On December 17 2020 10:19 Spazer wrote: You asked for the reasoning, and I tried to present it. I apologize for not spending half an hour prettying up the table for your consumption. No, I wasn't paying much attention when I wrote 2:1, but you know full well what I meant regardless.
If you want to write your own shit to correct the community's misconceptions, do as you will.
So you admit that you just posted a bunch of rubbish but had no idea what it meant or how to interpret it. If you are just ripping off someone elses work, I expect you say so, and write where you got it from. At the very least I can correct their misconception. I have no idea what these theory crafting communities are or how to find them. I thought you made those tables yourself because I don't even know there is a notion of a theorycrafting community. And yes I am writing my own shit to correct the community's misconceptions, you have read it right there.
But like I said, you are a good example of what I was saying. You have made up your mind it is 1:2 ratio, and then make up reasons that don't make sense to support it. Next you will be telling me that luxurious chest respawns because the community said so.
Anyways, due to hypothermia seems like we have a reason to make an Amber main DPS. Seems gimmicky and annoying to be honest. Same level of annoyance as drowning in that pond in Liyue next to the teleport alchemy point because you happened to run into it with no stamina.
Writing that I wrote shit doesn't strike me as trying to help.
I thought he made that table himself, so I thought I would help him, by giving him advice to present a table in an understandable format better, even though he got all the wrong conclusions from it, but according to slaughter he ripped it off unaccredited off someone else hard work.
So how do you think I feel? I took the time and effort to present and write what I thought, my equations, my arguments and counter arguments, but according to him, I wrote a bunch of shit.
On December 17 2020 11:51 Slaughter wrote: So mandatory pyro characters in the open world? Heh
I think early speculation was that pyro wouldn't work as well on Dragonspine, but no confirmation. What I meant by Embers is that there's some special map gimmick that has these scarlet embers (or w/e they get localized as) that float around you for a set period of time after you bust some rock or something - it's like the glowy stones in Liyue for some of those gimmicks. Difference is that here it slows the Hypthermia gauge and lets you open frosted rocks and the like. Not sure why Pyro status effect does here...
On December 17 2020 22:40 Dangermousecatdog wrote: Writing that I wrote shit doesn't strike me as trying to help.
I thought he made that table himself, so I thought I would help him, by giving him advice to present a table in an understandable format better, even though he got all the wrong conclusions from it, but according to slaughter he ripped it off unaccredited off someone else hard work.
So how do you think I feel? I took the time and effort to present and write what I thought, my equations, my arguments and counter arguments, but according to him, I wrote a bunch of shit.
'Write your own shit' isn't the same as you've written shit stuff.
Mentioned it a bit earlier but a few more details about the alleged Spiral Abyss changes incoming.
Floor 9-10 are Cryo-based.
Floor 11 is Geo-damage with Super Goblin, Geo Slimes, Ruin Guard, Eye of the Storm (whee!), Treasure Hoarders, Fatui Agents, Electro Ciqin.
Floor 12 is Electro (the energy drain) with Axe Goblin, Shield, Guard, Archers, Electro Ciqin, Treasure Hunters.
Apparently the energy drain kicks in really fast, like 5 energy every 3 seconds fast. Even more of a premium on Cleanse.
Also friendly reminder (for next week) that last time we had a patch the weekly bosses reset, so you may want to try clearing the bosses before the patch for two clears in a week.
Basic math constitutes that optimal crit ratio is 1:1. Noone is arguing against this.
However, the places from where you get crit rate and crit damage is very limited: 1) Weapon stats 2) 1x Artifact main stat 3) 5x Artifact substat.
In all of these, the numbers for crit damage is twice that of crit rate. ex: 5* Artifact Circlet main stat: 31,1% critrate vs 62,2% crit damage.
This means that there is exaggerated opportunity cost. You can't reduce your crit damage with 1% and increase crit-rate with 1% until you reach optimum. The cost is 1 for 2. // 2 for 1.
When you map it out in a spreadsheet - as shown above, it turns out the optimal ratio is always 1:2.
We can do an easy algebraic calculation for it, but it's not really necesary.
This ALSO means, that Characters that can get around this, by getting a boost in crit-rate (from character talent, character innate ability, or cryo), can 'trick' themselves closer to the 1:1 ratio.
Another point is, that 4* and 5* Weapons are pretty limited, you can't always pick and choose their stats. This is part of the reason why 'The Black Sword' is considered a 4.5* weapon. As its Crit-rate/Crit-damage ratio far outscale equivalent 4* weapons.
