Hey there, I agree on the format, although I hate that it's the other way round in-game (% for armor and x for damage - they should really change that) <.< ^^
The previous values on Maximized Power Strength were still the ones without Power Drift until Xyath added them in (with the wrong Maximum Fury since he just used it as a multiplier, so yeah, your format is definitely better :D)
Two things though: On Maximized Power Range it shows 139% (or 1.39x) in-game rather than 1.4x. And the Maximized Fury value on Maximized Power Strength should be 623.25%. You might want to doublecheck the latter since I don't have all the mods maxed but I get a 5.99 / 598.75% damage multiplier in-game with +185% PS, so it has to be higher than 6 for the maximum.
Sorry I didn't notice your message earlier. I also just noticed there was a discussion on the most recent edits in the comment section.
While the abilities menu and HUD show "139%" for the minimum value of Scorn, this is a UI error with rounding. This isn't the first and only case either. Overextended would have to have a power strength penalty of roughly -60.3% to produce that displayed minimum value. Normally I would accept UI values if there is a nonlinear relationship between an ability stat and mods or if the stat is capped, but this isn't the case here.
As for Fury in the maximization tab, we're talking about the damage bonus and not the total combined multiplier. If I'm saying maximum Fury grants an additional 175% total weapon damage, then maximum Fury will grant an additional 523.25% total weapon damage with maximum power strength. I'll reword the article for clarity.
I'm just trying to maintain consistency throughout all ability articles when differentiating between multipliers and percent bonuses as the UI often mixes these up. Thanks for letting me know, and if there's anything you disagree with we can discuss it further.
No worries and thanks for clearing these things up.
I totally didn't check the minimum value, that was pretty stupid - I wasn't expecting the game to be off in such a way though.
Same for the Maximized Fury, I was totally going with the in-game values there but was trying to stay in your format. It's really inconvenient to have this incoherent stuff in the game.. So I totally agree with having consistency here on those matters.
Thanks again for your help, have a nice day, too =D
(Edit: deleted my question since I just answered it myself, so you don't have to read that mess, haha)
I've been seeing your contributions around a lot, especially in verifying and updating ability descriptions and mechanics pages as the months go by. Thanks for everything you've done so far; my general sphere on this wiki is Mechanics and you've been covering a sizable portion of what I'd eventually want to get around to do.
No problem at all. Testing new mechanics is a major part of what keeps me interested in this game, and I want to help other players understand them. However, I would definitely encourage you and anyone else to test these things as well and share your input. It's helpful to have discussions with others (as long as they are civil) if there's any disagreement.
Hi PsycloneM, I've been looking into the damage calculations for hysteria recently and as far as I can tell they're correct for all but armored enemies (ie grineer). I've done quite a lot of testing and I keep getting theoretical values quite a bit lower than in-game values. I tried a few different approaches (assuming it's applied as finisher damage, different damage distributions, different multipliers etc) and what I think is going on is that the damage in hysteria is using the base armor level of the unit and not the scaled armor (or at least the in game damage display is).
The main thing to note is that I'm using the scaled armor value (150.6) for the normal attacks to match actual in-game values (as you'd expect) but to get the hysteria damage to match in-game values I'm using the base armor of 100 for the lancer unit.
Either I'm doing something stupid and haven't realised it (which is quite possible, lol), or the hysteria weapon interaction with armor is non-standard. So I wondered if you had any insights?
So if I'm understanding correctly, you're damaging a level-15 lancer and recording the damage values for various weapons and equipped mods. You've calculated theoretical values for each test and you've observed that the actual values are higher when using Hysteria. Using the lancer's base armor value in your calculations reduces the difference.
I've noticed your normal attack calculations also do not match actual values well in some cases. For instance, you've calculated that you should be doing ~38 damage with an unmodified Karyst, but you're seeing 45 damage in-game.
I'm also noticing the lack of armor modifiers that are tied to Ferrite armor resistances in your spreadsheet, unless you have them located elsewhere. For example, with Toxin damage vs. Ferrite armor you have to multiply the incoming damage by 1.25 as well as multiply the target's armor by 0.75. If this was excluded, it might be a cause for the discrepancies you're observing.
