GM Weapons vs Power Weapons (Halberd)

Topics related to Second Age
aspade
Posts: 52
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 9:27 pm

Re: GM Weapons vs Power Weapons (Halberd)

Post by aspade »

my understanding of how damage works is as follows.

base weapon + gm modifier
* str, tactics, anatomy mods (1.9 with anat, 1.7 without, +.01 per tactics bonus)
+ magic bonus
/2

tested results consistently average 5-7% higher than this formula predicts using published base damage numbers, and max damage observed is typically a few pts over the prediction. for weapons with many or several large die it would take an unreasonable number of swings to expect to achieve a max roll. a 1d26 kryss on the other hand should be easy.

not sure if the damage discrepancy is coming from incorrect use of formula or inaccurate published damage bases. testing with more combinations of str and tactics would allow those stats' behavior to be deduced.

User avatar
Capitalist
Posts: 11567
Joined: Wed Jun 30, 2010 12:39 pm

Re: GM Weapons vs Power Weapons (Halberd)

Post by Capitalist »

Here's how you should normalize weapon use in your mind: gm or heavy as hell. Friendly field fights somewhere in between. The end.
Denis the Menace wrote:Vega for me you are just exploiting the uosa system with your vanq charged spellreflect recall invis pink boobi pvp trammel style which never existed on osi, so stfu.
Jakob wrote:Regardless of douchebag, fair player or Vega.

Roser
UOSA Subscriber!
UOSA Subscriber!
Posts: 3367
Joined: Sat Jan 30, 2010 12:01 am
Location: In your tree house with binoculars
Contact:

Re: GM Weapons vs Power Weapons (Halberd)

Post by Roser »

One more question to bring up, how should the damage bonuses be applied to the base damage?

Should they be applied to each dice, or should they be applied after the initial dice roll?

There really is a lot of ways this can go.
Image

Taboo
UOSA Subscriber!
UOSA Subscriber!
Posts: 1236
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2009 2:03 pm

Re: GM Weapons vs Power Weapons (Halberd)

Post by Taboo »

With your test, it seems like its too small of a sample. We are talking about a 4 damage difference between gm exceptional and power. Perhaps if you tested more it would reflect an around 4 damage difference. Then again you should realize it's possible to have many bad rolls and have the gm doing a much larger amount of damage within a sample and also visa versa.

But what's the harm in the staff checking

/shrug

However, its already very obvious its better to use good magic weapons over gm anyway.

dren
UOSA Donor!!
UOSA Donor!!
Posts: 1145
Joined: Tue Aug 17, 2010 11:42 pm
Location: Britain

Re: GM Weapons vs Power Weapons (Halberd)

Post by dren »

For the record, GM weapons should have a +4 damage bonus, so the difference is 3 damage between power and GM. Damage modifiers listed below:

Power damage modifier is +7
Force damage modifier is +5
GM damage modifier is +4
Might damage modifier is +3

We can see that the GM weapons are actually not the same as force or might, but between the two. In addition to that we should note that the original patch which affected tactics (accuracy & damage) did not affect magic weapon damage (even with a tactics modifier). I would say that some research into patch notes by players and staff and look at the code is definitely in order.
Fit: Alderman, Merchants of Britannia: Proudly serving UOSA for more than 160 Sosarian years.

Image

User avatar
Mens Rea
UOSA Subscriber!
UOSA Subscriber!
Posts: 2952
Joined: Mon Jul 14, 2008 6:59 am

Re: GM Weapons vs Power Weapons (Halberd)

Post by Mens Rea »

dren wrote:For the record, GM weapons should have a +4 damage bonus, so the difference is 3 damage between power and GM. Damage modifiers listed below:

Power damage modifier is +7
Force damage modifier is +5
GM damage modifier is +4
Might damage modifier is +3

We can see that the GM weapons are actually not the same as force or might, but between the two. In addition to that we should note that the original patch which affected tactics (accuracy & damage) did not affect magic weapon damage (even with a tactics modifier). I would say that some research into patch notes by players and staff and look at the code is definitely in order.
I concur.

GM weapons were always slightly below force weapons in the T2A days.

Roser
UOSA Subscriber!
UOSA Subscriber!
Posts: 3367
Joined: Sat Jan 30, 2010 12:01 am
Location: In your tree house with binoculars
Contact:

Re: GM Weapons vs Power Weapons (Halberd)

Post by Roser »

Bump
Image

SighelmofWyrmgard
Posts: 881
Joined: Thu May 20, 2010 5:34 pm

Re: GM Weapons vs Power Weapons (Halberd)

Post by SighelmofWyrmgard »

If only out of curiosity, Rose, I'd also like to hear what --if anything-- Kaivan and Anarcho have turned-up through investigation.

From this thread, the following quoted-post cites no authority nor test-study but, if true, here's 'the likely culprit' (but, as has been stated by others, before, the original sample-set to which this thread refers is inadequate):
aspade wrote:my understanding of how damage works is as follows.

base weapon + gm modifier
* str, tactics, anatomy mods (1.9 with anat, 1.7 without, +.01 per tactics bonus)
+ magic bonus
/2
Under the above scheme, +4GM would enjoy the *1.7 strength+tactics modifiers, while +7Power would not: the bonuses would then present as, +6.8GM v. +7Power; since damage is then halved before it is applied, the observable difference would be, +3.4GM v. +3.5Power.

However, aspade's remarks do not include any provenance. Otherwise, if Kaivan & Anarcho can confirm/deny the "order of operations", it then follows that WAI/EA would need to be evaluated.

Is there any word, Kaivan and/or Anarcho?

SS
SighelmofWyrmgard wrote:
uosa44 wrote:For sale, by original owner:
1 Human Brain, never been used, only slightly damaged, still in original packaging.
$1, obo
FTFY.

SS
uosa44 wrote:The inability for this person to respond in such a crazy manner proves my point.

Post Reply