 90% pierce to 95% pierce doubles your damage. Going from 7 shots to 8 shots on Indigo increases your damage by 13%. How could you possibly get those two anywhere near enough for there to be a choice?
I'm saying Pierce chance needs to go up by less and less to reflect the increasing returns built into it - just the same as Defense% or Armor%. So early on it would go up by 10% or so, and for the later rune levels by 2% or 3% so as to keep the increase constant, or at least closer to constant. Of course this is yet another case where it'll confuse the heck out of people who aren't mathematically inclined but the devs don't seem to have a problem with that so might as well confuse them some more.
You can set L = 1 to 60. It sets the players level. Note that the result is for enemies of the same level only.
So for Defense, after you exceed the minimum defense threshold, you get +5/9% EHP per point, stacked additively.
For Armor, it's +1/30% EHP per point, also stacked additively.
Good. That means linear returns for both of those stats with respect to survival time, just like Attack stacks linearly with respect to damage. That makes them easy to compare.
You could also write Defense's bonus as +( 1/(Level*3) )% EHP per point
sigh... if you are looking at hitting 20 different targets then it is 20 x140% over 20 targets for... surprise, surprise... a stunning single-target shot of 140% percent.
multishot begins at 110% damage unruned. Give it the damage modifier and it's at 242%
Besides, this doesn't matter anymore... they apparently already updated the new demon hunter skills.
New stats for HA is 115% with a 60% chance to pierce targets when unruned and now generates 5 hatred.
HA Gold does not require 20 separate targets. It can hit the same target multiple times.
These are the top damage legendary bows and crossbows. Does it seem strange to anyone that the one-handed crossbows are capable of doing as much if not more damage than the two-handed bows and crossbows? I always thought the one-handed weapon was a bit of a trade-off, because you can use another weapon, shield, or quiver, but here the one-hander is obviously the best choice. Also, if you have two one-handed crossbows equipped, which weapon do your skills use to calculate the damage (or does it combine the damage of both weapons)?
edit: 1-hand xbows also have a significantly higher DPS rate, almost twice as much in some cases.
When you dual-wield, your skill damage alternates between your main hand and off-hand. You also get a +15% Attack Speed bonus.
I suspect the fact that Natalya's Redemption is a set item is what makes it better, however it might also be the fact that +damage% bonus are displayed as part of the weapon's DPS, which is somewhat confusing if you aren't expecting it.
With the new DH skill revamp that now includes Hatred Generators, people are wondering whether Hatred regeneration is still in the game. Here's my take on it.
We know that at level 1 you only have Impale. Impale costs 40 Hatred. If there is no hatred regen, you can only use it twice until level 2 when you get your first hatred generator. This sounds unreasonable, which is why I suspect that there's still Hatred Regen, although I'd guess that it's reduced.
Ok, I haven't really looked at these changes but I need some clarification. So Fan of Knives now has a 10 second cool down. Does this mean that their is one less skill the Demon Hunter has. To me a close range, mid-damage, aoe attack for the Demon Hunter was pretty useless to begin with, but now with the 10 second cool down, it can't even be used anymore?
How can it still be effective?
I'm with you. It either needs a huge damage boost (on top of the one it already got) or that cooldown needs to be reduced drastically.
0
0
0
0
First of all, there's a known bug that the character sheet calculates DPS with +100% more critical damage than you actually have. So your +159% critical damage is actually +259% as far as the character sheet is concerned.
Here I'll verify that. So first we calculate the DPS bonus from that +4% crit chance.
DPS multiplier from crit bonus:
((0.1049 * 3.59) + (1-0.1049)*1)/(.0649*3.59 + (1-.0649)*1) = +8.8691% DPS
Then, on top of that, the skill calculator says Battle Rage gives +30% damage. So we multiply those two damage bonuses together and we get:
1.3 * 1.088691 = +41.52983% DPS
Now we see how much of a DPS increase the character sheet says we're getting and we get:
107.27 / 75.8 = +41.517% DPS
So apart from some minor rounding errors and that known bug, the character sheet dps is right on.
0
0
0
0
Although Hungering Arrow is like a damage over time skill, there's nothing to stop it from incidentally hitting several enemies in a tightly packed group. Therefore it will use up its pierces faster against groups of enemies who die quickly, and slower against bosses who die slowly, which is pretty much ideal.
0
1/( 1- 0.6) = 1 + 0.6/(1 - 0.6)
It does average or above-average damage 1/3 times. It does below-average damage 2/3 times. Personally I don't think it matters due to all the +APS bonuses on equipment. If you're firing 3-4 times a second, that's more than enough to make up for the variance.
0
I'm saying Pierce chance needs to go up by less and less to reflect the increasing returns built into it - just the same as Defense% or Armor%. So early on it would go up by 10% or so, and for the later rune levels by 2% or 3% so as to keep the increase constant, or at least closer to constant. Of course this is yet another case where it'll confuse the heck out of people who aren't mathematically inclined but the devs don't seem to have a problem with that so might as well confuse them some more.
0
For Armor, it's +1/30% EHP per point, also stacked additively.
Good. That means linear returns for both of those stats with respect to survival time, just like Attack stacks linearly with respect to damage. That makes them easy to compare.
You could also write Defense's bonus as +( 1/(Level*3) )% EHP per point
0
If that's true then it's a moronic way to do things.
For example, this is what the Weapon Damage would come out to for each level of HA gold.
Compare that to Indigo, which scales linearly
It's impossible to balance them at each level with that kind of formula.
0
I suspect the fact that Natalya's Redemption is a set item is what makes it better, however it might also be the fact that +damage% bonus are displayed as part of the weapon's DPS, which is somewhat confusing if you aren't expecting it.
0
We know that at level 1 you only have Impale. Impale costs 40 Hatred. If there is no hatred regen, you can only use it twice until level 2 when you get your first hatred generator. This sounds unreasonable, which is why I suspect that there's still Hatred Regen, although I'd guess that it's reduced.
0