Shocking Grasp Research (in General)
Just to put down what I've discovered.
It takes AMF backlash at a similar rate to fireball (when AMF and DD are trained equally)
More damage than MM, equal (roughly with a few k of damage) with fireball, and considerably less than CoC.
Against one minion, CoC is by far superior at 0 AC. Around 75 base AC is where SG caught up. However, against the same AC and the AMF trained to the same level, SG far outperformed CoC.
(These tests are very rough, but they're a starting point for other researchers)
I'll post new things about the spell as long as I have BA.
June 29 2008 9:25 AM EDT
=> Chain_Handcuffs ok
=> Chain_Handcuffs COC is 0.20570568 in a 5minion split
=> Chain_Handcuffs FB is 0.11752
=> Chain_Handcuffs MM is 0.4408
=> Chain_Handcuffs SG is 0.588285335
<Chain_Handcuffs> How do you know?
=> Chain_Handcuffs from checking the effect lvls
=> Chain_Handcuffs and doing some testing
<Chain_Handcuffs> Yeah, but how does that account for random damage?
=> Chain_Handcuffs random damage will never go over that
=> Chain_Handcuffs so 60% is a safe bet
=> Chain_Handcuffs either way it just shows SG is stronger then MM
<Chain_Handcuffs> Against one minion.
<Chain_Handcuffs> And that number is increased by 1% per base AC.
=> Chain_Handcuffs exactly
=> Chain_Handcuffs SG is stronger NORMALLY :)
<Chain_Handcuffs> ONly than MM.
=> Chain_Handcuffs although against a minion with 0 AC
=> Chain_Handcuffs against a minion with 0 AC SG over takes MM only on the 9th melee round
=> Chain_Handcuffs however...
=> Chain_Handcuffs against a minion with 104 AC
=> Chain_Handcuffs SG imediately is stronger then COC
=> Chain_Handcuffs vs 1 minion
=> Chain_Handcuffs vs 1 minion COC will be
=> Chain_Handcuffs 1.0285284
<Chain_Handcuffs> Wait wait wait.
=> Chain_Handcuffs while SG will be 1.200102083
<Chain_Handcuffs> It's only amplified by the base AC.
=> Chain_Handcuffs 104 is max
=> Chain_Handcuffs comprehendo?
<Chain_Handcuffs> < hates math.
<Chain_Handcuffs> Do me a favor?
<Chain_Handcuffs> Post all that on the thread so everyone can see it ^.6
i was too lazy to break it down... :) enjoy
June 29 2008 9:55 AM EDT
So SG only affects the target's base armor. As in if the target has all this wall gear equipped, SG will be at its maximum potential:
Adamantite Cuirass 
Shadow Cloak 
Chain Mail Leggings 
Tulkas' Gauntlets 
Helm of Durin 
Mithril Shield 
Against tanks with say TSA and MgS, the SG effect will effectively be reduced by 40%? This changelog counts as a MgS boost, right?
June 29 2008 9:56 AM EDT
Did I say 40%? I meant 38%..
will u people stop going on about this supposed MgS boost its damage reduction has been quite significantly reduced as it is and u still can't cast anything effectively spell wise with it equipped so it ain't everything
This is HARDLY a MgS buff....
MgS was only ever vicious because of it's direct reduction and layering. This spell actually gets BUFFED when walls try to equip the MgS, and the MgS has been nerfed quite hard recently.
"This spell actually gets BUFFED when walls try to equip the MgS"
June 29 2008 10:06 AM EDT
MgS has a base of 0.
But add on a TSA and a BoF like on my PL wall and it's almost canceled out.
1.34*.64 = .8576
Basically add on just a bit of armor and the Mage shield benefit is gone.
June 29 2008 10:28 AM EDT
Actually considering the decreases to the Mage Shield.
38*.75 = 28.5% Resistance
1.34 * .715 = 0.9581
Wow what a reduction..
Well, it's not quite a good thing. But, technically, the more AC, the more damage. So you can actually outdistance the MgS reduction if the minion has even a decent amount of base armor.
Ok, but when you say that the spell gets better when a wall uses a MgS, that implies that the wall is using a MgS vice an MS. If that's the case, I think you're wrong.
Unless you think that a wall wouldn't have any shield, which is also mistaken. Walls have more equipment than anyone.
June 30 2008 11:09 AM EDT
i would like to put forward that SG deals more damage vs a fully equiped wall minion then a COC could ever do vs a single wall... im pretty sure my numbers are right... but i would like someone to prove me wrong
June 30 2008 11:34 AM EDT
"It takes AMF backlash at a similar rate to fireball (when AMF and DD are trained equally) "
Why wouldn't the backlash be related to the damage it does (minus the base AC enhancement effect)? In other words, AMF still casts based on level vs. level, and backlash is then a percentage of the damage the spell would do (before any increases, of which SG has the base-AC rule).
If this thing hits roughly the same as concentrated CoC but only backlashes like an FB spell would, that doesn't make any sense. Am I misreading what you are saying?
I've seen the return LA was getting, it's not too far off CoC.
What I do expect is that the extra damage from AC isn't causing extra return... making this spell simply awesome.
I hope you'll forgive me a selfish desire to see it nerfed back from whence it came...
June 30 2008 11:52 AM EDT
yes novice... i believe thats the case
June 30 2008 12:04 PM EDT
OK, that makes sense then, sorry I got confused...
June 30 2008 12:22 PM EDT
lets say SG and COC vs a 0.5 AMF.... vs a single minion
lets consider the damage...
COC = 0.4 * 1.0285284 * trained lvls * 0.5
SG = 0.4 * 0.588285335 * trained lvls * 0.5
extra damage boost doesnt affect the AMF percentage casted
which means against a 106 base AC wall....
SG would do 0.588285335 * 2.06 = 1.2118677901
1 - 1.0285284/ 1.2118677901 = 0.151286626806766881162278693689 which is 15% damage more then COC vs a single minion
to double check GW's observations...
for 0.588285335 to = 1.0285284
1 - 0.588285335/1.0285284 = 0.428031996977429111340046614173
a 43% increase in damage.... which would = 43 AC
i could go on all day.... let me end with... try using AOL + BOF with SG... it would be interesting to see the damage you put out against a wall... or even just BOF if you think you cant survive...
This thread is closed to new posts.
However, you are welcome to reference it
from a new thread; link this with the html
<a href="/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=002TPd">Shocking Grasp Research</a>