Update 7.12.23: Spreadsheet bug fix: added missing parenthesis in the crit chance portion of comparison equations, which wasn't properly including crit chance v. injured. Credit to @azndumbum for finding this bug!
So useful! And I see you’re updating the speadsheet at this exact moment - thanks for all your work. I, of course, have to be that one dude who loves thorns builds, and figuring out how that all works is a weird part of this as well. Additionally, I’m trying to use the new mechanic of Lucky Hits. So much weirdness and fun stuff to learn! I’d always be happy to share with anyone in the comments what I’ve learned about thorns - what affects it and what doesn’t - but my present concern is that it wont scale well towards very very late game stuff. UA-cam vid’s do exist of high-level thorns builds, but since it’s missing at least one global modifier (crit) it can lead to lower DPS and odd fights. Summoners, for example, rarely do direct damage and can take forever to DPS down.
I am hoping to get around to both thorns and overpower at some point. It's just easy to put them off for now since they're completely separate systems from the rest, and I'm generally going to try to do the mechanics that affect (almost) everyone before getting into those more niche ones. I do sort of want to play around with a thorns minion necro build, but that comment about summoners being difficult makes it sound like a nightmare for a thorn minion build, since you can't even control what minions are attacking.
For most stats it won't make much practical difference in the end, but I think that you are probably actually better off doing it in town with the lower stats, but its hard to say for certain at this point. The stats that change will be generally due to passive skills (which for some reason are disabled in town along with your active skills) that grant % bonus damage with some condition. A 9% increase to the 'damage vs close' stat will be less than a 9% multiplier on all damage that is against close enemies. If the multipliers you have act the same way as 30% necro golem crit or barbarian 135% core damage, then the character sheet uses different equations than the damage equations do (as the UI dev team wrote different equations that don't match what the damage mechanic dev team used). The problem is that the smaller numbers are really hard to test. Hit damage can vary over 80% from min to max hits, without changing anything, so it will take an incredible amount of data to know for sure if something like a 9% damage to close multiplier is 9% local to the close damage stat (as displayed in character stats), or 9% global whenever attacking a close target (in which case your displayed stats are incorrect). It's just such a small net difference between the two equations for the smaller passives that the huge natural hit variance obscures which one is actually used.
You're a legend mate. Gonna go throughout the equations in the cells to see if I have any feedback in this first edition. Well done putting this together!
That would be fantastic, thanks! To save you some time, just focus on the 'net multipliers' in the bottom left - I have the formulas broken down and separate for each category there which makes visibility a lot easier. The hidden cells doing the math for each individual stat comparison uses these exact formulas (or at least should be unless I messed up copy pasting), just all mashed together into a single cell with a super long and hard to parse formula. Just converting from the stats from displayed 'bonus' format to 'multiplier' format adds a lot of bloat to the single-cell formulas.
That's what I'm hoping will be my next video, actually! I've started some research on it, but some of the questions I have are pretty deep and difficult to test so it's taking a while (e.g., the % DR from armor changes with your level, but also states that the shown % only applies to enemies of your level - so how does that % shown differ based on both character level and enemy level).
I'm not sure if your spreadsheet considers this, but for injured/healthy enemies, the uptime reduces the more your damage against enemies that meets that condition increases. For example, if you deal double damage to healthy enemies, the enemy now spends less time in the healthy condition, so you will have less than 20% uptime. In this example, it's sort of like the healthy condition shrunk to .1, and their total health bar is now .9 (.8 not healthy + .1 healthy), meaning you would only have 11.1% uptime for the effect. So, doubling your damage against healthy enemies boosts damage by 11.1%, not 20%. Anyway, your videos are great, but just thought I would mention something people overlook a lot. I made a video where I talk about it with respect to damage boosts against low life enemies in Path of Exile.
Thanks, that is a good point, and I did not include that! I'll have to think about the best way to try and incorporate that into my spreadsheet - at first glance it seems a little tricky with healthy/injured added to the whole additive category, but I don't think it should be too difficult given that I already have the additive category and uptime values broken out.
