I could be doing the math wrong, but with offense sets increasing to 15%, and critical damage triangles getting the bump to 42% at 6 dot, it seems like cd sets will now very rarely give you more damage than offensive sets. As soon as your critical damage hits 200, then an offense set which gives you +15% offense would then be +30% on a critical hit, right? Which means that even without leader abilities that add to critical damage or critical damage up buffs, a cd of 192 with an offense set would give you ~29% extra damage. So, even in this scenario you’d only get an extra 1% damage on each critical with 15% less on non-criticals. If I did the math right, you’d need to have 96% critical chance for the average damage to break even, more if you factor in critical avoidance and immunity. Maybe useful for Ventress, but I think everyone else that has that hi of cc will have a higher cd as well.
"Eddiemundie;c-1626129" wrote: This is the kind of thread we need.
Not that i really read it through though. Too much math for a non-math game
That even people who enjoy nerding out on math can’t agree how the dang game works you know something is wrong with the game. This thread right here is what’s wrong with mods.
"Eddiemundie;c-1626129" wrote: This is the kind of thread we need.
Not that i really read it through though. Too much math for a non-math game
That even people who enjoy nerding out on math can’t agree how the dang game works you know something is wrong with the game. This thread right here is what’s wrong with mods.
The discussion is 10x more complicated than it needs to be. It’s not really that confusing. Using estimated numbers it ends up showing that unless you can get crit chance over 75% then offense mods are better. So just to with that and you will usually be fine.
"Eddiemundie;c-1626129" wrote: This is the kind of thread we need.
Not that i really read it through though. Too much math for a non-math game
That even people who enjoy nerding out on math can’t agree how the dang game works you know something is wrong with the game. This thread right here is what’s wrong with mods.
The discussion is 10x more complicated than it needs to be. It’s not really that confusing. Using estimated numbers it ends up showing that unless you can get crit chance over 75% then offense mods are better. So just to with that and you will usually be fine.
That's actually not correct, but I really don't want to debate it. I just mention it for caution to readers.
It’s pretty pointless to call out myself and numerous other people as wrong without providing any sort of alternative answer or reason for being wrong. Running basic examples shows it should be around 75%. Running the complex math from earlier in the thread shows about 75%. What are you getting that is different?
"Eddiemundie;c-1626129" wrote: This is the kind of thread we need.
Not that i really read it through though. Too much math for a non-math game
That even people who enjoy nerding out on math can’t agree how the dang game works you know something is wrong with the game. This thread right here is what’s wrong with mods.
The discussion is 10x more complicated than it needs to be. It’s not really that confusing. Using estimated numbers it ends up showing that unless you can get crit chance over 75% then offense mods are better. So just to with that and you will usually be fine.
Then put in many are running boring traya lead. So cc/cd are now really useless so go offense.
"Eddiemundie;c-1626129" wrote: This is the kind of thread we need.
Not that i really read it through though. Too much math for a non-math game
That even people who enjoy nerding out on math can’t agree how the dang game works you know something is wrong with the game. This thread right here is what’s wrong with mods.
The discussion is 10x more complicated than it needs to be. It’s not really that confusing. Using estimated numbers it ends up showing that unless you can get crit chance over 75% then offense mods are better. So just to with that and you will usually be fine.
That's actually not correct, but I really don't want to debate it. I just mention it for caution to readers.
It’s pretty pointless to call out myself and numerous other people as wrong without providing any sort of alternative answer or reason for being wrong. Running basic examples shows it should be around 75%. Running the complex math from earlier in the thread shows about 75%. What are you getting that is different?
Just for one, this advice is completely ignoring all abilities that are triggered by critical hits. I can name 5 characters using such mechanics from the top of my head, so Im pretty sure there are many more. Also, what someone else just pointed out, it also matters who are you fighting against. Furthermore, what kind of buffs/debuffa are expected. Lastly, what other stats may be much more important, like speed or potency.
And Im not smart, so there must be like 5x as many factors than what I just collected in 1 minute.
I said usually, not always, as I was trying to keep it simple. Each case will be different. But most of what you just named is irrelevant anyways. Abilities triggered by critical hits has no impact on whether you are doing more damage with Crit Damage vs offense sets. Other stats like speed or potency are irrelevant to this specific discussion. Who cares if a speed set is better? This isn’t debating the best set overall. The only buff that matters is Crit Damage Up (is there a Crit Damage down anywhere??). And crit chance Up/down, but that’s already accounted for when I say the break even crit chance is 75%. Obviously you should adjust that for leaders/buffs/debuffs/etc.
"Eddiemundie;c-1626129" wrote: This is the kind of thread we need.
Not that i really read it through though. Too much math for a non-math game
That even people who enjoy nerding out on math can’t agree how the dang game works you know something is wrong with the game. This thread right here is what’s wrong with mods.
The discussion is 10x more complicated than it needs to be. It’s not really that confusing. Using estimated numbers it ends up showing that unless you can get crit chance over 75% then offense mods are better. So just to with that and you will usually be fine.
