Printable View
I currently have a 3% total damage Neb on my arrow.
Fully buffed (decent SE), I have 94% crit. Would replacing the 3% total damage Neb with a 6% crit be more beneficial? I'm inclined to think it would.
Or am I missing something/not understanding mechanics?
100*1.03=103 damage.
100*1.5*0.94+100*0.06= 141+6=148 damage,
100*1.5=150 damage.
150/148=1.01x increase.
that calculation is assumming a crit of 150-150% or average 150%, the total damage is better damage on paper, i'd still go for the crit neb though. because it would mean you NEVER hit non-crits, so on things you can only KB with crits, you won't get a random regular attack that can mess you up. and the range required to hit full caps is now much lower.
The 3% total damage isn't a straight 1.03 multiplier because he is getting %dmg buffs from other areas as well e.g. ancient wardingQuote:
Originally Posted by ShinkuDragon
Even so, without doing calcs, based on similar questions I asked months ago, %dmg will be better. If it isn't, the difference is negligible and not worth the money.
can't talk about that, because nexon decided some buffs stack like that and others don't, but from my experience with DrK's, zerk's 1.6x is multiplicative with %damage and boss. and have been unable to test mercedes'Quote:
Originally Posted by Kaasoljoyyx
but in this case, this is the difference between full crits every time, and not hitting full crits :X which imo, makes the crits better.
forget fancy pomegranate
get to 100% crit and feel like a boss while you're fighting.
never see noncrits again!
Assuming you have 100% boss and 45% total damage from buffs.
1.48/1.45 = 1.02x increase
1 + (.94 * ((.35+.65)/2)) = 1.47x avg damage
1 + (1 * ((.35+.65)/2)) = 1.5x avg damage
1.50/1.47 = 1.02x increase
They're both the same thing. I'd pick the 6% critical.
Thanks guys! I'm seeing that if there is a difference, it's very minimal.
I was leaning towards 100% crit anyway since that's just cool.