Freaking ridiculous that someone from the community had to do this again for a Blizzard game. I remember when Landsoul did this for World of Warcraft, and then that spread sheet eventually became the bases for simulationcraft.
Not going to lie, I really hope someone makes a full on simulator for D4 so that I don't have to worry about spreadsheets anymore lol. Maxroll was fantastic for Diablo 3 with their D3planner, and I fully expect them to do the same with their D4planner once they finish coding it (I'm not associated with them in any way and this is just speculation), but this spreadsheet should serve well enough in the meantime while we wait!
It'd be really interesting to review some of the popular builds with this - I wonder if there are any small optimisations that can be found by swapping out a few of the recommended stats.
My vague feeling is that a lot of people/builds really undervalue additive, or overvalue conditional additive effects. Its pretty easy to think 'well, I already have 400% from vs. cc, slowed, and close' and start ignoring the additive pool. But if you toy around with the conditional uptimes, it's pretty easy to see a scenario that doesn't have those conditionals and lowers your overall dmg by ~30-40%. After saying that, I suddenly realize I should've drawn a little more attention to the 'total damage modifier' value highlighted in green in the bottom left corner of the spreadsheet. That's the value you would watch/compare if you want to test out different uptime values without comparing different gear.
@@Waddling_Duck exactly this 👆 It took me five minutes to get my first nice DPS improvement with more additive. This is epic. If you find ways to improve it even further, please announce it on the channel (because of the copyed sheed would not notice a v2.) 😀 btw: The damage reduction calculation at first seems to be easier, but a similar tool or even integration in the sheet still might be interesting. I‘m also wondering if there are some secrets or bugs with it we don‘t know about. The current resistance calculation seems very off to me. In a bad way… 😅 As a squishy class I would love to quickly compare different ways to stack or balance the total dmg reduction. (If someone knows a validated source for such details please let me know.) ✌️
Hmmm, quite odd. Two things: 1. I plugged in my two wands, each in one copy of the sheet, to see if one beats the other or could be better with more enchanting. My result is somehow that, even with 20% Crit Chance, it is still worth to roll over 90 Int (with 585 Int) for a Crit Damage roll, while having 184 Sheet CD already. (Might be due to having ~440% additive damage?) 2. Also, Necro Offering + Memento Mori are weird. The numbers I expect don't really line up with the results. E.g. 185 CD on sheet. +30%*1.6 from Golem + Passive. I expect 185/1.48 = 125. Sheet shows when removing Golem Offering: 119.
Crit can be pretty unintuitive when you have crit multipliers involved. Pretty much what happens is that your crit damage becomes so high, that even with low crit chance, it makes up a large portion of your overall damage. Going from 495 to 585 INT would be about a 6% increase to all damage, always (1.585/1.495). The crit multipliers are also ultimately multiplicative with the INT increase when a crit happens. But even if you have only 20% crit chance, and only 119% crit, yet have a 30% and 60% crit multiplier, out of every 5 hits you'll have a total of 47% of your damage from the first 4 noncrits combined, and 53% of your total damage from the 5th hit that crits. That means that the 14% increase on every 5th hit (2.5/2.19, going from 119 to 150 crit dmg) ends up doing more than the 6% increase to all 5 hits from INT. As your crit chance goes up, this difference becomes even bigger. Regarding memento mori, I haven't actually tested raw damage numbers with it. But based on character sheet stats, memento mori doesn't affect golem at all. Instead what you're seeing with your Crit dmg is (sheet+100)*1.3-100, or (119+100)*1.3-100=184.7. Why it is this way, is that the stat sheet only shows the bonus value, not total value, for crits, while the 30% increase is applied to the total value. So it does that math on the total value (or sheet + 100), and then subtracts 100 at the end to put it back into bonus, rather than total. Just remember that golems are a fake local multiplier , giving fake numbers on your character sheet, so that 119 without golem is what you want to use as your crit damage in the spreadsheet.
