Jump to content

Savage roar {feral}


Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

1. http://www.db.pandawow.me?spell=52610/savage-roar

 

2. it increase physical dmg by 30 % should be 40 %

 

3.

20 May 2013: Patch 5.3 update: updated the physical damage increase granted by Savage Roar to 40% from 30%.

 

Formula :

 

5300 hit without SR

7400 hit with SR 7400 / 100 = 74 , 5300 / 74 = 71,6 % ,

The physical dmg increase should be 40% not 30% , fix plz. Its even in spell name , just buff is incorrect , old from 5.2.

tested without procs

 

Proofs > [ATTACH=CONFIG]112303[/ATTACH][ATTACH=CONFIG]112304[/ATTACH][ATTACH=CONFIG]112305[/ATTACH][ATTACH=CONFIG]112306[/ATTACH]

First combat log SS is without SR , second is with SR , increase only by 30 , should be 40

 

4. x100 , 14.6.2016

5. 10/10 huge disadvantage in both pvp and pve its like 10 % dmg reduce just because of old /incorrect/ formula

 

according to formula its NOT visual !!!

Edited by Stayfjurt
  • Like 2
Posted
1. http://www.db.pandawow.me?spell=52610/savage-roar

 

2. it increase physical dmg by 30 % should be 40 %

 

3.

20 May 2013: Patch 5.3 update: updated the physical damage increase granted by Savage Roar to 40% from 30%.

 

Formula :

 

5300 hit without SR

7400 hit with SR 7400 / 100 = 74 , 5300 / 74 = 71,6 % ,

The physical dmg increase should be 40% not 30% , fix plz. Its even in spell name , just buff is incorrect , old from 5.2.

tested without procs

 

Proofs > [ATTACH=CONFIG]112303[/ATTACH][ATTACH=CONFIG]112304[/ATTACH][ATTACH=CONFIG]112305[/ATTACH][ATTACH=CONFIG]112306[/ATTACH]

First combat log SS is without SR , second is with SR , increase only by 30 , should be 40

 

4. x100 , 14.6.2016

5. 10/10 huge disadvantage in both pvp and pve its like 10 % dmg reduce just because of old /incorrect/ formula

 

according to formula its NOT visual !!!

 

Your math is just incorrect. You're taking the increased hit as the base calculation which is wrong.

 

If you calculate it with 5300 as base you get:

 

5300 + 5300 : 100 * 40 = 7420

 

So there's nothing wrong with the formula.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...