Adventure Quest Worlds Skill Clarification and Secrets Guide

Adventure Quest Worlds Skill Clarification and Secrets Guide Non Member Version by Abraska

Section:……………………………………..Search Codes:
Introduction
Definitions…………………………………..def01
Limits…………………………………………lim01
General Notes………………………………gen01
Skills………………………………………….skl01
-Dragonslayer………………………………ds01
-Enforcer/Protosartorium/Rustbucket….epr01
-Healer……………………………………….heal01
-Mage…………………………………………mage01
-Ninja…………………………………………nin01
-No Class…………………………………….no01
-Pirate/Rogue……………………………….p/r01
-Ranger………………………………………ran01
-Shaman……………………………………..sham01
-Warrior ……………………………………..war01
Passive Skills………………………………..pass01
Credits………………………………………..cred01
Have a Good One


Use “Ctrl+F” and enter the search codes to quickly jump to specific sections.

Welcome to the Skill Clarification and Secrets Guide. This guide was written in response to how some skill descriptions were not accurate or even contradictory to the actual skill. Well, that’s what I’d like to say but honestly, I got the idea to write this randomly from a flushing of thoughts on my birthday. So, now that you know this guide is a re-gift that came out of my mental toilet, let us begin.


The ultimate goal of this guide is to provide you with knowledge and understanding of all the skills examined. It does this through quantitative and qualitative data retrieved from the game. Treatment of data can be found under “Limits” heading. All assertions made are based off data and not opinion. However, as the author and tester, I am entitled to an opinion. Though, any opinions are limited to the testing of skills, data, and the guide. Not the skills themselves. Although the guide seems rather stringent in its analysis, it really is just me having fun and running amok in AQW (wow, this is some start to a guide, lolz).


The main charm of this guide is that it also reveals hidden skill effects/aspects not commonly known. I would say some of these skill effects cannot be discovered without the level of testing performed in this guide. For example, did you know that the Warrior skill “Prepared Strike” does higher than normal critical hits? Or, do you know just by how much the skill “Stiletto” boosts attack damage relative to enemy health? Almost every player should be able to learn something new from this guide.


That’s all you need to know. Go ahead skip the rest of the intro. It’s just some details about the guide. Read for your interest only.


This guide is long to say the least. I wrote it with the intention that no one reads it in one sitting. I’ve made of list of suggested readings for various readers.


-For light readers, I suggest that you read about the skills you are interested in and start with reading the revised skill descriptions. The revised descriptions are the condensed form of what I have found. However, there are subtleties that are not covered in those descriptions which can be found in the qualitative and quantitative headings so I would say read those next.


-For those mathematically inclined, the formulas should nicely sum up what each analysis found. Again, there are details only contained in the qualitative and quantitative analysis.


-For knowledge seekers, simply read the guide linearly. I have made the order of each skill analysis flow in a logical order.


The priorities of each skill inquiry are as follows:


1) To identify and clarify all skill effects


2) To quantify said skill effects. (Put numbers to everything)


3) For certain skills, to see how stats affect the skill effects. That is, skill damage/healing changes with either attack or spell power and I aimed to understand the associated numerical relationship.


That is, number one gets the most emphasis and number three gets the least.


Disclaimer: Unfortunately, you have me as an author. Apparently, most people read and write in the “Noble” style; they are straight forward and to the point. Whereas I write in the “Socratic” style where I am more concerned with details and generally more verbose in my writing. I find in the context of this guide, my writing style brings out the most of the content but also may produce aversion in most readers. I have tried to tone myself down and I apologize for any inconvenience. Wow, this should have been a small statement, not a paragraph, lolz.

Def01

Skill Template: The standard way I set up all the skills examined.


Original Skill Description: The skill description found in-game and on the AQW wiki. In actuality, overt grammatical errors were corrected because… yeah. Thus, these skill descriptions are slightly different.


Qualitative Analysis: An examination based off subjective judgment of detectable qualities. Eg. An orange is colored orange. For the purpose of this guide, this definition will be slightly modified from it’s true definition. Observations that do not require many calculations or any at all will be stated here. An example of this would be a skill that doubles a certain value. It is fairly easy to see that the skill doubles this when compared to the normal values.


Quantitative Analysis: An examination based off measurable or quantifiable properties. Skill aspects that require calculations such as averages or graphs will be described here. Eg. Over 100 uses, this skill adds an average x amount of damage.


Revised Skill Description: A rewritten skill description constructed from observed results and data. Values presented here will be rounded to “nice” numbers with uncertainties permitting (uncertainties as defined under the limits heading).


Formula: A possible method of how the AQW game system calculates skill values. An equation can describe all skills in succinct and elegant way. Far superior to even my best written explanation of skills.


T/A Notes: Tester/Author Notes. This is my playground. I’ll write my digressions and thoughts here. However, it’ll generally be a discussion on the testing of the skills and the validity of the results.


Data: Self-explanatory. I’ll also post any graphs I make here.


General Definitions:


ATP: Attack power. Specifically the value found in the stats page. Different from Atk.


SP: Spell power. Specifically the value found in the stats page.


Atk: Average, observable attack damage.


Avg: Average.


Base Damage: The damage range presented in the inventory, not the stat page.


Stat Base Damage: The damage range presented in the stat page.


DOT: Damage over time.


DMC: Dodge, miss, critical. Tests involving this simply record how many of each out of a total number of attacks.

lim01

These are restrictions/rules I placed on myself when I conducted skill testing.


The 1% Rule:


When calculating a quantitative average, I wanted to be sure if the value I was calculating was accurate. After taking so many data points, the average value stops changing significantly. When it stops changing within 1% of it’s current value, I call it stable and record that value. However, I won’t perform this analysis for all calculations if I see the data is obviously consistent/stable. This would be something like the concept of the standard deviation/error of a Gaussian distribution, which is the real life way one would go about estimating an average.


Significant Figures and Uncertainty:


Long story short, when taking quantitative data, only some digits are meaningful. Eg. If you took a ruler and examined the markings, you would see that you could be sure of tens, ones, and tenths place but you’ll have to start estimating the hundredth (any further digits would be meaningless). I try to follow the standard rules regarding these and report values that are significant with appropriate uncertainty. Think of uncertainty as the worse case scenario (it’s represented as +/- beside values) and significant figures as how many digits I should report. I’m quite sure the damage numbers we see in-game are rounded as there are many more decimal numbers than integers and having a completely integer based system is unlikely. Also, from doing all my testing I almost always end up using decimals in my attempts to figure skills out which further convinces me it is not a completely integer based system. Thus, I give all damages an uncertainty of +/-1 to account for this rounding (when you round to the ones digit, you don’t increase or decrease the original value by more than 1, thus the given uncertainty). For when I used a stopwatch, I used an uncertainty of +/-0.3 sec as that is the average human reaction time. As for graphs, I generally ignore this since uncertainty comes from the ability to resolve positions on the graph and so I just report to three significant figures.