@@Waddling_Duck Now that you said it out loud, the Int roll isn't really that significant. 90 Int sounds a lot, but is just a 9% dmg mod. While 20-30% CD with 20% CR is already a 6% average multiplier, and 18% if I pop Bonestorm and Corpse Tendies for CR. (Ignoring the additional CD buff tendies give, which makes it even better.) Ahhh! That makes sense! Do you know if this rule applies to all/most stats in that screen? E.g. 220% shadow damage is a 320% multiplier. Yes, I did use the downscaled values for the spreadsheet. I just tried to be lazy and define the scaling factor as 1.6 * MinionBuffValue, but the actual value was closer to 1.73 * MBV. The different baseline for that calculation explains the difference! EDIT: I am pretty sure memento mori worked on my Golem when I tested if it applied to my sheet in the first place. (Need to be outside of town) I'll check that again tomorrow! Thank you so much!
I'm running a build with aspects that multiply dmg against CC's enemies (stunned). It seems that they are already calculated in the character stats, but i'm confused about the calculation: i have two rings with aspects against stunned (one gives x[32%], the other x[34%]) when i unequip both rings my dmg against stunned is: 185.2% (this seem to be the stacked additive values on gear and paragon) i equip the first ring with 32% i would expect: 185.2% x 1.32 = 241% but the game shows a higher value: 276.4% !! the second ring includes a affix +27% against stunned. So i would assume: (185.2% + 27%) x 1.34 = 284.5% game shows: 318.2% !? when i equid both rings i would calculate: (185.2% + 27%) x (1 + 0.34 + 0.32) = 352,25% game shows: 452% i mean, i'm not complaining that i get higher values (displayed), but would be nice to understand what blizzard is doing here :D now it's hard to decide if dmg against CC (stunned) is more worth than other affix if the calculation is unpredictable. Do you have any clue?
I know what is going on with those displayed values. What I don't know and haven't tested is if those stun affixes are actually giving a local multiplier as your character sheet shows, or if that is a false tooltip and they are actually global multipliers. In the character sheet, it only shows 'bonus' percent, but the math is on 'base+bonus' (you have a 1x multiplier if you have 0 bonus), and then the base value is subtracted again at the end for display in the character sheet. So (100+185.2+27)*(1.32)*(1.34) - 100 = 452.21. I 'suspect' but don't know for certain, but they are probably actually global multipliers applied while the target is stunned, rather than local multipliers affecting your damage to stunned stat. In which case, in the spreadsheet, you'll want to include the value without those multipliers (212.2, or 185.2+27). The spreadsheet should then be accurate in comparing additive +dmg vs stunned to other stats.
@@Waddling_Duck Thanks for the reply. I think your assumption is right, that the multipliers are global in actual combat and blizzard is doing different calculations for displaying character stats. I come to that conclusion because in combat i get ~5 times higher numbers against stunned targets but when i remove the additive dmg (CC and stunned) from your spreadsheet the "Total Damage Modifier" is only reduced by ~40%. (it's a bit more complicated because i hava a core skill that has another x[25%] dmg against stunned, which is not included in the character stat calculation of blizzard, since it's only applied to a certain skill) In order to use your spreadsheet for item/stats comparison i think it's better to use the base value of 212.2, which is displayed in town! So my first suggestion to move out of town was bad advice - at least in my case.
@Waddling_Duck There is a bug in your spreadsheet. Once I've added Injury critrate, and then duplication of gear and gear swap stats, shows a difference when there isn't should be one.
Thank you very much for finding that! I found the problem and it should be fixed, although you'll have to make a new copy of the spreadsheet to get the fix. There was a missing parenthesis in the crit chance area for the comparisons. The main boxes on the left had it right, but the comparisons on the right (in the hidden cells) was adding your injured crit chance to the overall crit equation rather than adding it to the crit chance portion. I really appreciate you finding that and pointing it out so quickly!