Whenever you have the time, show me the expressions you're using to find theoretical values for normal attack damage and Hysteria's damage.
Hi, I just saw your additions to the Hysteria page, it's nice you did this thorough testing and adds a lot to what we've known so far!
I do, however, have a few questions.
1) For slam attacks, is the portion of damage that comes from the original slam attack of the equipped melee weapon affected by the mods on that weapon? Most importantly, elemental mods, they normally increase slam attack damage but were not known to have an effect on Hysteria, what's it in Hysteria?
2) About Hysteria's innate critical damage, you wrote 10% chance for 100% damage and 15% chance for 200% damage. Did you mean "for +100% / +200% damage" respectively? That would be 200% and 300% damage. It's a bit confusing because critical damage bonuses are generally given as the multiplier (x3 or 300%), not as the additional damage bonus (+200%) in most occasions in the wiki and the game.
3) About critical hit interaction between Hysteria and the melee weapon, the page previously claimed they both crit independently, so you could have one without the other or both together. In your version, you say that critical chance stacks additively and critical damage multiplier stack multiplicatively, which contradicts the previous statement. Based on your testing, are you really sure about that, and was the previous statement therefore outright false? If you are right, that would mean the same strike in the stance against the same enemy type (at the same enemy level for armored enemies) at the same combo counter at the same body part would, when critically hitting, only deal either 2*wCDM or 3*wCDM damage, whereas more different crit damage multipliers would be observed for the old statement. Or, since you have recorded so many hits it may be easier, the expected total chance to do any critical hit (ccte), according to your theory, is ccte=cch+ccw, according to the old theory it's ccte=cch+ccw-cch*ccw. Your measured total chance to do any critical hit is cctm=nc/nt (nc= number of critical hits ; nt = total number of hits). The standard deviation for each ccte equals sqrt(nt*ccte*(1-ccte)). The theory according to which the difference between ccte and cctm is less times its standard deviation on ccte is more likely to be true. If you don't want to do these calculations, you could share me your data and I will do them, then reply you the results. You could also give me them regardless, we both run them so we have a double check.
1) From what I've seen, faction damage mods are the only mods that can increase the damage of a slam attack. Elemental/physical and base damage mods do not seem to have any effect regardless of whether Hysteria is active.
Here's an Amphis with +120% Electricity damage and +280% base damage with its slam attack damage still at base values, and here's the same Amphis under the effects of Hysteria. Notice how the Charger is taking 300 x ( 3.25 / 3 ) = 325 damage from the primary attack and 40 Electricity damage + 20 Electricity damage secondaries from the status proc. Now with Smite Infested equipped, here's what the Amphis does to another Charger. Here's the same Amphis under the effects of Hysteria. Hysteria's primary slam attack damage remains the same as faction damage mods have no effect. The acquired slam attack damage, however, is increased to 40 x 1.3 = 52 Electricity damage with 52 x 0.5 x 1.3 = 34 Electricity damage secondaries from the status proc in both cases. I've edited the article to account for this information.
2) I've been going through all of the Warframe ability articles and have noticed that all damage bonuses are expressed as percentages. Even critical damage is expressed as a percentage for weapons. To clarify and to prevent readers from assuming a damage multiplier is an additive bonus, I try to use "multiply" or "multiplier" where appropriate. Unfortunately, I forgot to do that here and has now been corrected. It should be 1x critical damage and 2x critical damage, not +100% or +200%.
3) The previous theory made no mention of the 1x critical damage. The theory claimed that the critical chance of both the weapon and Hysteria's attacks are independent, and that when both crit simultaneously the critical damage stacks. It was also mentioned that Hysteria has a small chance to deal 3x critical damage. If a weapon has a 2x critical damage multiplier, I should expect to see 2x, 3x, 4x, and 6x critical damage hits if the previous theory were true. After 1350 observations, this is not what I'm seeing. There are only two critical damage values: 1*wCDM and 2*wCDM. If no melee weapon is equipped, wCDM = 1.