Acom’s Razor:


It is the theory that the simplest idea is the best. Though not an absolute rule (none of these limits are), it serves as a guideline in how I rationalize these skills. I will attempt to solve skills with the simplest theory and gradually move to more complex ones as the simplest case gets ruled out according to data. Related to this is how I assume that skills use “nice” numbers. Eg. If I get a number like 54+/-1, I’ll round it to 55 because it is a “nice” number and it is within range of the uncertainty.


Fixed/Un-enhanced Weapon:


Unless stated otherwise, I will use a fixed damage weapon in all tests. This allows me to quickly determine average weapon damage as well as eliminate variability. Weapons bought with only an adventurer enhancement will only increase stats by 1 regardless what level it is. This allowed me to alter weapon level without changing stats (important for some skills).


Imperfection:


The contents of this guide are not 100% correct or complete. To be absolutely sure anything is absolutely correct, you’d have to take an infinite number of data samples and put that against an infinite number of possibilities. This limitation is imposed on all testing and it is not by choice. However, it is this very limitation that allows testing to proceed in the direction of the truth; being wrong allows for more progress than success. When you have absolutely succeeded in proving something, there can be no more progress.


No opinions:


Again, I do not give my opinion on the skills themselves. This guide is an objective look at skills.

gen01

On Haste and Skills:


Several skills have an effect duration. This aspect was only qualitatively examined. Most skills do last as long as they should. Exceptions will be noted.


On Spell Power and Skills:


Whenever I plotted a graph involving spell power, it featured a “fuzzy” line. The nice lines of the Thief skill set were what I wanted to get. I rationalized this as being caused by the randomness of AQW magic. In Arcangrove, you can read the book and learn that magi react differently in nexuses and Warlic has a reverse mana characteristic. If I am correct, the results would show a subtle touch the developers added to the magic system. Nice.


On Lag:


Skills can fail due to lag. This is evident when a skill is activated, starts cooling down, but no skill effect is observed. This can occur when there is no obvious lag at all; hiccups in the system, which I will call micro-lag, can also prevent skills from working. That said, this guide avoided lag and micro-lag at all costs. Data was thrown out if lag was even suspected.


On Critical Hits:


Unless stated otherwise, critical hits produced by skill use simply use the same critical modifier as normal attacks. You may find that I say this again in several skill examinations. This is due to my paranoia that there is something interesting happening with critical hits and so I mention it several times to make it clear that nothing is going on.


On Revisions:


Not including the passive skills, I have not written revised descriptions for a grand total of four skills. Meaning, I have made a revised skill description (whether it be big or small) for all but four skills. This note is a cursory glance at what this guide has done.

skl01

Classes are listed in alphabetical order and skills are listed under their respective classes in the order that they appear in-game from left to right.


Baseline: Several skills I tested against the Red Dragon. This data is the control. Data consists of the damage received from Red Dragon with a rank 10 Warrior.


No Skill, Rank 10 Warrior vs. Red Dragon:


85,76,87,77,78,169,82,83,84,87
144,82,84,83,78,167,75,77,75,80
80,87,83,82,76,87,74,82,77,82
171,84,84,80,77,80,74,86,164,175
76,86,79,86,176,78,79,79,80,79
74,77,83,81,166,77,79,80,84,82
80,86,167,85,83,157,73,85,79,80,
78,76,81,74,78,86,83,82,149,78
86,162,79,164,78,149,82,85,153,88
77,86,75,78,178,112,84,77,149,75


Avg w/ Crit=94+/-1
Avg w/o Crit=81+/-1 (82 data points)
Hi=89
Low=73
Median=81


The fact that the calculated average agrees with the median value supports that it is accurate. The median is the middle number between the highest and lowest damage the dragon inflicted.


I also used monsters other than Red Dragon in specific tests. The monsters and their wiki pages are listed here:


Red Dragon
Undead Berserker
Dark Draconian


______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________


Dragonslayer Skills:ds01


Bane of Scales:


Original Skill Description: Taunts a dragon, forcing it to attack you, while reducing the dragon’s damage dealt with all attacks by 30%. Lasts 10 seconds.


Qualitative Analysis:
-Dragons do indeed attack the player after use of this skill.


Quantitative Analysis:
-An average of 56+/-1 damage received was found over one hundred samples while using the skill against Red Dragon. An average of 81+/-1 damage received was found over one hundred samples against Red Dragon with no skill. Thus, a 31+/-1% damage reduction was observed.


Revised Skill Description: Same as original.


Formula: (enemy dmg)*0.70=mitigated enemy dmg


T/A Notes: This is one the earlier skills I tested and in the early stages of tested I ignored critical hits since I didn’t like such variability in the data. However, I did note that the critical hits observed were nothing out of the ordinary (critical modifier just seemed to be applied to the reduced damage). Regardless the skill works as advertised. See my section on haste for a discussion on the skill durations.


Data:
Bane of Scales:
54,59,58,57,55 54,59,60,57,52
58,54,60,57,55 60,62,59,54,51
55,57,54,55,60 54,60,54,52,59
54,59,59,55,62 57,54,59,55,62
57,54,59,54,56 51,52,54,53,57
57,52,59,54,62 51,54,59,55,52
60,60,57,53,60 57,62,57,52,57
61,61,59,55,53 51,60,55,60,53
60,54,59,52,60 52,54,60,59,55
52,54,54,54,54 61,54,55,54,52


Avg=56+/-1
Hi=62
Low=51
Median=56.5




Impale:


Original Skill Description: Causes 200% of weapon damage over 12 seconds, and has a chance of stunning the target for 3 seconds.


Qualitative Analysis:
-The DOT’s damage range mimics that of the currently equipped weapon. If the weapon has fixed damage, the DOT will also do only one value of damage. If the weapon has a large range, the DOT will also have a large range of damage.
-In addition, the skill ignores any cumulative effects due to the passive skill Aggression, it is based off stat damage.
-Damage is delivered over six intervals.


