So, let’s assume a 2-handed weapon does 100 base void damage, and WILL crit (base crit multiplier is 200%).
Unforged: 100x2=200 damage
Now I add T5 +crit multiplier (caps at 68%). 100x2.68=268 damage.
Now, INSTEAD, I use T5 +void% (caps at 162%). 100x1.62=162. Then it crits, 162x2=324.
So… Crit multiplier is a crap forging choice then, right?
You’ve got your maths wrong on both points.
A crit should have a 200% multiplier meaning it does 3x damage (I think it currently does 2x, so the devs have got their maths wrong as well, wouldn’t be the first time they got this particular piece of maths wrong). So a crit should give you 300, but it only gives you 200. The crit multi craft should give your crit a 3.68 multiplier.
The void % of 162% should also be a 2.62 multiplier (assuming nothing else). If it were a 1.62 multiplier, then the t1 roll would be x0.32 which would make your damage worse. So that +162% would give you 262 non-crit void damage, which would crit to 524.
So while you get 0 marks for the workings, you do get some marks for the correct answer.
IMO, they need to significantly increase the numbers on the crit multi affixes & change the wording so that it says 100% multiplier at base (which would give x2 damage which is what we currently get).
Ohh I forgot to add 1 for the increased damage, I see. Still, disappointing that building crit multiplier is so underwhelming. Thanks Llama!
I don’t think this is the case, and feels very unintuitive, given the rpg “dev meta” landscape(if there is such a thing lol). Almost every rpg(and even mobas like lol, the list is honestly too big) uses 150% or 200% as a base crit multiplier(not 300%, so 300% here would be odd). And all being consistent that it is “a crit is 200% of your base attack” not “a crit does +200% more damage”.
There’s no reason to assume the interaction is +200% and that the devs messed up, implementing it as 200% of a hit instead of +200% on top of a hit. And just so it’s not a debate(not saying you’re contesting this) but it is currently 200% of a hit. Testing with a low lvl character, with basic gear and no bleeds or procs to confuse the testing, 25-30 hits turn into 50-60crits with 200% multiplier on the char sheet.
I agree with your assessment on the second paragraph, though 
Yes, but given it’s an x2 multiple of your non-crit damage, then that should be represented as +100%, just x2. I know I’m being pedantic. But it’s a 100% more multiplier, so why does it say 200%?
It’s just that, 200% of your damage. If your damage is 100, 100% of that is 100. If your damage is 100, 200% of that is 200. It doesn’t say +200%, that would indeed be 300% of your damage.
Take it on face value, multiply your damage by 200.
I know, I said it earlier, my issue with it is that it’s called a multiplier but it’s not multiplicative (like more). If it were just displayed as x2 then that would be fine, but its displayed as a percent and called a multiplier and when we multiply by a % we convert to a decimal and add 1.
Am I making myself clear why I have issues with the presentation of it (that sounds aggressive but it’s really not meant aggressively)? Could the presentation be changed so that its clearer/more in line with how maths uses percentages and how the game uses percentages? From my first post above, when the game gives you a percentage for damage, that percentage is an increase on the base damage (10% increased or more is multiplying by 1.1) until you get to crits, then the crit chance % works one way (100% increase doubles your base), but the crit multiplier percentage works a completely different way (a 100% figure doesnt double your base damage, for that you need a 200% figure).
@Llama8 is correct.
I think the solution of showing the semantically correct information - 100% isn’t good either because that will make plenty of players think along the lines of “I do 100% of my damage with crit? No damage increase? Well that sucks!”
Your interpretation of x2 could also be very easily read as 200% - do two times damage more.
The most foolproof method would be just to use “Increased critical strike damage” but at the same time “critical strike multiplier” is a known term for many if not most, so using that would be most intuitive.
Also without any inspection I thought that critical strikes are 300% of the base damage in this game. Kind of made intuitively sense as that was which was presented while the critical strike chances are pretty low on some skills.
Edit: Yet again the edit is 5x longer than the original.
I don’t know guys it says ingame:
Critical Strike Multiplier: 200%
“Multiplies damage dealt by critical strikes”
And every description ingame says flat +X% crit multi (not “increased”)
It’s the most straightforward description, a crit is x2 dmg
@OP: crit multi by itself is a bit meaningless as it is complemented by crit chance. (So in your comparison it is even an a lot weaker mod than you calced)
To get a more real idea of what % increase you are expecting you need to make a black box comparison, this means with your entire char buffed up by gear and stats.