If this new theory were true, then with an unmodified Ankyros equipped I should expect Hysteria's critical chance to be 0.25 + 0.2 = 45%: an ( 0.1 / 0.25 ) x 0.45 = 18% chance for 2x critical damage, and a ( 0.15 / 0.25 ) x 0.45 = 27% chance for 4x critical damage. With Dual Cleavers using a maxed Organ Shatter and True Steel, I should expect Hysteria's critical chance to be 0.25 + 0.4 = 65%: a ( 0.1 / 0.25 ) x 0.65 = 26% chance for 5.7x critical damage, and a ( 0.15 / 0.25 ) x 0.65 = 39% chance for 11.4x critical damage. The observations appear to agree with the theory.
Ahh, I got it now. You were right the way you wrote the critical damage multipliers, I misunderstood that, I thought it meant 100% or 200% of the weapon's base damage, where 100% of base damage wouldn't really be a critical hit (a crit with the damage of a normal attack), but it actually meant 100% or 200% of the weapon's critical hit damage, i.e. including its own multiplier.
These are indeed valuable additions. I recently published an article on reddit about Hysteria concerning which weapon will deal the most damage in it under which circumstances, that was a week before the Atterax was released and I compared Dragon Nikana to Dual Ichor. When Atterax came out, the comparison became pretty much obsolete because according to our old theory of Hysteria's damage, Atterax was the best in any scenario anyways. Looking at the new formula, I'd reckon the Atterax' prime position remains, but I'm gonna re-calculate the numbers to make sure. Going to add a note of the results to the Hysteria \ Tips & Tricks page thereafter.
Guess we're done here so far. Thank you for taking the time to answer my questions so thoroughly. Have a nice day! :)
Sorry for the delay. How are the tests coming along? If you would like to try again, use a weapon that does pure corrosive damage like the Tysis. This way you simplify the test by not having to account for other damage types. Record the damage of the first shot, and wait for any corrosive procs to wear off before recording again.
If Tenno really use Alloy armor, a 600-armor Valkyr will take 35 x ( 1 - 600 / 900 ) = 11.67 ---> 12 damage. If it's actually Ferrite armor, the same Valkyr will take 35 x 1.75 x ( 1 - 150 / 450 ) = 40.83 ---> 41 damage. If I'm not mistaken, damage values are no longer rounded down.
Oh it's fine, the delay was no worry. But yes, the tests were - more or less - why I wanted your help on the matter. I've been too busy and have no time to play Warframe as much as I'd like to. So it'd probably be even harder for me to find a guinea pig to get test results. But that's indeed what I think. I can't come up with exact numbers but Corrosive does seem way more effective against more heavily armored Warframes than Radiation. I'd ask one of my clan members but they usually log in at a time that I'm not available for.
where did you get the multiples from and the formula:
The duration in the info box with two decimal places was fine as it was. The info box and the description state that "48" is Rhino's movement speed when the power is used, which is affected by power duration. 48 x 2.57 = 123.36, 48 x 0.4 = 19.2.)
When you increase a power stat by +X%, you are adding the percent bonus to the original value. For example, Intensify increases power strength by 30%. A power that deals 500 damage will now deal 500 x ( 1 + 0.3 ) = 650 damage. The 1 is simply 100% of the original value.
No, those are not the "true" numbers. "1" is just 100% of the original value. The additional duration that you get from those mods does not add to 90% of 48, as you've shown in your calculations. Rhino's base speed of 0.9 has absolutely nothing to do with this example. We are only concerned with Rhino's movement speed after Rhino Charge has been activated, as that is the value that is affected by power duration. The "0.9" in your calculation needs to be a "1."
How would you calculate the damage dealt by a 400-damage power that's increased by 30%?
Where is this from? The reference regards it as a "speed of 48," not a "speed increase of 48%." Also consider that a movement speed of 1.332 isn't going to make Rhino travel ~17 m in less than half a second.
what reference, the wiki which is user based not DE based, or the game. Plus how do you know the gravity all other physics of the game would deny a "1.332"speed whatever that is in IRL terms can move ~17m in quarter of second. Plus like Vauban and other frames they have a base speed of 1 or 100% so with Rhinos charge(138%) he moves 38% faster than Vauban. That's my point.
The speed values did not just spring up in the wiki: they were datamined by Voqualin. Not to say that datamined values are 100% reliable, as observations often disagree with them, but it's all we have at the moment. That's the reference I'm talking about, and his findings did not indicate Rhino's sprint speed is increased by 48% at max rank. Which is why I asked where did you get the percentage. All I see in an image as your source, and I don't know where it's from. Answering my question could clear things up.
