Jump to content


Mercenary's Manual


  • Please log in to reply
183 replies to this topic

#1 Shippuu

Shippuu

    Principle Investigator

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 197 posts
  • 40 Props
  • <Vongola XI>
  • Server: East

Posted 03 August 2012 - 07:19 AM

As I have expanded beyond the Armory, and with the fall of VindictusDB, it's time for a proper thread for Mercenary's Manual itself. My scope is no longer "everything at once", that is no longer viable.

Mercenary's Manual is my answer to the lack of detailed information that the players have for Vindictus. I have created a precise tool for planning character builds down to the last point, but let's take it a step further. With the community's help, I'd like to design a site that can answer most any question a new or veteran player has. One that is kept up to date with not just NA content, but KR content as well.

Overall current plans for Mercenary's Manual
Home - Making a real home page and removing the placeholder.
Armory - Exact representation of the stats of any equipment set in Vindictus.
Untitled - Automatic Set Comparer.
Compare - Item Compare.
Archives - An incomplete repository of Vindictus information based around equipment, game features, and raiding.

Status of each page:
Home - [Development not Started.]
Armory - Live.
Untitled - [Development on Hold. No Title Yet.]
Compare - Live.
Archives - [Development not Started.]

The post immediately below will contain my up to date ramblings/progress reports on how my work (or the lack of) is coming along. Each 'update' will be dated, and old messages will be contained in spoiler tags, oldest at the bottom.

If you have anything at all to say (that's constructive!) about Mercenary's Manual, here is the place to post it. Whether it's a bug with the Armory, a page you'd like to see on the site in the future, or a design you really don't like, I'd like to hear about it.

You can also contact me ingame (NA East server, IGN Shippuu), or via the email given on Mercenary's Manual, but this is a better location for something worth discussing with multiple players.

Edited by Shippuu, 11 November 2014 - 12:12 AM.


Props awarded by 2 Members:

#2 Shippuu

Shippuu

    Principle Investigator

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 197 posts
  • 40 Props
  • <Vongola XI>
  • Server: East

Posted 18 March 2013 - 12:38 PM

Currently working on:
A major facelift to the entire Mercenary's Manual site layout.

I am also going to unify as much of the CSS as I can during this time, color-wise. I still want to allow full control over the looks of the site.

I am doing this first, because the look of the overall site will affect the style of the other pages.

------------------
On hold:
The new Landing Page (It's Home on the Nav Bar, but I don't like calling it Home because it's not a Home Page, that would lead to ambitionwest.com/)

I am restructuring the news articles section to be less annoying to navigate. Ironically, this will involve removing my "class" for declaring them. A slight file size increase for a vast increase in manageability!
------------------
Queued:
Someone (anonymous for now) has offered to do Chinese translations for all item data.

Should they successfully follow through on this, I will recode all of Mercenary's Manual to support multiple languages. The vast majority of this time would be spent remodeling item definitions to not be name-based.

------------------
Item Compare Development Log (Archive):
Spoiler

Edited by Shippuu, 27 November 2014 - 08:56 PM.


Props awarded by 4 Members:

#3 Peterbon

Peterbon

    Administrator

  • Administrator
  • 256 posts
  • 29 Props
  • <Ambition>
  • Server: West

Posted 18 March 2013 - 10:52 PM

View PostShippuu, on 18 March 2013 - 12:38 PM, said:

  • Clarification: Does boss crit cap at 50%? I'm pretty sure the min is 6%.
  • Information Request: A formula for the average damage % for x Balance (not counting Crit), and one for just Critical.
  • Information Request: A formula for average damage % for x Balance and x Critical.

I don't believe anyone has done any experiments concerning a Boss's chance to crit you.

For statistically average damage, the following formulae work.  The Crit and Bal multipliers are separate terms, so you can just remove one or both as you like:

AverageDamage(Physical) = ATT_term*Crit_term*BAL_term, where

ATT_term = (MAX(MIN(10000,ATT+2380*Paladin?+3880*DarkKnight?+900*FuryInfusion?+1200*CrushingStrike?-BossDEF),0)+900+AddlDmg*6.25)

Crit_term = (1+MIN(MAX(Critical+22+22*FuryInfusion?+MIN(WIL+600*DarkKnight?+600*Paladin?,2000)/2000*15+3-BossCR,3),50)/100*(0.5+MIN(WIL+600*DarkKnight?+600*Paladin?,2000)/2000*0.3))

BAL_term = MIN(BAL/200+0.5+0.05*DarkKnight?,0.95).