Quantitative Analysis:
-Using the Blade of Affliction (BoA) with stat base damage of 145, one hundred samples of the first DOT (number one of six). An average was calculated to be 23+/-1 which would be 140+/-6 average total damage. This total average damage is 97+/-9% of the stat base damage.
-Over 500 samples of data were collected in regards to the skill’s stun chance. 49 of 500 tests resulted in successful stuns or a 9.8% (exact) calculated stun chance. Additionally, no misses were observed over the 500 tests.


Revised Skill Description: Causes 95% of weapon damage over 12 seconds in 2 second intervals and has a 10% chance of stunning the target for 3 seconds. Does not miss.


Formula: (next attack)*0.95/6 + rounding=DOT per interval


T/A Notes: The reason why I used the BoA to test the % damage of the DOT was to resolve the rounding issue. That is, if I just used a fixed damage weapon, I would get a slightly erroneous result due to rounding up or down. By using the BoA, it is as if I took many different tests with different fixed damages and so that any rounding up is likely to be canceled by any rounding down in the average. I included rounding in the formula because I’m not sure of how the game rounds the skill damage; the game could calculate total damage, round that to a multiple of 6, and then divide or it can do all the calculations then round at the end. I asked A_hobo_ and he told me he had a stat base damage of 66-66 which I used to calculate that his impale would do 10 damage per interval or 60 damage total of DOT (66*.95=62.7, rounded, 60/6=10). If I just divided 62.7 right away and rounded at the end I still would’ve gotten 10. Really, this is a small detail that only I would worry about. The formula will give fairly accurate numbers either way.


Data:
Impale: Blade of Affliction stat avg=145
27,29,22,32,14, 29,14,15,20,31
30,32,33,27,21 29,20,26,30,19,
24,20,25,21,12, 28,23,12,22,15,
15,18,32,26,32, 15,12,26,14,16
17,20,32,31,29 14,18,23,11,13
23,28,29,17,24 26,31,25,19,15
25,30,17,24,16 13,13,29,18,29
25,21,20,30,21 29,29,23,33,32
16,22,12,15,26 22,13,15,16,15
25,17,18,31,32 26,15,27,19,26


Avg=23+/-1
Hi=33
Low=12
Median=22.5
Total avg=23.39+/-2*6/145+/-1=0.97+/-0.09




Scorched Steel:


Original Skill Description: A fiery attack dealing 150% weapon damage.


Qualitative Analysis:
-Damage is calculated from a combination of base damage and base stat damage; 50% of the base damage is added onto the full base stat damage (see formula).
-The skill ignores any cumulative effect from the passive skill Aggression.
-Critical hits are simply the result of the critical hit modifier applied to skill damage.


Revised Skill Description: A fiery attack dealing 100% weapon damage (excluding Aggression) and 50% average base damage .


Formula: (next base stat dmg)+(base dmg)/2=skill dmg


T/A Notes: Go see my definitions section if you don’t get what’s the difference between base stat damage and base damage. I don’t have a lot of data for this because I didn’t feel the need, using fixed damage weapons is very reliable. This was one skill where having a lot of data would not help as much. Simply looking at a few data and logically constructing a formula is how this was done.


Data:


Scorched Steel Data Table




Talon Twisting:


Original Skill Description: If used while in combat with a dragon, 50% of damage done to you will be added to your attacks. Lasts 8 seconds.


Qualitative Analysis:
-Critical hits done by enemy were treated the same as normal hits by the skill.
-Critical hits done by player with skill activated appeared to simply have the critical hit modifier applied.
-The skill ignores the Bane of Scales effect and treats enemy damage as if it was not mitigated. That is, Bane of Scales does not affect the values produced by Talon Twisting.


Quantitative Analysis:
-Ninety-six samples of damage (excluding critical hits done by player) received by Red Dragon and associated damage returned were taken. Samples were then calculated for percent of enemy damage added to player damage: ((skill dmg)-(normal player dmg))/enemy dmg. Calculated samples found to have an average of 36+/-3% of enemy damage added to player damage.


Revised Skill Description: If used while in combat with a dragon, 35% of damage done to you will be added to your attacks. Lasts 8 seconds.


Formula: (enemy dmg)*.35+(weapon dmg)=skill dmg


T/A Notes: You may be wondering why I only have ninety-six samples of data. I just plain don’t have the final four and I don’t know why, lolz. Regardless, the data still follows my 1% rule. As for the critical hits done by me, I just used the critical hit modifier to see what some of my critical hits would have been had they been normal hits. I observed that the values calculated agreed with the all the normal hits. However, I left out critical hits done by me because I didn’t like so much number crunching. So I just recorded normal hits. I’m very confident about the analysis of this skill since all the data was very consistent.


Data:
Talon Twisting: (enemy atk – player return atk) (player atk, no skill=161)
86-193, 83-193, 85-191, 80-190, 178-226 152-218,75-188,73-187,153-217,78-189,82-190 75-188,80-190,176-226,77-189,83-191 77-189,77-189,167-222,75-188,85-191,85-191 76-188,73-187,80-190,176-226,86-193,83-435 77-189,89-194,88-193,76-186,76-186,173-223 162-220,84-435,175-224,171-223,79-432,74-188 80-433,86-196,81-220,87-193, 82-190, 82-433 86-193,83-435,135-310, 80-190,153-217,77-189,40-433 75-188,77-432,79-189,77-189,77-189 82-433,82-190,89-194,87-193,175-224 79-189,78-189,162-220, 80-190, 88-193, 85-435 82-190,88-436,85-191,173-224 162-463,76-188,83-193,167-465,153-217 83-435,77-432,88-436,77-189,86-193,83-191 164-221,78-189, 84-191,86-193, 76-188, 77-189 84-191,83-191,153-217,77-189,86-693,83-191


calculated atk bonus avg=0.36+/-0.03


____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________


Enforcer/Rustbucket/Protosartorium Skills:epr01


Jackhammer:


Skill Description: A rapid assault dealing 150% weapon damage, cannot be avoided but also cannot crit.


Qualitative Analysis:
-The skill can be avoided and can deal critical hits.
-Skill damage is indeed 150% of attack.


Revised Skill Description: A rapid assault dealing 150% weapon damage.


Formula: (weapon dmg)*1.5=skill dmg


T/A Notes: Not much to see here. The issue with the skill being avoided and doing critical hits was already known prior to this guide. All it requires is the devil’s proof which I believe most players have already seen for themselves.