I was wondering if this was tested for the Close-Enemy additive? Just to remind you, word from the channel of RoyalkubsTV is that Close-Enemy Damage % modifier are additive however are around 200% stronger for characters lv 1-60 but are 160% for level 61+. Some class builds have a preference towards Close Enemy Damage Modifiers so it be interesting to know if you've covered it.
I know this is a big ask but I would be really interested in seeing this rigorous breakdown of the concept of damage reduction as well. Seems to me that damage reduction works more effectively when stacking a few multipliers. For example say I get to choose from having two multiplicative effects of 40% and four multiplicative effects of 20%. 100 * 0.6 * 0.6 = 36 | ~64% damage reduction 100 * 0.8 * 0.8 * 0.8 * 0.8 = 40 | ~59% damage reduction Is this correct?
how do things like "15%[x] increased cold dmg to elites" (permafrost passive) from the sorc skilltree scale? do they multiply with every number from the first bucket or just the elite damage number? how does "core skills deal X [x]% more damage" scale? and how would apsects scale that have an "x" in the text like "increased dmaage [x] when you have a barrier?
Yeah, anything that doesn't explicitly have a field for conditional uptime assumes 100% uptime. It just seemed like it would feel even more bloated and cumbersome if I had put an uptime field for every stat - data entry can take a few minutes as-is. You can still manually adjust the input stats to reflect other uptimes (e.g., if you have 20% vs. something and want 25% uptime on it, can just input it as having a 5% value instead of 20%).
could you inform me if aspects such as conceited gives 25% additive damage or if it is a sort of global multiplier that actually makes the damage numbers 25% bigger?
They 'should' all be global multipliers tacked on at the end, which is why I didn't include those sorts of things in this spreadsheet (as they don't change the relative weights of different stats that you would be rerolling on gear). That being said, it would not surprise me at all if an aspect were bugged and doing something else. I have not tested conceited, and can't specifically recall having read about anyone else testing that one.
I didn't test that one personally, but that's what seems to be the emerging consensus among the barbarian pros. I just wanted to call that out here since that is by far the worst offender in misleading/fake character sheet stats that I'm aware of.
Yep - that is exactly how. I record myself hitting a monster hundreds of times, then watch through it on .25x speed and record all the damage numbers into a spreadsheet. My first tests a few weeks ago (which led to the wrong conclusion on local multipliers) I had tried grouping effects together. I figured that my 30%, 36%, and 114% crit multipliers would act the same, and that it would be easier to interpret the data with higher multiplier values, so I tested the three together at the same time. But due to bugs and incorrect tooltips, I actually had a 30%, 60%, and 114% (and 60% less additive). So to find out how things actually work, I then had to test the 30% alone, then the 60% alone, then the 114% alone. If you want to see the amount of data I took just for the necro crit bugs, I linked my spreadsheet with that data in the description of my necro crit bug video. I'm working on defensive research right now, and its even more tedious. Unless I'm missing something, there's no popup numbers for damage taken, so I have to just stand there with my cursor over the health globe and then manually do the math to find out how much damage each hit was.
@@Waddling_Duck damn, good on you for taking the hit and doing this and sharing with everyone lol. I would be interested to see if resists are actually worthless… Chuck 60 psn resist boots on, get hit by psn rouge, check dmg…. Repeat with boots off.
Update 7.12.23: Spreadsheet bug fix: added missing parenthesis in the crit chance portion of comparison equations, which wasn't properly including crit chance v. injured. Credit to @azndumbum for finding this bug!
This is S tier content. Thank you for your extensive work! 👍
Thank you!
So useful! And I see you’re updating the speadsheet at this exact moment - thanks for all your work. I, of course, have to be that one dude who loves thorns builds, and figuring out how that all works is a weird part of this as well. Additionally, I’m trying to use the new mechanic of Lucky Hits. So much weirdness and fun stuff to learn!
I’d always be happy to share with anyone in the comments what I’ve learned about thorns - what affects it and what doesn’t - but my present concern is that it wont scale well towards very very late game stuff. UA-cam vid’s do exist of high-level thorns builds, but since it’s missing at least one global modifier (crit) it can lead to lower DPS and odd fights. Summoners, for example, rarely do direct damage and can take forever to DPS down.