My point is that a 48% sprint speed increase is far too slow when compared to the sprint speed of other warframes. If the "48" really should be "48%", then Rhino's sprint speed would be 0.9 x 1.48 = 1.332. That's a little bit faster than Loki's sprint speed of 1.25. Does Loki move around at Rhino Charge speed? Is it possible for any warframe to move that quickly with Rush or Sprint Boost? This is why I'm skeptical.
Is there something wrong with the calculation that you quoted? If Rhino's base sprint speed is 0.9, and according to you, Rhino Charge increases that by 48%, how would you find the final sprint speed? Note that this is not the same as what I was describing earlier, since I'm under the assumption that Rhino Charge increases Rhino's sprint speed to 48 based on the actual datamined information, and not by an additional 48%.
So that's your source. The reported power mechanics there are more outdated than this wiki. Do you even know who developed that website, and where and at what time the information was obtained? Stoi84 shared this on the forums, and it's clearly a WIP. How about we actually test these things in-game?
No the .9 is point out you were consistanly saying 1. yeah its WIP so is the wikia and every other active web page, you know what else is a WIP, Warframe O.o i know right. It updates about once a day. Ok lets measure the distance when my hat is getting shitted upon cause thats why im here to fap all the numbers cause ill test the 5/100 out for you just to make sure its .35 instead of .3.
Anyway check the numbers they are accurate, and up-to-date if the wikia is up to date.
I was saying "1" in reference to a completely different example. I don't understand why it's so difficult to grasp that when you add a percentage of a specific number to that number, you are adding to 100% of that number.
I asked you to provide the answer for 30% of 400. You said 120, added that to 400, and gave me 520. So that's 400 x ( 1 + 0.3 ) = 520. Do you see where the "1" is coming from now? Why in the hell would you replace the "1" with the 400 base damage like you're doing in your calculations? That was the point of the exercise, to show that you were not understanding me.
If you aren't here to test, then why do you make mechanic changes? It's clear you aren't actually observing these things, and are referencing the website you linked. If that's the case, then there's really nothing else to discuss until you actually play and observe the mechanics yourself. Obviously everything is a WIP, and not one source is 100% reliable, but it's not helpful when you find people are removing updated information with outdated information from other sources.
1) This is considered, especially by this wikia, one of the legit "programs" to use. these are some of my frames and their current stages of development. I have tested vauban ash mag/mag prime nekros nyx mutiple times and the numbers match the site. I believe the numbers why i use it to find other frames as well. plus we're not talking about damage we were talking about dash speed of Rhino. i have seen loki's out run me to extraction countless times even thought im rhino dashing like a mad man and volt holy shit don't even.
plus we're not talking about damage we were talking about dash speed of Rhino.
Whether it's damage or duration, it doesn't matter. All additive percent bonuses are applied in the way that I described.
That website is very useful, no doubt, but the power mechanics seem to have been taken directly from the wiki when Damage 2.0 was new. Meaning, a good amount of that information is outdated. It claims that certain powers inflict a specific damage type when they don't. For example, Shuriken does not inflict puncture damage, Shield Polarize does not inflict blast damage, Absorb does not inflict slash damage, and so on. Some of the damage values are off: Freeze and Avalanche do not deal 125 and 1000 cold damage respectively (changed with U12), Fireball does not deal 200 heat damage with a 4-second DoT, Null Star does not deal 150 slash damage per particle, etc. The effect mods have on certain powers are not considered, such as the influence power duration has on Miasma's damage tick.
The list goes on. As for Rhino's dash speed, where do you think that "48%" from the Warframe Builder came from? Here. It is certainly possible that a percent sign was added as a misinterpretation. I will test Rhino Charge one of these days to verify that Loki and Volt can sprint faster than Rhino can dash, and see just how power duration affects the distance traveled.
There are three primary stats: power strength, power duration, and power range. The movement speed is supposedly affected by power duration. So yes, increased power duration is going to affect that number.