Data:
Jackhammer:
JH/Crit …..Atk/Crit
189/404 …126/270
186/398 …124/266
198/327 …132/218
108/179 …72/119
126/208 …84/139




Plasma Bolt:


Skill Description: An energy-based ranged attack dealing physical and magical damage.


Qualitative Analysis:
-Skill damage increases with weapon enhancement level and ATP plus SP. ATP is equivalent to SP. Eg. 100 ATP and 50 SP gives the same result as 50 ATP and 100 SP.
-Skill damage does fixed damage, it does not vary with weapon damage range.


Quantitative Analysis:
-Thirty-seven points of data were collected concerning skill damage relative to ATP and SP with a Default Sword (lvl 1 adventurer enhancement). Data was graphed and slope analysis reveals that the relationship between skill damage and stats is approximately 0.145 points of skill damage per point of ATP/SP.


Revised Skill Description: An energy-based ranged attack dealing physical and magical damage. Deals ~0.15 damage per point of attack power/spell power plus a weapon level bonus.


Formula: (ATP+SP)*0.15+(weapon lvl bonus)=skill damage


T/A Notes: Obviously, the greatest weakness of my analysis of this skill is the weapon lvl issue. Using my available weapons and weapon enhancements, I can show that skill damage gets a fixed boost from weapon lvl (high weapon lvl=high boost) but I can’t discern a plausible pattern to the bonuses. The weapon level bonus would correspond to the Y-intercept of the graph. Thanks to Mira 489 for supplying her data.


Data:


PB vs. ATP&SP; (Headings=PB, ATP, SP, Total)
PB vs. ATP&SP; Unedited 0-33
PB vs. ATP&SP; Unedited 34-36


Plasma Bolt Varying with Weapon Level




Arc Lightning:


Skill Description: Emits a burst of electrical energy that will bounce to up to 4 targets, dealing more damage with each bounce.


Qualitative Analysis:
-Skill damage does not vary with weapon damage, it is fixed.
-First target hit by the skill receives 60% weapon damage (average)
-Subsequent targets hit take 50% more damage. That is, the second target hit takes 50% more than the first, the third target takes 50% more than the second or twice the damage of the first target, etc (see formula).


Revised Skill Description: Emits a burst of electrical energy that will bounce to up to 4 targets, dealing 50% more damage with each bounce with the first bouncing dealing 60% average weapon damage.


Formula: (avg weapon dmg)*0.6*((target number-1)*.5)=skill dmg for target number (1, 2, 3, or 4)


T/A Notes: It also seems like values calculated by the game for this skill are rounded up (see data and calculate a few). A nice skill to test.


Data:


Arc Lightning Data Table


Event Horizon:


Skill Description: Reduces all incoming damage by an amount based on attack power for 20 seconds.


Qualitative Analysis:
-Effect does not last 20 seconds.


Quantitative Analysis:
-300 data samples were collected from skill usage against Red Dragon using six different ATP (50 samples per ATP). Upper and lower limits of damage received using the skill was compared to upper and lower limits of damage received without the skill. The differences were then compared to the ATP used. An average of 0.225+/-0.02 points of mitigation per point of ATP was found.


Revised Skill Description: Reduces all incoming damage by 0.23 per point of attack power for 20 seconds.


Formula: (enemy dmg)-(ATP*.225)=enemy dmg using skill


T/A Notes: I used a high-low comparison for this. That is, I understood that the highest and lowest damage the dragon could do with me using the skill corresponds to the highest and lowest damage the dragon does regularly. Thus, the median values should also correspond. I took the difference between medians to find out how many points were mitigated for each ATP. Data were consistent for each trail and not far off from average. I realize that I should be using 0.23 in the calculation and quantitative report but from my experience testing the skill, I have a hunch the 5 is important.


Data:


Event Horizon Data Table


______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________


Healer:heal01


Healing Word:


Original Skill Description: Heals a friendly target for a large amount immediately, and up to 3 additional nearby targets for a smaller amount. Applies Radiance to the first target, healing for an additional amount over 16 seconds, and restoring some mana to the caster when the target takes damage.


Qualitative Analysis:
-Target gains 1 MP ever time they are struck.
-Radiance applies healing over 8 intervals.
-Weapon level gives a fixed boost to healing in addition to spell power.
-Critical heals use the same critical modifier as normal attacks.


Quantitative Analysis:
-43 data points were recorded from different players using different builds of Mage and Healer enhancements (Mage enhancements were not used simultaneously with Healer and vice versa.) standardized to the Default Sword (lvl 1). Data were graphed and slope analysis shows approximately 0.846 points of healing per point of spell power.
-27 data points regarding secondary healing were collected. On average, secondary healing is 51+/-1% of primary healing.
-43 data points regarding radiance were collected. Recorded was the healing per interval of radiance. On average, the total healing from radiance (8 times one interval) was found to be 65+/-1% of primary healing.


Revised Skill Description: Heals a friendly target for 0.85 per spell power plus weapon level bonus immediately, and up to 3 additional nearby targets for 51% that amount. Applies Radiance to the first target, healing 65% the amount of the first target over 16 seconds, and restoring 2 MP to the caster when the target takes damage.


Formula: 0.85*SP+(wpn lvl bonus)+(correction factor)=primary heal
(primary heal)*0.51=secondary heal
(primary heal)*0.65/8=radiance heal interval


T/A Notes: This was a collaboration between Mira 489, A_hobo_, and myself. I wanted to see how healing changed as spell power changed over the full spectrum so I requested aid from my friends. This was our first time working together and so data got lost/not collected during the process even after going back and collecting missing data. Regardless, I am thankful for their help. As you can see, the graph is linear but a little fuzzy. The line of best fit is actually incorrect at all points except for those that have an actual data point (of course I don’t have all data points but you get the idea) and so a correction factor is added to the formula. It is there to visualize the general behavior of healing vs. spell power. The secondary heal data is especially lacking but qualitatively, the calculated result makes sense so I don’t feel a strong urge to go back for more data. As for the weapon level bonus, I do believe I see a pattern in the data but not such that I feel that it is concrete. However, it can be reasonably said that healing increases with increasing weapon levels. Weapon level bonus corresponds to the Y-intercept. Data was standardized to the Default Sword (lvl 1).


Data:


Healing vs. SP
Healing vs. SP Unedited 1-32
Healing vs. SP Unedited 33-43


Radiance and secondary heal data part 1
Radiance and secondary heal data part 2


Healing Varying with Weapon Level


Heartbeat :


Original Skill Description: Deals 10% of current HP plus moderate magical damage to the target.