I am hoping to get around to both thorns and overpower at some point. It's just easy to put them off for now since they're completely separate systems from the rest, and I'm generally going to try to do the mechanics that affect (almost) everyone before getting into those more niche ones.
I do sort of want to play around with a thorns minion necro build, but that comment about summoners being difficult makes it sound like a nightmare for a thorn minion build, since you can't even control what minions are attacking.
So glad you found the issues and clarified the global/local issue! Great job :)
This info and dedication to be correct makes me sub. I really appreciate this
Amazing sheet!
Remember to move out of town before copying the values into the sheet. On some stats the values a lot lower in town.
For most stats it won't make much practical difference in the end, but I think that you are probably actually better off doing it in town with the lower stats, but its hard to say for certain at this point. The stats that change will be generally due to passive skills (which for some reason are disabled in town along with your active skills) that grant % bonus damage with some condition. A 9% increase to the 'damage vs close' stat will be less than a 9% multiplier on all damage that is against close enemies. If the multipliers you have act the same way as 30% necro golem crit or barbarian 135% core damage, then the character sheet uses different equations than the damage equations do (as the UI dev team wrote different equations that don't match what the damage mechanic dev team used). The problem is that the smaller numbers are really hard to test. Hit damage can vary over 80% from min to max hits, without changing anything, so it will take an incredible amount of data to know for sure if something like a 9% damage to close multiplier is 9% local to the close damage stat (as displayed in character stats), or 9% global whenever attacking a close target (in which case your displayed stats are incorrect). It's just such a small net difference between the two equations for the smaller passives that the huge natural hit variance obscures which one is actually used.
Thanks for alot for this!
You're a legend mate. Gonna go throughout the equations in the cells to see if I have any feedback in this first edition. Well done putting this together!
That would be fantastic, thanks! To save you some time, just focus on the 'net multipliers' in the bottom left - I have the formulas broken down and separate for each category there which makes visibility a lot easier. The hidden cells doing the math for each individual stat comparison uses these exact formulas (or at least should be unless I messed up copy pasting), just all mashed together into a single cell with a super long and hard to parse formula. Just converting from the stats from displayed 'bonus' format to 'multiplier' format adds a lot of bloat to the single-cell formulas.
This was a great video. I wished there was one explaining the math behind all the different types of damage reduction and how they stack
That's what I'm hoping will be my next video, actually! I've started some research on it, but some of the questions I have are pretty deep and difficult to test so it's taking a while (e.g., the % DR from armor changes with your level, but also states that the shown % only applies to enemies of your level - so how does that % shown differ based on both character level and enemy level).
You are insane, thank goodness.
Oh, yes. Thanks again! Quality content.
Glad you enjoy it!
Holy crap man - thank you so much
You're welcome!
I'm not sure if your spreadsheet considers this, but for injured/healthy enemies, the uptime reduces the more your damage against enemies that meets that condition increases. For example, if you deal double damage to healthy enemies, the enemy now spends less time in the healthy condition, so you will have less than 20% uptime. In this example, it's sort of like the healthy condition shrunk to .1, and their total health bar is now .9 (.8 not healthy + .1 healthy), meaning you would only have 11.1% uptime for the effect. So, doubling your damage against healthy enemies boosts damage by 11.1%, not 20%.
Anyway, your videos are great, but just thought I would mention something people overlook a lot. I made a video where I talk about it with respect to damage boosts against low life enemies in Path of Exile.
Thanks, that is a good point, and I did not include that! I'll have to think about the best way to try and incorporate that into my spreadsheet - at first glance it seems a little tricky with healthy/injured added to the whole additive category, but I don't think it should be too difficult given that I already have the additive category and uptime values broken out.
Any intentions to cover the new damage bucket changes coming in Season 2? You’re videos are some of the best quality regarding damage calculations.