Besides, my point was that the power stat type doesn't matter. An X% increase of a power stat is going multiply that stat by ( 1 + X / 100 ). Again, to make sure you understand, that "1" is NOT Rhino's movement speed. "1" is just "100%" converted into a decimal. If Rhino's movement speed of 0.9 is increased by 48%, that's 0.9 x ( 1 + 0.48 ) = 1.332. Understand?
To break this down a little further for you, Pharuan, Psyclone's not saying that the 1 is Rhino's movement speed, he's saying the 1 is just 100% of his speed, which is 0.9. If Rhino's movement speed was 1.2 then it would be (100% + 48%) = 148%. 148% of 1.2 = 1.776. The 1 and 0.48 are just decimals. If you're still a little confused, just add the 1 and 0.48 together and multiply it by 0.9. You'll get the same answer he has.
Just wanted to pipe in on the more political side. When I joined the wiki I was involved in some extremely heated debates as well about the original damage system, so I understand the concept of how annoying it can be to discuss math on the wiki. That being said, please attempt to keep your tone as friendly as possible. It seems like you guys are doing a good job of no personal offenses, and I applaud you on that. Just wanted to drop a little note, good luck with your magical mathematical mayhem! :P
PsycloneM wrote: The speed values did not just spring up in the wiki: they were datamined by Voqualin. Not to say that datamined values are 100% reliable, as observations often disagree with them, but it's all we have at the moment. That's the reference I'm talking about, and his findings did not indicate Rhino's sprint speed is increased by 48% at max rank. Which is why I asked where did you get the percentage. All I see in an image as your source, and I don't know where it's from. Answering my question could clear things up.
A bit late, but hello! As PsycloneM said, datamined info isn't reliable as it's just an interpretation of what we can see. In this case, the values for the speed were not presented as multipliers usually are, i.e. as a decimals. Moreover, it was listed as 'speed' and not a 'speedmultiplier' as multipliers are usually listed. Based on that, I thought it was reasonable to conclude it was an actual increase to the listed speeds.
Also, keep in mind the duration of the speed increase. It's barely a 1/3 of a second. If the speed increase really was just 48%, it wouldn't be much of a charge at all.
Hello. Yes, I admit that my tone has become a little aggressive over the course of this discussion. However, it's not that I grew impatient trying to discuss math: it was upon learning that Pharuan's source was the Warframe Builder that currently uses outdated power mechanics, combined with the snide, sarcastic comment he made about testing. That sort of attitude is completely counterproductive to the progress of this wiki. I don't see the reason to make mechanic changes if you aren't going to take the time to test, observe, and analyze to make sure your changes have basis. Simply saying that you tested once upon a time without providing any details of your tests isn't helpful. Having observations to share also add to the discussion: we can check over one another, compare our findings, and derive conclusions.
That said, I'll tone it down. Thanks for stopping by.
Hey, nice to see you here. I had tried to explain that a +48% speed increase from Rhino's base 0.9 would be far too slow, but he claims to have observed Lokis outrun him as a charging Rhino. I wanted to see for myself, and I think you all might be interested in reading this .
To briefly summarize, Loki and Volt do not sprint faster than Rhino can charge. The 48 speed value uses m/s as units, and is not a +48% sprint speed increase. I'm not sure if this is common knowledge here, but warframe sprint speeds do not appear to be actual speeds. Based on the observations in the link, they appear to be constants that are multiplied to a base speed of ~ 7 m/s. So Loki with his 1.25 sprint speed moves at 7 x 1.25 = 8.75 m/s. This definitely needs to be tested further.
@PsycloneM you keep saying that Warframe builder uses outdated data when its updated once a day. The only thing outdated is your view on using non-approved(by you) sources. I have tested all my builds on all my 30's and the numbers match up and in 1 case better my mag not as shit as I thought it was going to be. So your disapproval is unjustified and unfounded. Just uses it and see if it matches your numbers as well you'll see that its as close as updated can get.
First of all, I've already provided evidence that Rhino's charge speed of 48 m/s is not a +48% sprint speed increase. So that's one instance where the Warframe Builder is off. Now what about all of the other things I listed earlier?