Qualitative Analysis:
-The “moderate magical damage” is added as an increase of the base 10%. That is, a fixed amount is not added for a certain spell power. The bonus from spell power also depends on current health.
-Attempting to subtract more than 10% of health from a particular Heartbeat may result in a negative number. Additionally, subtracting less than 10% of health results in a graph a broken graph of Heartbeat vs spell power. This supports the skill description in regards to that skill damage is based off 10% of current health.
-See graphs


Quantitative Analysis:
-41 data points were collected in regards to skill damage for a certain spell power and total health. A graph Heartbeat/health-0.10 vs. spell power was constructed. See graph and T/A Notes for details.


Revised Skill Description: Deals 10% of current HP plus moderate magical damage to the target, (an additional 1% or 2% of current HP based on spell power).


Formula: ((slope)*SP+Y intercept+0.10) *(current HP)=skill damage
Alt Formula: 0.11*current HP=skill damage


T/A Notes: I did calculate the slope for the graph of HB/Health-10% vs. SP but the result was so small, on the order of 10^-5 (the slope of HB/Health vs SP is only a a little better on the order of 10^-4) . A human’s ability to resolve a graph to that precision is doubtful. Thus, I left it out of the formal analysis since I’m not sure of it’s accuracy. Similarly, I left out the Y-intercept for the same reasons. Moreover, using the slope to predict skill damage is impractical since the change in % damage is so small. It is more practical to simply estimate the skill to deal ~11% current HP; a rough estimate of 11% is more or less the average so you get a fairly decent prediction with a simple calculation. Lots of graphs for this one because I spent quite some time figuring it out with test graphs (posted so you may enjoy watching me struggle). Data for this came from the same collaboration as the one for Healing Word. Thanks to Mira 489 and A_hobo_. Also included are a couple of tests regarding how skill damage changes with decreasing health (getting hurt by an enemy). It seems the spell power bonus is increasing with decreasing health but it can also decrease with decreasing health. Moreover the differences are very small which leads me to believe it’s just rounding causing the differences.


Data:


Data points 1-33
Data points 34-41


HB vs. Health
HB/health vs. SP
HB-10% vs. SP
HB-2.5% vs. SP
HB vs. SP


HB->10%


HB Qualitative Data:


HB Data Tables


HB Varying with Decreasing HP


Energy Flow:


Original Skill Description: Grants Mana to the caster each time the target takes damage for 12 seconds. Also applies Inhibition, reducing the target’s damage by 30% for 8 seconds.


Qualitative Analysis:
-Player gains 2 MP per hit with skill effect placed on target.


Quantitative Analysis:
-Skill was used against Red Dragon and 100 samples of damage received was recorded. Excluding 31 critical hits, average damage received was 57+/-1. This value was calculated to be 63+/-1% of damage without skill use (37+/-1% damage reduction) .


Revised Skill Description: Grants 2 MP to the caster each time the target takes damage for 12 seconds. Also applies Inhibition, reducing the target’s damage by 37% for 8 seconds.


Formula: (enemy dmg)*0.63=mitigated enemy dmg


T/A Notes: I was surprised to see so many critical hits. I think that was just the result of bad luck. Oh well, there was enough non-critical hits to calculate a non-critical average that obeys the 1% rule so it’s fine. Moreover, said average agrees with the median result which inspires confidence. However, the 37% makes me suspicious as it is such a strange number. Due to the uncertainty analysis, I can’t round it down to a nice number of 35% unless I want to defeat the purpose of the revised skill description.


Data:
Energy Flow:


56,106,54,56,106,115,113,57,57,51
52,57,58,55,108,115,103,52,53,54
55,52,53,58,57,113,60,55,55,59
117,116,55,60,54,53,57,55,60,116
52,61,59,123,59,53,115,53,55,123
113,55,55,108,61,55,113,55,52,60
112,111,61,54,110,112,108,116,59,122
53,55,52,110,60,115,59,111,55,78
122,118,61,60,54,61,60,56,59,55
55,59,54,54,57,123,110,57,58,61


Avg w/ Crit=74+/-1
Avg w/o Crit=57+/-1 (69 data points)
Hi=61
Low=52
Median=56.5


Clear Mind:


Original Skill Description: Reduces friendly target’s Mana cost by 50% for 10 seconds.


Qualitative Analysis:
-Skill description is accurate.


Revised Skill Description: Same as original.


Formula: (MP cost)/2=halved MP cost


T/A Notes: Yeah…


Data:
…


______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________


Mage:mage01


Multi Skill Analysis: Fireball, Ice Shard, and Explosion


Original Skill Descriptions:


Fireball: Hurls flame at your opponent, dealing moderate damage on impact, and dealing that same amount again over 10 seconds. Deals more impact damage if Frozen Blood is present on the target, but consumes the debuff.


Ice Shard: Launches a freezing shard at your enemy, dealing moderate damage. If Scorched is NOT present, applies Frozen Blood, reducing their attack speed and power for 10 seconds. If Scorched IS present, deals increased damage but does not apply Frozen Blood.


Explosion: Causes energies within opponent to become unstable and burst forth, causing moderate damage to your target and light damage to surrounding targets.


Qualitative Analysis:
-Fireball damage after Frozen Blood is applied to enemy is 175% of Fireball damage against a normal enemy.
-Ice Shard damage after Scorched is applied to enemy is 125% of Ice Shard damage against a normal enemy.
-Both Fireball and Ice Shard increase in damage with increasing weapon level.
-Ice Shard damage is always equal to damage done to primary target of Explosion.
-Explosion damage to secondary targets is 50% of primary. Often times, a bonus point of damage is added to the 50%.
-All skill damages simply have the relevant critical modifier applied to calculate critical hits with skill.
-Class mana regeneration applies to these skills. If the skills hit, they give some mana back resulting in a net loss of mana less than the listed mana cost for each skill.


Quantitative Analysis:
-A graph of Fireball vs. spell power with 45 data points, shows a slope 0.45 damage per spell point. Graph standardized using the Wooden Hammer (lvl 4).
-A graph of Ice Shard vs. spell power with 45 data points, shows a slope of 0.20 damage per spell point. Graph standardized using the Wooden Hammer (lvl 4).
-30 data points regarding damage due to Scorched, an average of 0.079 (damage of one interval over fireball damage). Re-calculated, this value is equivalent to 0.40 (carrying all digits) total Scorched damage over Fireball damage.
-The damage mitigation component of Ice Shard was found to be on average 40+/-1% out of 84 data points. Including critical hits, 100 data points were collected.
-Normal enemy attack speed was compared to it’s attack speed after using Ice Shard. Over 100 data samples were collected for each (100 before and 100 after skill). On average, the skill increased enemy attack speed by 1.1+/-0.6 seconds.