Freaking ridiculous that someone from the community had to do this again for a Blizzard game. I remember when Landsoul did this for World of Warcraft, and then that spread sheet eventually became the bases for simulationcraft.
Not going to lie, I really hope someone makes a full on simulator for D4 so that I don't have to worry about spreadsheets anymore lol. Maxroll was fantastic for Diablo 3 with their D3planner, and I fully expect them to do the same with their D4planner once they finish coding it (I'm not associated with them in any way and this is just speculation), but this spreadsheet should serve well enough in the meantime while we wait!
Love this stuff!
Thanks!
It'd be really interesting to review some of the popular builds with this - I wonder if there are any small optimisations that can be found by swapping out a few of the recommended stats.
Yea but that relies on rng. I haven’t found better gear in like 1-2 weeks
My vague feeling is that a lot of people/builds really undervalue additive, or overvalue conditional additive effects. Its pretty easy to think 'well, I already have 400% from vs. cc, slowed, and close' and start ignoring the additive pool. But if you toy around with the conditional uptimes, it's pretty easy to see a scenario that doesn't have those conditionals and lowers your overall dmg by ~30-40%.
After saying that, I suddenly realize I should've drawn a little more attention to the 'total damage modifier' value highlighted in green in the bottom left corner of the spreadsheet. That's the value you would watch/compare if you want to test out different uptime values without comparing different gear.
@@Waddling_Duck exactly this 👆 It took me five minutes to get my first nice DPS improvement with more additive. This is epic. If you find ways to improve it even further, please announce it on the channel (because of the copyed sheed would not notice a v2.) 😀 btw: The damage reduction calculation at first seems to be easier, but a similar tool or even integration in the sheet still might be interesting. I‘m also wondering if there are some secrets or bugs with it we don‘t know about. The current resistance calculation seems very off to me. In a bad way… 😅 As a squishy class I would love to quickly compare different ways to stack or balance the total dmg reduction. (If someone knows a validated source for such details please let me know.) ✌️
Hmmm, quite odd. Two things:
1. I plugged in my two wands, each in one copy of the sheet, to see if one beats the other or could be better with more enchanting.
My result is somehow that, even with 20% Crit Chance, it is still worth to roll over 90 Int (with 585 Int) for a Crit Damage roll, while having 184 Sheet CD already.
(Might be due to having ~440% additive damage?)
2. Also, Necro Offering + Memento Mori are weird. The numbers I expect don't really line up with the results.
E.g. 185 CD on sheet. +30%*1.6 from Golem + Passive. I expect 185/1.48 = 125. Sheet shows when removing Golem Offering: 119.
Crit can be pretty unintuitive when you have crit multipliers involved. Pretty much what happens is that your crit damage becomes so high, that even with low crit chance, it makes up a large portion of your overall damage. Going from 495 to 585 INT would be about a 6% increase to all damage, always (1.585/1.495). The crit multipliers are also ultimately multiplicative with the INT increase when a crit happens. But even if you have only 20% crit chance, and only 119% crit, yet have a 30% and 60% crit multiplier, out of every 5 hits you'll have a total of 47% of your damage from the first 4 noncrits combined, and 53% of your total damage from the 5th hit that crits. That means that the 14% increase on every 5th hit (2.5/2.19, going from 119 to 150 crit dmg) ends up doing more than the 6% increase to all 5 hits from INT. As your crit chance goes up, this difference becomes even bigger.
Regarding memento mori, I haven't actually tested raw damage numbers with it. But based on character sheet stats, memento mori doesn't affect golem at all. Instead what you're seeing with your Crit dmg is (sheet+100)*1.3-100, or (119+100)*1.3-100=184.7. Why it is this way, is that the stat sheet only shows the bonus value, not total value, for crits, while the 30% increase is applied to the total value. So it does that math on the total value (or sheet + 100), and then subtracts 100 at the end to put it back into bonus, rather than total. Just remember that golems are a fake local multiplier , giving fake numbers on your character sheet, so that 119 without golem is what you want to use as your crit damage in the spreadsheet.