"It claims that certain powers inflict a specific damage type when they don't. For example, Shuriken does not inflict puncture damage, Shield Polarize does not inflict blast damage, Absorb does not inflict slash damage, and so on. Some of the damage values are off: Freeze and Avalanche do not deal 125 and 1000 cold damage respectively (changed with U12), Fireball does not deal 200 heat damage with a 4-second DoT, Null Star does not deal 150 slash damage per particle, etc. The effect mods have on certain powers are not considered, such as the influence power duration has on Miasma's damage tick."
So I assume you have tested all of this beforehand, recorded your observations, and came to the conclusion that the Warframe Builder is correct. So, for instance, if you claim that Shuriken deals puncture damage, can you share your observations for discussion?
I wouldn't make the claim that the Warframe Builder is using outdated mechanics without testing anything. I've been sharing my observations with the community since Damage 2.0 was released. As for the issues I've listed earlier, here's my evidence . Here's another , and another .
I don't understand why you're so defensive of the Warframe Builder. Yes, it's an amazing tool, but not every warframe's power report is accurate. Which is fine; I wouldn't even dare claim that my observations are 100% accurate either. That is why I encourage discussion so we can draw more accurate conclusions. The actual disapproval I have is you reverting mechanics that have been recently updated, without any reason other than "the Warframe Builder has the true values, and I believe them." I wouldn't have a problem if you actually shared some information to prove why the recent updates are incorrect, but you haven't. Not to mention you clearly mocked the idea of doing your own testing. Given all of the observations I and others have shared with the community, I strongly disagree that my disapproval is unjustified and unfounded.
oh and calm your tits i ask for an explination and you explode into numbers and rage (i.e., Summary Conversation could have ended in a couple of replies. Turned into "generic internet tough guy" talk n) just calmly explain yourslef and i won't bombard you with questions and supposition, plus all your numbers are based on chance, your build, good hits, etc., and as you said we can't fully rely on number posted or mention by anyone except DE, which i hope they eventually do post out actual numbers sometime soon to make it easier to mods out our frames.
What's with the hyperbole? You made the assertion that my position was unjustified and unfounded, and I simply provided evidence to back up my claims. Sharing observations with you so we can discuss them does not qualify as rage. No need to pretend like I'm losing control and need to calm down after doing something as harmless as sharing data for you to look over. And yes, our previous discussion did devolve into generic internet tough guy talk on your part because you misunderstood my position in the very first reply.
Now, if I'm testing to see what type of damage a particular power does, all that requires is to damage various surface types (shields, cloned flesh, sinew, etc.), record numbers, and narrow down the possibilities. The numbers that are displayed are not based on chance; they occur 100% of the time if a hit is made. My build affects the stats of a given power, and I always account for that (like equipping Intensify for an additional 30% power damage). I also share the damage calculations so others can see where the displayed numbers are coming from.
However, I can say I completely agree with you that these numbers can give us an idea of how a power works, but not necessarily the full picture. There's still so much that we don't know, and like you said, it would be very helpful if power stats were included in the game as are weapon stats.
Oh, it's not so much that I found errors. I would just like to add clarification, such as the effects of Steel Charge or power strength, or how the observed damage values are calculated. I made some observations here that I would like to summarize for the article.
Also, I'm not observing the melee weapon's critical damage being added to Hysteria's base. Hysteria appears to adopt the critical damage multiplier of your weapon. So for Dual Ichor, Dual Cleavers, and Dual Zoren combined with Organ Shatter, that's 5.7x critical damage for Hysteria's attacks.
No the critical chance and damage mult are definitely being added. to the hysteria base. I've done plenty of testing that backs it up. As to the observed damage calculations: I listed that, though maybe not in the best format.
Also: the formulas are as follows:
(300 (100 each IPS) + Weapon total damage (after mods and split across IPS evenly)) * the power's mult = non-crit damage
((300 + Weapon total damage (after mods)) * (2.0 + Weapons crit damage mult)) * the power's mult = crit damage
Keep in mind that all of the damage gained is split evenly between Impact Puncture and Slash so observed values will vary from the raw calculated value.
The power multiplier from Hysteria is not applied to the base 300 damage: only the weapon damage. So at max level, that would look like this:
300 + 1.75 x ( 1 + P / 100 ) x base weapon damage x [ ( 1 + S / 100 ) + M / 100 ] = total damage for non-crits. P, S, and M represent power strength, Steel Charge, and additional melee damage from Spoiled Strike and/or Pressure Point, respectively.