AverageBaseDamage(Magical) = M.ATT_term*Crit_term*BAL_term, where

M.ATT_term = (MAX(MIN(10000,M.ATT+1900*Paladin?+3880*DarkKnight?-BossDEF),0)+900+AddlDmg*6.25)

Crit_term = (1+MIN(MAX(Critical+48+MIN(AGI+600*DarkKnight?+600*Paladin?,2000)/2000*30+3-BossCR,3),50)/100*(0.37+MIN(INT+600*DarkKnight?+600*Paladin?,2000)/2000*0.3))

BAL_term = MIN(BAL/200+0.5+0.05*DarkKnight?,0.95).


Terms ending with a ? are T/F, where T=1 and F=0.  Fully ranked skills and properly built transformation paths are assumed.  DarkKnight? and Paladin? are in reference to first-level trans of either.  Second-level trans is not accounted for.

Both formulae are for calculating average base damage.  To get the real damage, you'd have to multiply by skill multipliers, smash mastery, AGI Multipliers (Lann), etc.

The 6.25 AddlDmg multiplier has been called into question before.  The number may be closer to 7.  Manna has done some work with this.

#4 Shippuu

Shippuu

    Principle Investigator

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 197 posts
  • 40 Props
  • <Vongola XI>
  • Server: East

Posted 18 March 2013 - 11:50 PM

View PostPeterbon, on 18 March 2013 - 10:52 PM, said:

I don't believe anyone has done any experiments concerning a Boss's chance to crit you.

For statistically average damage, the following formulae work.  The Crit and Bal multipliers are separate terms, so you can just remove one or both as you like:

AverageDamage(Physical) = ATT_term*Crit_term*BAL_term, where

ATT_term = (MAX(MIN(10000,ATT+2380*Paladin?+3880*DarkKnight?+900*FuryInfusion?+1200*CrushingStrike?-BossDEF),0)+900+AddlDmg*6.25)

Crit_term = (1+MIN(MAX(Critical+22+22*FuryInfusion?+MIN(WIL+600*DarkKnight?+600*Paladin?,2000)/2000*15+3-BossCR,3),50)/100*(0.5+MIN(WIL+600*DarkKnight?+600*Paladin?,2000)/2000*0.3))

BAL_term = MIN(BAL/200+0.5+0.05*DarkKnight?,0.95).


AverageBaseDamage(Magical) = M.ATT_term*Crit_term*BAL_term, where

M.ATT_term = (MAX(MIN(10000,M.ATT+1900*Paladin?+3880*DarkKnight?-BossDEF),0)+900+AddlDmg*6.25)

Crit_term = (1+MIN(MAX(Critical+22+MIN(AGI+600*DarkKnight?+600*Paladin?,2000)/2000*30+3-BossCR,3),50)/100*(0.29+MIN(INT+600*DarkKnight?+600*Paladin?,2000)/2000*0.3))

BAL_term = MIN(BAL/200+0.5+0.05*DarkKnight?,0.95).


Terms ending with a ? are T/F, where T=1 and F=0.  Fully ranked skills and properly built transformation paths are assumed.  DarkKnight? and Paladin? are in reference to first-level trans of either.  Second-level trans is not accounted for.

Both formulae are for calculating average base damage.  To get the real damage, you'd have to multiply by skill multipliers, smash mastery, AGI Multipliers (Lann), etc.

The 6.25 AddlDmg multiplier has been called into question before.  The number may be closer to 7.  Manna has done some work with this.

I'm lost. There's a lot of extra not math things thrown in that make those impossible for me to decipher, sorry.

I just need a set that works on a characters gear stats/skill ranks alone (no status buffs or trans buffs or the like).

Edited by Shippuu, 18 March 2013 - 11:52 PM.


#5 Peterbon

Peterbon

    Administrator

  • Administrator
  • 256 posts
  • 29 Props
  • <Ambition>
  • Server: West

Posted 19 March 2013 - 12:17 AM

OK, here are the formulae without buffs:

AverageDamage(Physical) = ATT_term*Crit_term*BAL_term, where

ATT_term = (MAX(MIN(10000,ATT-BossDEF),0)+900+AddlDmg*6.25)

Crit_term = (1+MIN(MAX(Critical+22+MIN(WIL,2000)/2000*15+3-BossCR,3),50)/100*(0.5+MIN(WIL,2000)/2000*0.3))

BAL_term = MIN(BAL/200+0.5,0.95).


AverageBaseDamage(Magical) = M.ATT_term*Crit_term*BAL_term, where

M.ATT_term = (MAX(MIN(10000,M.ATT-BossDEF),0)+900+AddlDmg*6.25)

Crit_term = (1+MIN(MAX(Critical+48+MIN(AGI,2000)/2000*30+3-BossCR,3),50)/100*(0.37+MIN(INT,2000)/2000*0.3))

BAL_term = MIN(BAL/200+0.5,0.95).



MIN(a,b) means take the smallest of exp<b></b>ressions a and b.
MAX(a,b) means take the largest of exp<b></b>ressions a and b.