@@Waddling_Duck Now that you said it out loud, the Int roll isn't really that significant. 90 Int sounds a lot, but is just a 9% dmg mod. While 20-30% CD with 20% CR is already a 6% average multiplier, and 18% if I pop Bonestorm and Corpse Tendies for CR. (Ignoring the additional CD buff tendies give, which makes it even better.)
Ahhh! That makes sense! Do you know if this rule applies to all/most stats in that screen? E.g. 220% shadow damage is a 320% multiplier.
Yes, I did use the downscaled values for the spreadsheet. I just tried to be lazy and define the scaling factor as 1.6 * MinionBuffValue, but the actual value was closer to 1.73 * MBV.
The different baseline for that calculation explains the difference!
EDIT: I am pretty sure memento mori worked on my Golem when I tested if it applied to my sheet in the first place. (Need to be outside of town)
I'll check that again tomorrow!
Thank you so much!
@Waddling_Duck There is a bug in your spreadsheet.
There is a bug in the "Damage while[2]". Damage while[1] appears to be working fine for gear swpa.
I'm running a build with aspects that multiply dmg against CC's enemies (stunned). It seems that they are already calculated in the character stats, but i'm confused about the calculation:
i have two rings with aspects against stunned (one gives x[32%], the other x[34%])
when i unequip both rings my dmg against stunned is: 185.2% (this seem to be the stacked additive values on gear and paragon)
i equip the first ring with 32% i would expect: 185.2% x 1.32 = 241%
but the game shows a higher value: 276.4% !!
the second ring includes a affix +27% against stunned. So i would assume: (185.2% + 27%) x 1.34 = 284.5%
game shows: 318.2% !?
when i equid both rings i would calculate: (185.2% + 27%) x (1 + 0.34 + 0.32) = 352,25%
game shows: 452%
i mean, i'm not complaining that i get higher values (displayed), but would be nice to understand what blizzard is doing here :D
now it's hard to decide if dmg against CC (stunned) is more worth than other affix if the calculation is unpredictable.
Do you have any clue?
I know what is going on with those displayed values. What I don't know and haven't tested is if those stun affixes are actually giving a local multiplier as your character sheet shows, or if that is a false tooltip and they are actually global multipliers. In the character sheet, it only shows 'bonus' percent, but the math is on 'base+bonus' (you have a 1x multiplier if you have 0 bonus), and then the base value is subtracted again at the end for display in the character sheet. So (100+185.2+27)*(1.32)*(1.34) - 100 = 452.21.
I 'suspect' but don't know for certain, but they are probably actually global multipliers applied while the target is stunned, rather than local multipliers affecting your damage to stunned stat. In which case, in the spreadsheet, you'll want to include the value without those multipliers (212.2, or 185.2+27). The spreadsheet should then be accurate in comparing additive +dmg vs stunned to other stats.
@@Waddling_Duck Thanks for the reply.
I think your assumption is right, that the multipliers are global in actual combat and blizzard is doing different calculations for displaying character stats. I come to that conclusion because in combat i get ~5 times higher numbers against stunned targets but when i remove the additive dmg (CC and stunned) from your spreadsheet the "Total Damage Modifier" is only reduced by ~40%. (it's a bit more complicated because i hava a core skill that has another x[25%] dmg against stunned, which is not included in the character stat calculation of blizzard, since it's only applied to a certain skill)
In order to use your spreadsheet for item/stats comparison i think it's better to use the base value of 212.2, which is displayed in town! So my first suggestion to move out of town was bad advice - at least in my case.
@Waddling_Duck There is a bug in your spreadsheet.
Once I've added Injury critrate, and then duplication of gear and gear swap stats, shows a difference when there isn't should be one.
Thank you very much for finding that! I found the problem and it should be fixed, although you'll have to make a new copy of the spreadsheet to get the fix.
There was a missing parenthesis in the crit chance area for the comparisons. The main boxes on the left had it right, but the comparisons on the right (in the hidden cells) was adding your injured crit chance to the overall crit equation rather than adding it to the crit chance portion.
