[X] My Assistant

What I mean is maybe it'd have been better if you clarified that monsters had those particular stats set to 0 instead of saying that they have "all stats that players do," which gave the impression that they actually did have it.

Also, I can't quote you for some reason.

So...
'existing value' = original stat
'new bonus amount' = increased stats from forging/chaos upgrading
Something like that? I'm quite confused about what are 'existing' values.

Unless I'm reading it wrong he simply means this

Huh? No. Everything that contributes to a multiplicative stat is added with the (1 - ( (1 - old_value / 100) * (1 - minmax(0, bonus_value / 100, 1)) ) ) * 100 formula. It doesn't matter which order it happens in or what kind of bonus it is.

Old value = starts at 80% (or whatever our starting accuracy is)

Say you have a 70% focus staff, and 20% accuracy bonus from INT (for simplicity sake this is all I list)

Bonus value would be 70%

Solve formula

"old value" has now been changed to the accuracy adjusted for the 70% bonus

now reuse formula where bonus value is 20% this time

etc. so basically the old value and new value is constantly changing until you have addressed all the accuracy bonuses.

Edit: and yeah I already expected monsters didn't have E/P/R like us ever since Eila reached 500 PL (yes that long ago)

This post has been edited by dcherry: Jul 26 2012, 21:19

Strange i never thought that monsters had resist/parry/evade. I guessed that before monster lab patch original monsters had 20% chance miss then when new monsters were introduced they had less misses so i thought their stats increased their accuracy at that moment.

What I mean is maybe it'd have been better if you clarified that monsters had those particular stats set to 0 instead of saying that they have "all stats that players do," which gave the impression that they actually did have it.

Not my fault you can't read. The stat system is unified, but monsters and players have vastly different ways of actually calculating the stats.

Not my fault you can't read. The stat system is unified, but monsters and players have vastly different ways of actually calculating the stats.

I read what you wrote. And this is what you said:

Among the biggest changes is that players and monsters now share a common stat system, which means that monsters now have all the stats players have.

Was I supposed to assume by "monsters now have all the stats players have," to actually mean "they have all the stats players do except that resist/evade have been set to 0?" In that case, then yes I really can't read.

And this is not meant to incite rage or argument just a clarification on wording, not sure why you seemed pissed about it.

This post has been edited by Sushilicious: Jul 26 2012, 21:25

This seems reminiscent of the whole EDB fiasco back in the day. I guess it was our fault for not finding out sooner that monster actually had evade/resists but only that their value has been set to 0. (IMG:[invalid] style_emoticons/default/rolleyes.gif)

I did have a suspicious for a while now, and even more once I discovered that void shard = 100% hit chance, literally... Which beg the question whether monster could actually E/P/R the attack or not, and whether if mage with 100% hit chance would mean no spell miss at all:

Another interesting question is: if player can actually have 100% acc, will that have the same effect as melee+void shard (i.e. always hit) (IMG:[invalid] style_emoticons/default/huh.gif) ... People might say that it won't because of various shenanigans. But I believe back when high lv mage can still have 100% acc (Hito is one of them, I think), I heard that you won't miss at all even though it still miss a lot at 99.99% ... It's possible that it may still work the same way right now, so thing might not be as simple as one might think. Who knows... (IMG:[invalid] style_emoticons/default/unsure.gif)

But since everyone seems to fell prey to the masterfully-crafted TenbSpeak ... No one seem to cares. (IMG:[invalid] style_emoticons/default/heh.gif)

Was I supposed to assume by "monsters now have all the stats players have," to actually mean "they have all the stats players do except that resist/evade have been set to 0?" In that case, then yes I really can't read.

It literally says that monsters have the same stats the players do, which is true. It doesn't say that the stats have the same values, which should be bleedingly obvious, considering that monsters don't have auras/equipment/proficiencies/etc and players don't have chaos upgrades.