The link I shared in my first message has two different tables with observed and expected values, and there's very good agreement between them.
While the critical chance might be added to Hysteria's base, the critical damage does not appear to be. For instance:
With Dual Zoren (15 physical damage), Steel Charge (+45%), Focus (+30%), and +220% melee damage from Spoiled Strike and Pressure Point, Hysteria's attacks deal 457 damage to chargers.
With Organ Shatter equipped, I see critical damage for 2605 and 5211 . Using 7.7 as the critical damage multiplier I get 457 x 7.7 = 3519, which doesn't match either of the observations. If I use 5.7, I get 457 x 5.7 = 2605. The second crit is simply double the value of the first.
All that said, would you mind sharing your observations?
There appears to be something odd going on, or we're both wrong as I'm seeing completely different results with both the Ichors and Zorens. When testing with Organ Shatter, Spoiled Strike, Pressure Point, and True Steel (but not Steel Charge, Focus, or Blind Rage) against infested Chargers (I used ODS) I see the following:
Crit - 4993
Weakpoint Crit - 9985
Non Crit - 649
Weakpoint Non Crit - 1297
Crit - 6014
Weakpoint Crit - 12029
Non Crit - 782
Weakpoint Non Crit - 1562
These fit the forumula I posted to you last time when factoring that the chargers take 25% additional damage from the slash portion of the attack as shown here:
Note that the numbers are very slightly off due to the way DE handles rounding.
I can't help but wonder what the difference is that causing us to get such different results from our testing. Can you think of anything that might be influencing it? Would you mind testing with this exact setup and seeing if you get the same results?
As to the crit chance: I'm definitely seeing a 90% crit chance (I actually bothered to count the crits and non crits in the test I recorded last night) here which fits exactly with the Hysteria Base + Weapon After Mods theory.
I've tested Dual Zoren without additional power strength or Steel Charge, and I'm seeing 416 for non-crits, and 4742 for weakpoint crits.
[ 300 + 1.75 x 15 x ( 1 + 2.2 ) ] x ( 3.25 / 3 ) = 416
416 x 5.7 x 2 = 4742.4
These are the same values that I observed when I originally tested Hysteria in the link I shared before.
Are you hosting your tests? It would be very strange if a client used a completely different damage formula. What mods do you have on your warframe, and are those the only four mods that you have equipped on your melee weapon? What order do you have them slotted?
I want to try to replicate your exact set-up and see if I can obtain similar results.
What warframe mods do you have equipped on Valkyr?
I tested again with your melee weapon layout, but I had to exclude Berserker. I still observe the same values: 416 , 2371 , and 4742 .
If you wouldn't mind, could you repeat the test again? Solo the mission (ODS if you prefer), and only equip Pressure Point, Spoiled Strike, Organ Shatter, and True Steel. Equip no additional power strength or Steel Charge, and try to keep warframe mods to a minimum (no corrupted or any other power stat-affecting mod). I want to determine if you are consistently getting these high damage numbers with your formula. Screenshots would also be helpful for both of us.
Regarding your Dual Zoren calculation. Dual Zoren have 15 base physical damage: 0.75 impact, 0.75 puncture, and 13.5 slash. It looks like you're using 13 (maybe from the rounded-down numbers in the UI). 42 should be 48, which then throws off the accuracy of the expected values compared to your observations. I can't draw any conclusions from this, but I thought I'd mention it.
Sorry about the delayed reply. My GPU went down literally 2 hours after I posted the last message. I should have a replacement in on friday. Feel free to go ahead with your changes to the page. We can always adjust them later if my info isn't in error.
Glad to see that you'll be getting a replacement GPU soon.
I'll add the changes, but I'm still very curious as to why we are observing different damage values. I do know that Hysteria's damage can go haywire when playing as a client, but that does not seem to be the case here. If any of your teammates had Steel Charge equipped, that would also affect your damage output, but not to the extent that you're observing.
Also, you might want to see this regarding Hysteria's critical chance. I compared three different weapons, and after repeated observations (900 recorded attacks), the base critical chance that's added to the crit chance of your melee weapon appears to be closer to 25% - 30% than 50%. This still needs further testing to get a better idea.