So a char with i dont know 100 weapon dmg, 50 added dmg, the skill having 100% added dmg effectiveness, 500% dmg, and then 20% crit and 200% multi, i may have missed another dmg source dont know EDIT: ah and the attack/cast speed if you want to get the DPS heh
(you need to check with your char skill and gear etc)
Also in your calcs the T5 void is “increased” void damage so in your example it is
weapon damage * (normal dmg + increased dmg) * crit multi -> 100*(1+1.62)*2=524 crit
But it needs to be corrected by adding the crit chance make it 20% crit? so it becomes 100*(1+1.62)*(0.2x2)=366
And yet again it is not so meaningful if you don’t take into account your atk speed, let’s assume 1aps for now
But if for a real example you are calcing your rive 3rd hit crit and you go for the 15k hit but are ignoring higher speed weapons (swords) that deal 12k at 1.2aps then the final DPS and extra value like mana on hit may become better on a faster weapon without you realizing it
Yes, we’ve been over that already.
Though you make a fair point about comparing the realistic damage increase of a +136% void damage affix compared to +68% crit damage. If you’ve already got +500% void damage, that t5 affix will give you an increase of 27.2% (regardless of whether it’s a crit or not, since the crit damage is a x2 multiplier), whereas the 68% crit multi would be a 34% increase (268% damage / 200%) assuming 100% crit chance (17% for a 50% crit chance,etc). The higher your total “increased” the less value an additional increased affix has, and more relative value crit multi has (more so if you have a high crit chance).
Anyway 100% crit chance is not real (on a VK) so by going estimates you have to cut that 34% increase by at least 1/2 or 2/3 or more.
Even if using rive 3rd crit you are still doing 1st and 2nd hits noncrit so it is not a pure 100% crit skill, but then it gets complicated as if you buff the 3rd hit it compensates a little and also the 3rd hit has a 200% added dmg effectiveness and so on
The most important thing is not to see those values alone. If you only consider one single increased modifier to crit multi, it will be better for sure. But the thing is once you have say 1000% increased damage already and you add another 100% increased damage, it will be much less meaningful than just the “first” 100% increased damage. Crit multiplier will instead also scale from all that 1000% increased damage you had already.
Going with the simple math ignoring things like attack speed and such:
If you have 100 base damage, with 1000% increased damage and critical chance of 10% and 200% crit multiplier.
Adding 162% increased damage to that would result an average hit of 100 * 11.62 * (1+0.1 * 2.00) = 1394
Adding 68% crit multi would result an average hit of
100 * 10.0 * (1+0.1 * 2.68) = 1268
If my math is right, then it would be better to get increased damage.
With 20% crit chance, the numbers would be: 1627 vs 1536 (increased damage still being better).
With 20% crit chance and 2000% increased damage as a base, numbers would be : 3027 vs 3072 (crit multi giving higher damage increase).
It all comes down to how much increased damage you have before adding the single new value and how large your critical chance is. To really compare which one is better, it would need to be a diagram that shows which one is better in a given situation.
Except 1,000% increased = x11, not x10, and the crit section of your formula is wrong too, 1.1 = 110% chance to crit so 10% crit chance with 200% crit multi would be (0.1 * 2).
So that first calc should be 100 * 12.62 * (0.1 * 2) = 252.4
The second one would be 100 * 11.62 * (0.1 * 2.68) = 311.4
Edit: Which is my case in point about how switching how you use percentages is a bad thing, inconsistencies confuse people.
True enough that my increased damage is wrong, it’s actually correct for 900% increased damage, not 1000% increased. Wasn’t paying enough attention to it 
.
My crit calculations on the other hand might be correct I think. After all, if you have x10 or x11 times the base damage of 100, you should have a hit over 1000 or 1100, not 250 or 300. Since I calculated average hit, it has the case of no crits (the 1 in calculation), and the additional damage you get from crits (crit chance * crit multi).
Anyway, the theory itself is correct: the more increased damage you already have, the better crit hit chance and crit multi gets compared to additional increased damage.
I retract my bad maths & will go and fall on my Eastern Blade with a t7 affix…
This topic was automatically closed 60 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.