Revised Skill Descriptions:


Fireball: Hurls flame at your opponent, dealing 0.45 points of damage per spell point plus weapon level bonus, and dealing 40% that amount again over 10 seconds. Deals 75% more damage if Frozen Blood is present on the target, but consumes the debuff.


Ice Shard: Launches a freezing shard at your enemy, dealing 0.20 points of damage per spell point plus weapon level bonus. If Scorched is NOT present, applies Frozen Blood, increasing their attack speed by 1 second and decreasing their attack power by 40% for 10 seconds. If Scorched IS present, deals 25% increased damage but does not apply Frozen Blood.


Explosion: Causes energies within opponent to become unstable and burst forth, causing damage equivalent to Ice Shard to your target and half that damage to surrounding targets.




Formulas:
-0.45*SP+(wpn lvl bonus)+(correction factor)=fireball dmg
(fireball dmg)*1.75=skill dmg after frozen blood
-0.20*SP+(wpn lvl bonus)+(correction factor)=ice dmg
(ice dmg)*1.25=ice dmg after scorched
-(ice dmg)=primary explosion dmg
-(ice dmg)/2=secondary explosion dmg (sometimes add a bonus 1 dmg)


T/A Notes: Since I more or less tested these all at once and that they are quite strongly related to one another, I clumped them into one huge analysis. Ironically, not too much to say though, the data speaks for itself. Again, note that the line of best fit is wrong at all points without an actual data point (hence the correction factor). Y-intercepts correspond to weapon level bonuses. I made a mistake in that I forgot to standardize one set of data but posted it anyway to illustrate the importance of standardization. Sigh, Mira had to suddenly decide to level up from 22 to 30 and A_hobo_ wasn’t on so I had to do this all with my own accounts.


Data:


FB vs. SP
FB Unedited 1-32
FB Unedited 33-45


not standardized
not standardized 2


Scorched (FB Buff) data 1
Scorched (FB Buff) data 2


IS vs. SP
IS Unedited 33-45


Mage Data Tables


Ice Shard:


Damage Mitigation Component:
SP=230


52,51,48,49,91,53,52,45,53,51,52
49,45,49,48,52,45,49,49,45,52,52
50,48,48,83,48,102,49,104,47,46,45
90,52,51,44,50,49,53,95,105,51,53
100,53,48,51,89,48,158,48,50,50,45
46,52,45,45,52,51,92,46,44,50,89
52,100,53,48,45,52,52,45,92,49,96
45,52,46,46,49, 45,44,95,51,49,53
45,48,45,52,45,50,52,45,45,48,48,51


Avg w/ critical hits=57+/-1
Avg w/o critical hits=49+/-1 (84 data points)
Hi=53
Low=44
Median=48.5
Damage Reduction=1-49/81=0.40+/-0.01


SP=60
49,49,52,98,104,44,50,51,53,47,52,48 (qualitatively the same as SP=230)


Speed Reduction Component:


Red Dragon attacks over time sec/atk (no skill)


43.31/20, 40.50/19, 55.41/25, 42.81/20, 63.84/29 avg=2.2+/-0.3 sec/atk


Red Dragon attacks over time sec/atk with skill active


100.97/31, 97.03/30, 102.50/32, 113.90/33, 125.78/38, 96.38/30, 115.41/35 avg=3.3+/-0.3 sec/atk


Arcane Shield:


Original Skill Description: Shield the caster, transferring most incoming damage to their MP instead of HP and reducing outgoing damage for 20 seconds.


Qualitative Analysis:
-Player loses a net 8 MP per hit when skill is active.
-Concerning critical hits, damage mitigation is applied after the critical hit modifier. Otherwise, critical hits would be zero in the ATP-328 trial.
-Amount of damage mitigated is directly proportional to spell power.
-Damage output from player is not reduced.


Quantitative Analysis:
-Five trials using different spell powers. Each trial included 50 data concerning damage received from Red Dragon. An average of all the trials equaled 0.27+/-0.02 damage reduced per spell point.


Revised Skill Description: Shield the caster, transforming 0.25 of incoming damage per spell point to a loss of 8 MP instead of HP for 20 seconds.


Formula: (enemy dmg)-(SP*0.25)=mitigated enemy dmg.


T/A Notes: Since this is a variation of the Enforcer skill Event Horizon (or vice versa), I did a similar analysis of this skill. Go see the notes for Event Horizon to see what I did.


Data:


Arcane Shield Data Table


____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________


Ninja:nin01


Crosscut:


Original Skill Description: Instantly attack twice, dealing extra damage.


Qualitative Analysis:
-Damage dealt is twice normal attack damage.


Revised Skill Description: Instantly attack twice, dealing double damage.


Formula: (atk)*2=skill dmg


T/A Notes: …


Data:
Atk/Crit ..X-Cut/Crit
39/61 …..78/121
45/70 …..90/140
98/197 …195/393
93/188 …186/375


Multi Skill Analysis: Shadow Blade and Shadow Burn


Original Skill Descriptions:


Shadow Blade: Deals physical and magical damage, and blinds enemy for 6 seconds.


Shadow Burn: Deals light weapon damage plus magical damage, stunning any target afflicted by Shadow burn for 3s, or returning 20 mana otherwise.


Qualitative Analysis:
-Both skills deal the same damage with all else equal.
-Critical hits using the skill simply have normal skill damage multiplied by the current critical modifier.
-Shadow Blade causes enemies to always miss.
-Shadow Burn does return 20 mana and does apply stun if target has been hit by Shadow Blade.
-Both skills increase with increasing ATP and SP. ATP and SP are weighted equally.
-Both skills’ damage range varies with weapon range.
-Both skills increase with increasing weapon level.


Quantitative Analysis:
-A graph of Shadow Blade vs. (ATP+SP) consisting of 47 relevant data points, shows a slope of 0.097 damage per point of ATP/SP. This analysis assumes this graph is also representative of Shadow Burn vs (ATP+SP).


Revised Skill Descriptions:


Shadow Blade: Deals 0.1 physical and magical damage per point of attack and spell power plus weapon level bonus, and blinds enemy for 6 seconds.