I really appreciate you finding that and pointing it out so quickly!
I was wondering if this was tested for the Close-Enemy additive?
Just to remind you, word from the channel of RoyalkubsTV is that Close-Enemy Damage % modifier are additive however are around 200% stronger for characters lv 1-60 but are 160% for level 61+.
Some class builds have a preference towards Close Enemy Damage Modifiers so it be interesting to know if you've covered it.
I haven't tested that yet, but I've heard a few references to it now so I am interested in taking a look!
I know this is a big ask but I would be really interested in seeing this rigorous breakdown of the concept of damage reduction as well. Seems to me that damage reduction works more effectively when stacking a few multipliers. For example say I get to choose from having two multiplicative effects of 40% and four multiplicative effects of 20%.
100 * 0.6 * 0.6 = 36 | ~64% damage reduction
100 * 0.8 * 0.8 * 0.8 * 0.8 = 40 | ~59% damage reduction
Is this correct?
Correct
This means penitent greaves actually increases damage 1.1x for say cold sorcs?
how do things like "15%[x] increased cold dmg to elites" (permafrost passive) from the sorc skilltree scale? do they multiply with every number from the first bucket or just the elite damage number? how does "core skills deal X [x]% more damage" scale? and how would apsects scale that have an "x" in the text like "increased dmaage [x] when you have a barrier?
Is the Damage Vs [Anything Else] calculated at 100% uptime since it does not have a section in Conditional Effect Uptime?
Yeah, anything that doesn't explicitly have a field for conditional uptime assumes 100% uptime. It just seemed like it would feel even more bloated and cumbersome if I had put an uptime field for every stat - data entry can take a few minutes as-is. You can still manually adjust the input stats to reflect other uptimes (e.g., if you have 20% vs. something and want 25% uptime on it, can just input it as having a 5% value instead of 20%).
could you inform me if aspects such as conceited gives 25% additive damage or if it is a sort of global multiplier that actually makes the damage numbers 25% bigger?
They 'should' all be global multipliers tacked on at the end, which is why I didn't include those sorts of things in this spreadsheet (as they don't change the relative weights of different stats that you would be rerolling on gear). That being said, it would not surprise me at all if an aspect were bugged and doing something else. I have not tested conceited, and can't specifically recall having read about anyone else testing that one.
So, barbarian local core damage multiplier is fake?
I didn't test that one personally, but that's what seems to be the emerging consensus among the barbarian pros. I just wanted to call that out here since that is by far the worst offender in misleading/fake character sheet stats that I'm aware of.
How do you actually test this? Find monsters and hit them 100 times, change stats and repeat?
Yep - that is exactly how. I record myself hitting a monster hundreds of times, then watch through it on .25x speed and record all the damage numbers into a spreadsheet. My first tests a few weeks ago (which led to the wrong conclusion on local multipliers) I had tried grouping effects together. I figured that my 30%, 36%, and 114% crit multipliers would act the same, and that it would be easier to interpret the data with higher multiplier values, so I tested the three together at the same time. But due to bugs and incorrect tooltips, I actually had a 30%, 60%, and 114% (and 60% less additive). So to find out how things actually work, I then had to test the 30% alone, then the 60% alone, then the 114% alone. If you want to see the amount of data I took just for the necro crit bugs, I linked my spreadsheet with that data in the description of my necro crit bug video.
I'm working on defensive research right now, and its even more tedious. Unless I'm missing something, there's no popup numbers for damage taken, so I have to just stand there with my cursor over the health globe and then manually do the math to find out how much damage each hit was.
@@Waddling_Duckthat's dedication right there folks
@@Waddling_Duck damn, good on you for taking the hit and doing this and sharing with everyone lol.
I would be interested to see if resists are actually worthless…
Chuck 60 psn resist boots on, get hit by psn rouge, check dmg…. Repeat with boots off.
Not sure if I missed it but what about overpower
Not sure if I missed it but what about overpower