These two functions are necessary to account for caps.  They're very important for High-Defense and Low-Defense bosses, and for Magical crits (INT Cap).

Mind my note in my previous post about the AddlDmg multiplier.

Props awarded by 1 Member:

#6 Shippuu

Shippuu

    Principle Investigator

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 197 posts
  • 40 Props
  • <Vongola XI>
  • Server: East

Posted 19 March 2013 - 12:55 AM

Thanks, those are a lot clearer. I hope to get the new window + it's first tab up in the next few days, it will have most any other information that isn't already displayed on the current Armory windows.

I'll keep the note in mind, but for now 6.25 is the believed number, so I will go with that initially. I can quickly adjust it on the page if a more accurate number is found, and on that note can also tidy up all of the raid window's Javascript when I get time tomorrow.

#7 Manna

Manna

    Scientist

  • Moderator
  • 92 posts
  • 24 Props
  • <Ambition>
  • Server: West

Posted 20 March 2013 - 06:48 AM

Also, for damage per unit time, add a factor of (ASPD+200)/200 so the equations become:

AverageDamage(Physical) = ATT_term*Crit_term*BAL_term
AverageDamagePerTime(Physical) = ATT_term*Crit_term*BAL_term*ASPD_term, where

ASPD_term = (ASPD+200)/200


AverageBaseDamage(Magical) = M.ATT_term*Crit_term*BAL_term
AverageBaseDamage(Magical) = M.ATT_term*Crit_term*BAL_term*ASPD_term, where

ASPD_term = (ASPD+200)/200


Also, keep in mind that (att-def) doesn't simply floor at 0; it actually changes forms just like the damage taken formula (except this one is still continuous). However, if you are under the boss's def, you will be doing very little damage anyway, so determining the actual formula is currently a low priority.

#8 Shippuu

Shippuu

    Principle Investigator

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 197 posts
  • 40 Props
  • <Vongola XI>
  • Server: East

Posted 20 March 2013 - 12:35 PM

That's basically 0.5% per speed, so I'll take that as a yes.

That damage info is new though. I suppose I should be updating the page to show ? marks when it reaches that point.

Most of the damage information will be on a second patch to the window, it has two tabs, but it's good to see them early to plan out how I want to do it when I get there.

Are these formula's posted by BoswerLK still valid?
[Mana Shield HP] = [Mana Shield Base HP] + ([INT] * 2)
[Mana Amber HP] = [Mana Amber Base HP] + ([M.ATT] * 0.1)
[Mana Shield Regeneration Rate [HP/sec]] = [Mana Shield HP] * 0.1 / 15
[Healing] = [Base Healing by Rank] + ([M.ATT] * 0.046)

(Note they are all Evie's, the source of half of my problems when I was arranging the windows layout.)

#9 Manna

Manna

    Scientist

  • Moderator
  • 92 posts
  • 24 Props
  • <Ambition>
  • Server: West

Posted 20 March 2013 - 01:25 PM

The attack speed thing might not be completely valid once factoring in hit delay (that would depend on the attack anyway), but it should be close enough to be a useful comparison.

I know corona was buffed during ignition, but I'm not sure about the other formulas. The buff only changed the base healing of corona; the dependency on matt is still .046, so that equation is valid.

When the attack is lower than boss def, I would just add a less than sign in front of the value for when att equals def.

Edited by Manna, 20 March 2013 - 02:25 PM.


#10 Shippuu

Shippuu

    Principle Investigator

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 197 posts
  • 40 Props
  • <Vongola XI>
  • Server: East

Posted 20 March 2013 - 04:29 PM

Thanks.

To the main reason of this post: Spell Books can be 3*/4* now.

I wonder if anything else was ninja'd in.

Edited by Shippuu, 20 March 2013 - 04:29 PM.


#11 Peterbon

Peterbon

    Administrator

  • Administrator
  • 256 posts
  • 29 Props
  • <Ambition>
  • Server: West

Posted 21 March 2013 - 04:15 AM

The usefulness/validity of accounting for ATT SPD is an interesting question.  You could argue that it's really useful to know the difference in DPS for stunlock situations, but then the value output for that is misleading because in sandbag, hit delay is a huge factor which can't be easily accounted for.

And in non-sandbag, DPS is not really a useful number, because gear combinations with different ATT SPDs can have entirely different attack combo options.

The only situation where ATT SPD completely applies is during Transformation against a sandbagged target.  Kraken's head comes to mind.  Hit delay doesn't affect Staff Evie or Kai, but Staff Evie has little business on Kraken's head, and ATT SPD doesn't really apply to Kai's DPS.

It also applies when using Focus Stims, and anyone using Focus Stims is likely also using Fury Stims.  Accounting for Fury Stims is simple in code, but very hard to do in one's head.  0.8*DMG(ATT+4010)+0.2*DMG(ATT) =/= DMG(ATT+0.8*4010).

