Blog Comments

oh
no Time-Obscuring Wall of Chalk

buff cap? what is it?

The latest test shows that EA's buff is valid now.

Depends on the attack and it's a % of the total damage. Since it always adds up to 100% I saw it pointless to list.

how about damage per hit? not damage per card

I am pretty sure 1 / 0.8 / 1.5 for card type is effect on NPs but position not.
From my play experience.

And that is why Quick NPs multiply is so high and buster NPs multiply is low.

Originally Posted by Aedra

cardDamageValue (aka unknownvalue)

Why are you conflating the two.

Originally Posted by Kyte

No it doesn't work like that. Like I said, there's no card type / card position split in the game. That was simply so I could type a bit less. cardDamageValue is either both or neither.

That is so strange, because the dmg of red NP is so much more then blue NP , well...

BTW , my test is showing that my hypothesis is not correct , but I will try to collect more data.

Originally Posted by Kyte

No it doesn't work like that. Like I said, there's no card type / card position split in the game. That was simply so I could type a bit less. cardDamageValue is either both or neither.

From the testing I posted before, one thing I'm sure is that cardDamageValue is being used... (though, we might need to call it something else so we are not confusing with normal card values) (aka unknownvalue)

it should simplify to:
damage for this card = [servantAtk * npDamageMultiplier * (1 + cardMod) * classAtkBonus * triangleModifier * attributeModifier * randomModifier * 0.23 * (1 + atkMod - defMod) * {1 + powerMod + selfDamageMod + npDamageMod} * {1 + (traitModifier * hasSuperEffectiveTrait) + (statusTraitModifier * hasSuperEffectiveStatus)}] + dmgPlusAdd + selfDmgCutAdd

The reason is..., if we follow this simplified formula, aka cardDamageValue in original (firstCardBonus + (cardDamageValue * (1 + cardMod))) = ( 0 + ( 1 * (1 + cardMod)) = 1, the range for damage is far off the lower/upper limit (random 0.9 to 1.1) from the real damage.

That's why I re-calculating with the 2nd table, changing cardDamageValue (aka unknownvalue) to 1 / 0.8 / 1.5 and the data make more sense...


I'm not saying that this cardDamageValue aka unknownvalue is equal to 1 / 0.8 / 1.5 yet since only few servants have been tested. (I've tested aroun 7 servants only).

Right now I still need to get more testing result first (which from my testing it seems sometimes Siegfried's damage is still falling off the limit if use x1.5)

I don't understand Aedra's points but at least the colours are pretty!

No it doesn't work like that. Like I said, there's no card type / card position split in the game. That was simply so I could type a bit less. cardDamageValue is either both or neither.

I got an idea about the [card position] problem ,

Hypothesis : NP card and Normal card count as 2 type of card, you can only put NP card before another NP card to give one of them the [card position bonus]

Is this possible? I will test it once I get enough AP

http://blogs.nrvnqsr.com/entry.php/3313-servant-profile-draft

thx for the update..

at least berserker is not 0 anymore :v

sorry for some newb question.

I only see kyte replace old data with new data, starting from artoria to d'eon and now gilgamesh+robinhodd. Is it just me or it is only a draft so still testing the format.

-10% atk on attacker = +10% def on defender

So, is "defense" a hidden stat that the buff increases, or does 40%+30%+30%def mean "takes 0% damage"?

I guess I'll do some tests.

Buffs are allowed to stack (they add up), although many are capped at 500% IIRC. Attack and Defense are not of those, I believe.

Since I use a lot of George, stacking def buffs from him and Mashu is making me wonder: Do they add up, or are they applied one after another? Because I can get together +100% def easy.

Now new APK means no significant changes to the calculations.