That's actually not correct, but I really don't want to debate it. I just mention it for caution to readers.
It’s pretty pointless to call out myself and numerous other people as wrong without providing any sort of alternative answer or reason for being wrong. Running basic examples shows it should be around 75%. Running the complex math from earlier in the thread shows about 75%. What are you getting that is different?
This has been discussed. The fact you say 75% is the break-even suggests you read what was posted already and dismissed it without reason.
So I've been saying all along there is some error in CrazyDroid's reasoning. My formula is based around the crit damage set's % increase on crits alone, and figuring it to get 100% of that increase at 100% crit, and 1% of that increase at 1% crit.
CrazyDroid is using the formula: =(((1-(A1/100))+(A1/100*2.22))/((1-(A1/100))+(A1/100*1.92))-1)*100 to determine the % offense increase. This is copied from an excel spreadsheet. This formula was placed in cell B1. Cell A1 only had =ROW(A1) in so doing I could drag cell A1 all the way down and have it list 1-100. I could then drag cell B1 down and have it use the 1-100 values. In so doing I had it give the % offense increase the Crit damage set gives for each 1% crit chance you get using crazydroid's formula.
Does this seem reasonable to anybody here? Because it doesn't to me. @ImYourHuckleberry @crzydroid In my formula, the crit damage set also has a 15.625% increase at 100%, but only a 7.8125% increase at 50% crit. 50% crit should only be a 50% damage increase compared to the maximum. CrzyDroid's formula is giving it 2/3 of it's maximum damage increase at 50% crit chance. Well that would certainly make 75% look like 50% wouldn't it? But I wouldn't call it accurate. The value of the crit damage set should be directly proportional to crit chance. It is with my formula, it is not with CrzyDroid's. The fact that the line on his graph is not straight shows that it is producing skewed results.
See how dead straight it is? If Crit damage can only be increased on crits, then the % increase must be directly proportional to the crit chance %... ie. a straight line. The fact that mine is straight and CrzyDroid's is curved shows that his method is somehow flawed.
No, the proper formula for calculating crit damage increase is (Crit damage with set/ crit damage without set) * crit chance. Other factors will only skew your results.
My accurate formula to compare is: (1-physical damage with offense set/physical damage without offense set)/(1-crit damage with set/crit damage without set) = crit chance breakpoint.
It's simple, and it actually bases the crit damage increase off of the crit chance breakpoint instead of... whatever crzydroid's is using.
Crzydroid's formula worked pretty well for determining the offense set's value, but it didn't work well at all for determining the crit damage set's value, mainly because it included non-crits in the equation.
To use a bit of theory, my formula is actually written as:
1 - offense with set/offense without set = (1 - Crit damage with set/crit damage without set) * crit chance breakpoint. In order to determine the crit chance breakpoint, I am dividing the whole problem by (1 - Crit damage with set/crit damage without set) which leads to the equation: (1 - offense with set / offense without set)/(1-crit damage with set / crit damage without set) = crit chance breakpoint
Crzydroid and I both got the same results with our formulas on the offense set side of things, so there's no reason to use his extra complicated formula there, and we can see that his formula produces skewed results on the crit damage side since overall damage increase isn't directly proportional with crit chance, which means his formula for that shouldn't be used either.
Now using both his and my formula we reached the same determination for maximum damage increase, and the fact that mine is actually consistently proportional to crit chance means that the formula I am using is the definitively simplified accurate formula for determining the breakpoint.
Now there is a potential error in my calculations. It could be that I should be comparing crit damage with crit set to crit damage with offense set for crits. I'm actually kind of leaning towards it being that way. In that case, however, it would only further decrease the value of the crit damage set and would give us the formula: ((offense with set/offense with no set)-1)/ ((crit damage with set/((offense with set/offense with no set) * crit damage with no set)) -1)= cc breakpoint
I'm going to run through this with Chirrut quick to see how it affects the breakpoint. (5622/(5622-433)-1) = 0.08344575062632491809597224898824 ((2.22/((5622/(5622-433))*1.92))-1) = 0.06719694948416933475631447883316
In this scenario, the crit damage set is only increasing the value of crits by 6.7% over what the offense set is doing with crits so will never be better than an offense set ever.
So if there are any errors in my calculations, they have only increased the value of the crit damage set, they have definitely not diminished its value as others have contended.
So either the breakpoint is around 67% for a rule of thumb, or offense is just better.
My guess? I have been making an error, and offense set is always better.
So the answer to the thread topic is: Yes, after the rework, critical damage mods will be useless.
I'd like to thank all the people that argued with me in this thread and helped me to perfect my formula. I just wish it wasn't going to be useless. (they should have increased the bonus for crit damage as well).
About SWGOH Strategy & Tips
Share guides, tips, and tricks for Star Wars: Galaxy of Heroes, discuss Arena strats, and help new players get started.