What he was saying is that you should choose crit ratio to crit damage to a 1:2 ratio because substats come in a 1:2 ratio. or that artifacts come in a 1:2 ratio. But that cannot possibly be the ideal because characters have an innate +5% crit rate and a +50% crit damage. It's quite simple that it cannot possibly be a 1:2 ratio, and I said this was a common misconception.
The tables posted don't actually support this because they completely missout
1) Innate character crit rate (5%) and crit damage (50%) 2) Weapons, which don't have a 1:2 ratio
Just the character innate crit damage and crit damage with change the optimum ratio. You don't even need to factor in weapons and 1:2 ratio cannot possibly be right.
On December 18 2020 04:31 Goolpsy wrote: Basic math constitutes that optimal crit ratio is 1:1. Noone is arguing against this.
However, the places from where you get crit rate and crit damage is very limited: 1) Weapon stats 2) 1x Artifact main stat 3) 5x Artifact substat.
In all of these, the numbers for crit damage is twice that of crit rate. ex: 5* Artifact Circlet main stat: 31,1% critrate vs 62,2% crit damage.
This means that there is exaggerated opportunity cost. You can't reduce your crit damage with 1% and increase crit-rate with 1% until you reach optimum. The cost is 1 for 2. // 2 for 1.
When you map it out in a spreadsheet - as shown above, it turns out the optimal ratio is always 1:2.
We can do an easy algebraic calculation for it, but it's not really necesary.
This ALSO means, that Characters that can get around this, by getting a boost in crit-rate (from character talent, character innate ability, or cryo), can 'trick' themselves closer to the 1:1 ratio.
Another point is, that 4* and 5* Weapons are pretty limited, you can't always pick and choose their stats. This is part of the reason why 'The Black Sword' is considered a 4.5* weapon. As its Crit-rate/Crit-damage ratio far outscale equivalent 4* weapons.
Goolpsy, you say you can do basic algerbraic equation. So can you show me that basic algebraic calculation? Where it include innate chracter crit rate and crit damage? You say you map it out on a spread sheet, so where is that spreadsheet? Where is the proof? Slaughter says there are theory crafting communities, but he still cannot point me to them so I can join them. Spazer ripped (slaughters words not mine) a table from someone and yet I am still none the wiser where it came from.
Yes weapons are limited, so any ratio should factor in the weapon included for the optimum dps, not ignore it entirely. You are not going to invest 1:2 ratio when the weapon itself will provide a substantial crit rate or damage themselves.
You can't have it both ways guys. It can't both be that 1:1 ratio is the ideal mathematical relationship if it includes innate crit rate and crit damage, artifacts weapons all added up, yet at the same time a 1:2 ratio for substats only that ignore the flat % of innate character stats.
KeqingMains is one of the more well known ones and was posted and referenced to a few pages back. ChildeMains also does some as well I think? Would look around for the keqingmains discord and they could point you in the right direction.
Edit: Specifically talking about the Reddit communities r KeqingMains and r ChildeMains. Not too familiar with all the various theorycraft/maths communities because I'm not in those discord communities but that is where a lot of them hang out.
On December 18 2020 10:11 Slaughter wrote: KeqingMains is one of the more well known ones and was posted and referenced to a few pages back. ChildeMains also does some as well I think? Would look around for the keqingmains discord and they could point you in the right direction.
Edit: Specifically talking about the Reddit communities r KeqingMains and r ChildeMains. Not too familiar with all the various theorycraft/maths communities because I'm not in those discord communities but that is where a lot of them hang out.
Thanks Slaughter. Finally. I spoke with the people who made the tables yesterday. He acknowledges the table was presented badly before I could say it. We went back and forth finding the source for the maths. It doesn't actually exist. There is no equation, no easy algebraic calculation found. That's why nobody in the English community can tell me the maths. Which is the exact problem I was talking about, yet multiple people here are telling me it exists. We found it in the end sort of. It was taken off the Chinese genshin community and they assured me that they are utterly fanatical and cannot be wrong. I could very well be incorrect and it is looking that way, but I think it is telling that the vey person who made the very table and arguments you are all using, who has more reason than anybody else to dispute me is more receptive than those who don't.
EPT
![[image loading]](https://uploadstatic-sea.mihoyo.com/contentweb/20201216/2020121621530882958.gif)
![[image loading]](https://i.imgur.com/otLHYQF.jpg)
![[image loading]](https://i.imgur.com/KtMH15w.png)