Unless I'm reading it wrong he simply means this

etc. so basically the old value and new value is constantly changing until you have addressed all the accuracy bonuses.

Edit: and yeah I already expected monsters didn't have E/P/R like us ever since Eila reached 500 PL (yes that long ago)

Then there's no difference to the 'old' formula!

If you rewrite the old formula, you will get

(1 - accuracy) = (1 - a) (1 - b ) (1 - c)

while You're suggesting
d = 1 - (1 - a) (1 - b ) -> (1 - d) = (1 - a) (1 - b )
And
accuracy = 1 - (1 - d) (1 - c) -> (1 - accuracy) = (1 - d) (1 - c)
which is basically the same.

That's why I'm confused: What's the difference except that minmax?

This post has been edited by varst: Jul 26 2012, 21:27

for one thing, T might not have fully understood the formula presented to him. the one presented to him suggested that equip bonuses were lumped together and THEN applied, which would make 100% accuracy ridiculously easy. which would be wrong. most of us that understand the formula already know it accounts for each bonus individually

That's why I'm confused: What's the difference except that minmax?

The difference is that the way it was postulated, equipment values would be summed together and then applied multiplicatively, instead of being multiplicatively added individually.

edit: or what he said ^

I want a cookie for ninja-ing T (IMG:[invalid] style_emoticons/default/happy.gif)

It literally says that monsters have the same stats the players do, which is true. It doesn't say that the stats have the same values, which should be bleedingly obvious, considering that monsters don't have auras/equipment/proficiencies/etc and players don't have chaos upgrades.

Right, and I assumed that monsters had some sort of evade chance they get from agility like players do. Never said their values had to be the same as players, but just some sort of value above 0. For example, if a monster has 18 AGI or something and we know monsters share the same stat system as players, I don't think anyone would assume that would amount to 0 total evade.

If I'm reading what you wrote correctly, it seems like monsters only had stats like evade/resist only if they were upgraded via chaos tokens, which became available at 0.6.8. Which means that increasing monster's primary attributes had no effect on their resist/evade prior to 0.6.8.

Fact: Tenb's information [about HV] are extremely unreliable.

(IMG:[invalid] style_emoticons/default/tongue.gif)

I want a cookie for ninja-ing T (IMG:[invalid] style_emoticons/default/happy.gif)

You deserve one for that. Chocolate cookie?
(And since even Tenb miss that formula, I'm going to add one more sentence in wiki for clarification)

(IMG:[4.bp.blogspot.com] http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-MNL1FHcCMa8/Tse9BHVyYYI/AAAAAAAAA-4/bki5Gzuqq2M/s1600/ecc.jpg)

This post has been edited by varst: Jul 26 2012, 21:40

Stop bothering Tenb. He is supposed to dish out a Patch tomorrow! (IMG:[invalid] style_emoticons/default/tongue.gif)

nom nom nom

If I'm reading what you wrote correctly, it seems like monsters only had stats like evade/resist only if they were upgraded via chaos tokens, which became available at 0.6.8. Which means that increasing monster's primary attributes had no effect on their resist/evade prior to 0.6.8.

I think it became pretty obvious when only the DwD dragons actually Resisted the spells you threw at them.

Fact: people assume too much.

FTFY. Unfortunately, completely unambiguous speech would be far too verbose.

Stop bothering Tenb. He is supposed to dish out a Patch tomorrow! (IMG:[invalid] style_emoticons/default/tongue.gif)

I have work tomorrow, you insensitive clod.

FTFY. Unfortunately, completely unambiguous speech would be far too verbose.

Hey, where would we be without assumptions? (IMG:[invalid] style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

(IMG:[4.bp.blogspot.com] http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-MNL1FHcCMa8/Tse9BHVyYYI/AAAAAAAAA-4/bki5Gzuqq2M/s1600/ecc.jpg)

Gawd, give me one of those, this thread is giving me a headache.