#12 Shippuu

Shippuu

    Principle Investigator

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 197 posts
  • 40 Props
  • <Vongola XI>
  • Server: East

Posted 21 March 2013 - 10:32 AM

Hit drag does make speed a 'fun' one to figure out, though I hadn't intended an overall dps number that factored speed.

I hadn't even been thinking about hit drag at that point, just that each character is affected differently by higher/lower speeds, and the benefit isn't consistent enough for a number to represent.

I'd have to do a third column on the list of attacks and their damages for that single attack's damage per second, which would require an endless amount of testing for each attack, as well as still not being accurate. What if it's based on whiffing normals and landing the smash, but people decide to land the normals? Things like that make it too much trouble to try to count it.

I figured damage boost from crit, damage average from bal, combined average applying both, and their percent attack speed, with 100% being 0 speed. It separates attack speed from dps on the display, but a lot who stack speed just do it for fun. People who stack it for extra dps will already know how it benefits them, as well as likely having the skill to take advantage of the extra attack turns.

Edited by Shippuu, 21 March 2013 - 10:36 AM.


#13 Manna

Manna

    Scientist

  • Moderator
  • 92 posts
  • 24 Props
  • <Ambition>
  • Server: West

Posted 21 March 2013 - 01:47 PM

The effect of attack speed can sometimes be much greater than perfect sandbag and sometimes much less. It may not be completely accurate to assume the effect is about equal to the effect in sandbag, but not factoring attack speed into the equation would unfairly make low speed builds look better.

#14 Shippuu

Shippuu

    Principle Investigator

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 197 posts
  • 40 Props
  • <Vongola XI>
  • Server: East

Posted 21 March 2013 - 06:14 PM

There isn't really a proper way to represent it I'd say. It should be implied that higher speed impacts DPS, but there isn't an easy way to show it through numbers. Some random +1 speed might make the difference between being able to fit in a Bloody Thread instead of a Mark of Death, and that's not really something a formula can account for accurately.

I personally am fine with the number only being close rather than exact, but I don't know of a realistic way to even get to there.

#15 Shippuu

Shippuu

    Principle Investigator

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 197 posts
  • 40 Props
  • <Vongola XI>
  • Server: East

Posted 25 March 2013 - 02:44 AM

I decided against a separate window and merged the originally planned Character Info window with Raid Analysis.

Feedback on how it looks/functions/etc will be appreciated. This goes doubly for if a number is wrong on the new window.

Edited by Shippuu, 25 March 2013 - 02:45 AM.


#16 Manna

Manna

    Scientist

  • Moderator
  • 92 posts
  • 24 Props
  • <Ambition>
  • Server: West

Posted 25 March 2013 - 01:21 PM

Looks good. I thought it was kind of weird at first (I don't really know why), but I like it now.

For fury infusion, it predicts losing 418 HP with 5725 total, but I actually only lose 401. Maybe this is tiered as well?

#17 Shippuu

Shippuu

    Principle Investigator

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 197 posts
  • 40 Props
  • <Vongola XI>
  • Server: East

Posted 25 March 2013 - 01:57 PM

It shows 401 on my screen. 418 is closer to 5900 HP, so the math on the value itself is fine.

If it's displaying that and is repeatable, it might be an error on it actually updating.

#18 Manna

Manna

    Scientist

  • Moderator
  • 92 posts
  • 24 Props
  • <Ambition>
  • Server: West

Posted 25 March 2013 - 02:08 PM

Oh whoops, I entered the final amount of HP instead of the base amount.

#19 Shippuu

Shippuu

    Principle Investigator

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 197 posts
  • 40 Props
  • <Vongola XI>
  • Server: East

Posted 27 March 2013 - 07:16 AM

I added a first compare tool to the Armory, though it's a basic one. It was also a test at a drag and drop feature.

It's not an actual component of the Armory and more of a side tool, so it is by default hidden. To open it, right click the black background in the main section of the page, and click Show Weapon Compare.

I wasn't entirely sure how to 'score' the differences on the weapons, so I don't feel very satisfied with the current version of the tool yet.

Any suggestions on adjustments?

EDIT: I have noticed that I forgot to setup a check for whether to use M.ATT or ATT on Weapon Compare.

Right now it only uses ATT. I won't have time to fix this until tonight EST.

Edited by Shippuu, 27 March 2013 - 07:41 AM.


#20 Manna

Manna

    Scientist

  • Moderator
  • 92 posts
  • 24 Props
  • <Ambition>
  • Server: West

Posted 27 March 2013 - 03:15 PM

Looks pretty good, but I'd get rid of the % comparisons because I think they might be misleading since it's out of context.