Has anyone documented the maximum damage caps per class?

[ya.dingus]

Originally Posted by Trexller [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

the devs who would go write new code and change mechanics are boomers, with jobs, families and real life commitments.

Is this where you perform mental gymnastics and tell me how throwing away a majority of your points based on vanilla optimization and a racial talent make you the best race for the class?

Please son. People optimizing for 20 points at char screen start for 100+ or more hp end game, and you're going to argue that throwing away nearly 50 str and stamina to gear overstating doesn't matter.

Ogre hasn't been Min/Max alternative for *anything* since Velious.

Thems.Are.The.Breaks.

The only thing that made you good were the stats, fsi is a meme, and your fashion is bad.



I mean, look at the thread we're in. OP is crying about going over 200 str with no avatar and reaching the same dps caps nearly because of diminishing returns (if they even exist).

Enjoy your piss poor wis/int/dex pools I guess.

[Vivitron]

Originally Posted by DeathsSilkyMist [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

At first I thought that may be the case. If STR worked like INT and it only gave you half the bonus past 200, then 84 would roughly be correct. The problem is Avatar gives you +100 attack, so I 100% should go past 84 with Avatar on and 255 STR.

The fact that each weapon damage perfectly ends up being 4.2 damage per 1 weapon damage is pretty conclusive evidence to me that there is some kind of maximum damage cap occurring.

Maybe for melee classes the maximum damage cap is too high to matter, but I would be interested if some weapons on some melee classes are actually hitting the maximum damage cap.

There's no attack in the formula you suggested above, though. On my bard I seem to get 97 max prime hand with a 16 damage weapon, and 92 prime hand with a 15 damage, regardless of avatar status.

Looking through my logs it looks like rogues are probably hitting 96 with a 15 damage prime hand.

[Jimjam]

Yea attack doesn’t increase your hit values, it just weights the dice. Attack doesn’t make you hit for more than you could before, it just makes you more likely to hit for your higher values.

[Duik]

What's a "boomer"? Serious question.
Assigning labels rarely ends well.
Born 1965.
Own home.
Worked/works shit jobs (low pay so to speak)
Smart. Imho.
Young wife, 22yrs younger.
2 kids 12 and 10.
Not rich so not sugar daddy.
Label me.
Go.
In B4.
Insults dont count. Unless they make me laugh.

[Duik]

You become better at dodge insult (237).

[DeathsSilkyMist]

Originally Posted by Vivitron [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

There's no attack in the formula you suggested above, though. On my bard I seem to get 97 max prime hand with a 16 damage weapon, and 92 prime hand with a 15 damage, regardless of avatar status.

Looking through my logs it looks like rogues are probably hitting 96 with a 15 damage prime hand.

I am not 100% sure what you mean here when you are talking about "There's no attack in the formula you suggested above".

But thank you for supplying some numbers people can check to see if their bards/rogues are hitting higher than that. The damage cap is certainly on a per class basis, so I would assume melee classes have a higher cap. My Shadowknight can hit for 132 with a 25 damage weapon, so Shadowknights definitely have a higher cap than 4.2 damage per 1 weapon damage. It is at least 5.3 damage per 1 weapon damage, but I am sure it is higher than that. I need to get Avatar on him sometime to see what his damage is then with 255 STR and +100 attack.

Originally Posted by Jimjam [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Yea attack doesn’t increase your hit values, it just weights the dice. Attack doesn’t make you hit for more than you could before, it just makes you more likely to hit for your higher values.

Yeah, attack from something like Avatar or AoB items doesn't increase chance to hit. The only thing that increases your chance to hit are weapon skills. It's just confusing because both of those values get rolled into attack stat on your character sheet.

Attack does increase your max damage values. When you say "weight the dice", what you are referring to is the combination of your damage range and the maximum damage cap.

If your damage range is 1-100 and your maximum damage cap is 84, you have more of a chance of getting an 84, because the cap occurs as the LAST step. This means you can still roll a 100, it just becomes an 84. So you have a 16% chance to roll an 84 , instead of a 1% chance to roll a 100 if your maximum damage cap was 100.

[Vivitron]

Originally Posted by DeathsSilkyMist [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I am not 100% sure what you mean here when you are talking about "There's no attack in the formula you suggested above".

The post I quoted suggested you expected a higher max hit from avatar's +atk, but your first post and the wiki quote a suggested max damage formula that is only a function of str, offense, weapon damage, and damage bonus -- not +atk.

So, +atk not upping your max damage may be due to attack not factoring in to max damage rather than further evidence of a damage cap.

[Vivitron]

Originally Posted by DeathsSilkyMist [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Yeah, attack from something like Avatar or AoB items doesn't increase chance to hit. The only thing that increases your chance to hit are weapon skills. It's just confusing because both of those values get rolled into attack stat on your character sheet.

Attack does increase your max damage values. When you say "weight the dice", what you are referring to is the combination of your damage range and the maximum damage cap.

If your damage range is 1-100 and your maximum damage cap is 84, you have more of a chance of getting an 84, because the cap occurs as the LAST step. This means you can still roll a 100, it just becomes an 84. So you have a 16% chance to roll an 84 , instead of a 1% chance to roll a 100 if your maximum damage cap was 100.

Here you seem to be saying attack doesn't matter, so perhaps it's just a miscommunication. I was responding to your statement that "The problem is Avatar gives you +100 attack"

[DeathsSilkyMist]

Originally Posted by Vivitron [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Here you seem to be saying attack doesn't matter, so perhaps it's just a miscommunication. I was responding to your statement that "The problem is Avatar gives you +100 attack"

Oh I see. What I meant was that even when I got +100 attack, I was still only hitting for 84, which was reinforcing the evidence to show that there is a maximum damage cap. On my Shadowknight getting +Attack from Aura of Battle, Grim Aura, and Firefist is increasing my max damage. Without 2x Aura of Battles, Grim Aura, and Firefist I hit for 124 max with a 25 damage weapon. I hit for 132 with a 25 damage weapon with 2x Aura of Battles, Grim Aura, and Firefist.

I was saying +Attack doesn't increase chance to hit.

[Jimjam]

When I say attack doesn’t increase your hit values, i’m not talking about chance to hit.

I mean the 20 sided die has a different amount of damage on each face. Attack doesn’t increase the number on any of these faces. Instead it makes the faces with the larger numbers more likely to be rolled (ie weights the dice, ie ie more likely to hit closer to max).

That was my understanding at least, but from like pop+ era based on Yoda’s parses. Perhaps it is different here/in this era.