Heavy Strike
Well, given they add % Physical, it means no change for them.
The fixed damage bonuses were buffed. Zaanus:
Global chat: Mechanics for A work one way, B for another, C for a third but also with A, B uses C but not A, and D uses A&B but not C ___ Isn't a "no" better than an ignore? |
|
well not sure if hatred's damage add will be buffed for this skill, but my joking point still stands till proven. added fire will definitely be boosted because it is a support. damage effectiveness of 150% from heavy strike is 50% more damage for everything done by skill. physical, elemental, chaos.
check glacial hammer for similar. infernal blow doesn't have it as it is half melee half spell (unless they want to balance it on a rewrite). | |
If added fire adds 30% of physical as fire, and it has 150% physical damage effectiveness, it deals 50% more physical, the question there is, is the fire damage calculated before or after the efficiency?
It's probably after, in which case it might indeed have profited from the change where as before it did not. Zaanus:
Global chat: Mechanics for A work one way, B for another, C for a third but also with A, B uses C but not A, and D uses A&B but not C ___ Isn't a "no" better than an ignore? |
|
1) 100 *1.5 = 150 phys *0.3 = 45 fire
2) 100 *0.3 = 30 fire *1.5 = 45 fire Damage modifier can go any location in damage calc but because it is a multiplier, it can be counted as "more" like you tried to say with physical damage boost. Given that, i'm not sure if it is added to other more based increases or if it's a separate "more". like if there was 20% increased phys, 40% more phys, and this 150% damage mod: a) 200 *1.2 = 240 *1.4 = 336 *1.5 = 504 b) 200 *1.2 = 240 *1.9 = 456 | |
More is always multiplicative.
What I was wondering is, if it was only 150% physical efficiency, it might have calculated fire damage first, then the efficiency, not affecting fire damage. As it is simply efficiency, it will obviously affect everything. Zaanus:
Global chat: Mechanics for A work one way, B for another, C for a third but also with A, B uses C but not A, and D uses A&B but not C ___ Isn't a "no" better than an ignore? |
|
yes i know more is always multiplicative, but there's nothing showing damage modifier is in same group as more base increases or separate.
this went from me trying to prove something to me being confused and i wasn't clear enough. | |
The knockback is very annoying, especially for fast attacking 1h melee, It's the sole reason I prefer other single target spells despite better damage of heavy strike.
Last edited by GeneralBuzda on Jan 30, 2013, 6:44:55 AM
|
|
Unless the Knockback is intended to be a penalty for using Heavy Strike, please remove it.
The knock back isn't enough to position mobs strategically, but it is just enough that you have to keep moving closer to the mob after every hit. This is a melee attack, which means you have to be in melee range, which means pushing the mobs out of melee range is bad for you! |
|
" I have to really really agree. I simply don't see a point to knockback the mob and push him away while you actually want him to be close to you. The knockback should imho be something that a ranged skill should have as a side effect and NOT a melee skill, Unless you fancy the following: Heavy strike should be really useful if it could be combined with fire damage instead of knockback, hence complementing the arsenal of melee ( Glacial hammer = cold, Lightining strike= lightning, Heavy Strike = fire). Resists trolls
Casts Joy Ninja looter Spreads tar when tickled |
|
" Infernal Blow. |