Shadow Burn: Deals 0.1 physical and magical damage per point of attack and spell power plus weapon level bonus, stunning any target afflicted by Shadow Blade for 3s, or returning 20 mana otherwise.


Formula: 0.1*(ATP+SP)+(wpn dmg bonus)+(correction factor)=skill dmg


T/A Notes: Realizing that these skills vary with weapon level, I wanted to analyze it. However, the observation that they vary with weapon range hinders my efforts. I would have to take many trials for each weapon level and average it. Other skills didn’t vary with weapon range so I could just do one trial and find the average. I figured that completing the rest of the guide would be more useful than spending a significant amount of time figuring out these skills. If you look at the graphs, you’ll see several points that are outliers. They are the result of me including preliminary data not standardized to the level 4 Wooden Hammer. Instead, they were collected using a level 28 Cruel Hydra Blade so their Y-intercept is higher than the rest (but they still have the same slope). Again, thanks to Mira 489 and A_hobo_ for their data.


Data:


SB vs. (ATP+SP)
SB vs. (ATP+SP) Unedited 1-33
SB vs. (ATP+SP) Unedited 34-47


Ninja Multi Skill Data Table


Thin Air:


Original Skill Description: Raises dodge by 3% and haste by 5% every time you are hit. Lasts 30s.


Qualitative Analysis:
-Dodge and haste increase when the player is struck.
-Haste increases by 5% when skill is activated.


Quantitative Analysis:
-Using the experimentally derived dodge rate as the control (see Elusive passive skill), skill boosted dodge rate was tested against Dark Draconian. An approximate dodge rate of 50% was expected. A dodge rate of 47.43% (exact) was observed. This result supports the original skill description.
-The cool-down time of the skill Shadow Blade was used to examine the haste increases of Thin Air. Time trials were conducted after player was hit a certain number of times. The expected difference between trial averages was 0.6 seconds (12*0.05). Observed average difference between trials was 0.6+/-0.3 seconds which supports the original skill description.


Revised Skill Description: Raises dodge by 3% and haste by 5% every time you are hit. Gain an additional 5% haste upon activating skill. Lasts 30s.


Formulas:(evasion)+3%*(hits taken)=skill boosted evasion
(haste)+5%*(hits taken +1)=skill boosted haste (maximum of 50%)


T/A Notes: This is a unique and dynamic skill. Since I trust what I can observe, I went with the base dodge rate that I derived from passive skill DMC tests instead of the one in my stat page. I calculated the expected dodge rate by seeing that the skill lasted long enough for one enemy to deal 14 hits. So I constructed the most likely result according the base dodge rate and original skill description. Eg. With a dodge rate of 0.308 (exact), it is most likely I would get hit. Next I added 0.03 to 0.308 and repeated the process to get 50% out of 14 hits as the most likely result. As for the haste component, I was surprised I was able to resolve a 5% difference so well (stop watch skills!). It was difficult to collect data for 5, 6, and 7 hits since a single enemy had trouble hitting that many times and using more than one enemy caused me to overshoot my target count often. So I just collected what I could and used it for qualitative analysis. At 7 hits, my haste would be expected to be 48.92% and the cap is 50% so we don’t see much of a difference at 8 hits (I doubt I could resolve a difference smaller than my uncertainty anyway). Anyway, data supports the skill description.


Data:
DMC Testing Post Passive Skills:


Dark Draconian Attacks on Player:
(154,58,65)/500 Dodge avg=0.308


DMC Data for Thin Air (Dark Draconian Attacking Player)


(332,82,111)/700 Dodge avg=0.474 Expected~0.50


Haste Data for Thin Air: (Using S.Blade Cooldown)


Uncertainties=+/-0.3 Base Haste=8.92 Base Cooldown:12 sec


No Skill: 11.38, 11.09, 11.06, 11.06, 11.16, 11.06, 11.10, 11.06, 11.00, 11.03 … avg=11.1
0 Hits: 10.41, 10.53, 10.53, 10.44, 10.35, 10.44, 10.50, 10.50, 10.43, 10.44 …… avg=10.5
1 Hits: 9.91, 9.87, 9.88, 9.87, 9.91, 9.88, 9.87, 9.35, 10.00, 9.82 …………………. avg=9.8
2 Hits: 9.25, 9.25, 9.25, 9.31, 9.32, 9.35, 9.31, 9.32, 9.31, 9.28 …………………… avg=9.3
3 Hits: 8.06, 8.60, 8.62, 8.69, 8.66, 8.63, 8.68, 8.69, 8.72, 8.66 …………………… avg=8.6
4 Hits: 8.19, 8.16, 8.06, 8.06, 8.06, 8.18, 8.10, 8.00, 8.03, 8.03 …………………… avg=8.1
6 Hits: 6.97, 7.00, 6.34, 6.40
7 Hits: 6.28, 6.15, 6.28, 6.37, 6.25, 6.31
8 Hits: 6.19, 6.19, 6.15, 6.28, 6.13, 6.15, 6.19, 6.09, 6.16, 6.16 …………………… avg=6.2
9 Hits: 6.16, 6.10, 6.18, 6.09, 6.09, 6.12, 6.12, 6.18, 6.16, 6.13 …………………… avg=6.1


Average difference between trials 0-4: 0.6+/-0.3


____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________


No Class:No01


Peasant Uprising:


Original Skill Description: Causes a hostile target’s damage to increase. Wait… what?


Qualitative Analysis:
-Skill initiates an attack dealing 90% normal weapon damage.
-Character stats do not affect the skill effect.
-Skill lasts 10 seconds


Quantitative Analysis:
-Data on the amount of damage dealt by the Red Dragon was collected. 100 samples were collected with no skill effect and 100 samples were collected with the skill effect active on the opponent. Differences in the highest, lowest, and median values were compared. This revealed a 10+/-2% difference.
-Over ten time trials, the skill effected lasted


Revised Skill Description: Deals 90% weapon damage and causes a hostile target’s damage to increase by 10% for 10 seconds. Wait… what?


Formula: (next atk)*0.9=skill dmg on enemy
(enemy dmg)*1.1=skill dmg caused by enemy


T/A Notes: A unique skill that didn’t require any unique testing. I did a hi-low comparison as I did for Event Horizon (see the T/A Notes under Event Horizon for details). However, I could have also compared the averages and more or less gotten the same result. The data for damage received under the skill effect is split into two different attack powers. I suspected that attack power may affect the skill but the data disproves that idea.


Data:


No skill, No Class vs. Red Dragon


93,93,81,196,99,91,170,83,87,90,
93,94,82,86,82,85,87,83,87,86,
88,81,186,85,81,93,168,87,97,98,
95,96,86,86,178,85,94,81,84,88,
98,93,196,88,96,90,91,96,82,196,
94,88,170,89,188,82,182,98,196,98,
93,84,88,184,94,92,95,98,84,190,
164,92,178,94,93,82,97,97,86,182,
99,89,90,92,93,98,194,94,85,82,
184,83,98,99,89,97,83,97,92,196


Avg w/ Crit=108+/-1
Avg w/o Crit=90+/-1 (81 data points)
Hi=99
Low=81
Median=90


Peasant Uprising vs. Red Dragon ATP=322


100,96,108,105,95,102,98,100,94,107
96,89,105,92,101,102,100,99,106,103,
189,101,209,178,101,106,105,108,97,106,
190,97,106,103,183,194,94,187,95,105,
209,100,95,109,105,92,98,95,94,198,


Peasant Uprising vs. Red Dragon ATP=148


99,108,100,103,106,100,102,103,90,106,
94,99,97,96,96,106,98,102,107,100,
103,92,109,89,106,107,97,216,97,102,
180,100,96,105,91,106,198,94,106,108,
103,98,92,207,108,108,98,99,102,205,


Avg w/ Crit=114+/-1
Avg w/o Crit=100+/-1 (86 data points)
Hi=109
Low=89
Median=99


Skill Damage Data:


ATK/Crit………..Uprising/Crit
82/146………….74/132
88/158………….80/143
91/161………….82/147
100/177………..90/161
108/181………..98/165


Uprising Time Trials


10.09, 10.47, 11.12, 11.06, 11.25, 10.81, 11.00, 11.06, 10.25, 10.66


____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________


Pirate/Rogue:p/r01


Viper’s Kiss:


Original Skill Description: Instantly causes 50% weapon damage, and applies a poison dealing additional damage over 10s.


Qualitative Analysis:
-Poison damage is delivered over five intervals with total damage being 175% of average, initial skill damage.
-Skill damage is 2/3 of average weapon damage.
-Skill damage range varies with weapon damage range.
-Critical hits are simply calculated by applying the critical hit modifier to normal skill damage.


Revised Skill Description: Instantly causes 66% weapon damage, and applies a poison dealing 175% additional, average damage over 10s.


Formula: (next atk)*2/3=skill dmg
(avg skill dmg)*1.75/5+rounding=poison interval


T/A Notes: I thought I could get away with just qualitative observations with this one and I think I did. All the results are nice and simple with “nice” numbers. Not really interested in examining this one any further.


Data:


Pirate Multi Skill Data Table


Opportunity Strike:


Original Skill Description: Deals damage based on how much time is left on your application of Viper’s Kiss (less time means higher damage).


Qualitative Analysis:
-Skill damage is 4/3 of attack damage (Without Viper’s Kiss)
-Critical hits are simply calculated by applying the critical hit modifier to normal skill damage.


Quantitative Analysis:
-Data was collected by rapidly activating the skill after using a successful Viper’s Kiss. Data relevant to damage done and time intervals of the skill were recorded. 150 damage done data at three time intervals as well as the skill cool-down time and global cool-down time was recorded (to determine time intervals between skill uses). A graph of damage vs. time had a slope of 32.5 damage per second. Recalculated, this value is 0.25 of skill damage (without Viper’s Kiss) per second. The line of best fit passes through the origin indicating the skill would do 0 damage if activated 0 seconds after Viper’s Kiss (which is currently impossible to do).


Revised Skill Description: Deals 133% weapon damage. Otherwise, deals 0.25 times this damage per second elapsed of Viper’s Kiss. (At ten seconds, deals 2.5 skill damage or 333% weapon damage)


Formula: (next atk)*4/3=skill dmg
(skill dmg)*0.25*(secs of Viper’s Kiss elapsed)=skill interaction dmg


T/A Notes: Sure the graph only has three data points. However, a junk load of data was used to construct those three data points and I have no doubt about their accuracy. I am confident that the amount of data collected resolved any uncertainty. Though, the uncertainty was only partially understood; there was a large variance between damages within the first, second, and third intervals but a number could not reasonably be assigned to represent the variance. *scratches head*. Whatever. The results being as parsimonious as they are leads me to believe I did something right. I used critical hits in this analysis because I was simply doing too many to use only normal attacks. Critical hits were divided by the critical hit modifier (210/98) and included in calculations.


Data:


Op Strike vs. Time
Op Strike vs. Time Unedited


Pirate Multi Skill Data Table


Opportunity Strike Damage Data Table (“c” indicates a critical hit) 98/210 Atk/Crit


Time Trials:
Op Strike Cooldown: 3.62, 3.53, 3.60, 3.59, 3.57, 3.60, 3.62, 3.56, 3.62, 3.62, 3.62, 3.59, 3.60, 3.66, 3.69, 3.66, 3.66, 3.59, 3.57, 3.53, 3.56, 3.50, 3.68, 3.63, 3.50, 3.66, 3.58, 3.65, 3.60, 3.56
avg=3.6+/-0.3


Global Cooldown: 1.34, 1.34, 1.38, 1.25, 1.25, 1.34, 1.25, 1.38, 1.39, 1.25 1.31, 1.25, 1.38, 1.34, 1.22, 1.25, 1.28, 1.28, 1.22, 1.35, 1.34, 1.25, 1.28, 1.32, 1.37, 1.28, 1.32, 1.38, 1.28, 1.31 1.35, 1.25, 1.28, 1.25, 1.38, 1.31, 1.31, 1.32, 1.28, 1.22 1.35, 1.38, 1.28, 1.38, 1.31, 1.34, 1.34, 1.25, 1.34, 1.32
avg=1.3+/-0.3




Stiletto:


Original Skill Description: Deals moderate damage, and applies Concealed Blade, causing your attacks to do more damage the lower you’re targets’ HP are (if below 40%) for 20 seconds.


Qualitative Analysis:
-Skill takes no effect when enemy HP is above 40%.
-Skill does an initial 16/15 of attack damage.
-Critical hits are simply calculated by applying the critical hit modifier to normal skill damage.


Quantitative Analysis:
-32 data points of skill damage at specific enemy health values were collected (from Undead Berserker). A graph of additional skill damage over weapon damage vs. fraction of enemy health left was drawn. Slope analysis shows a -7.5 relationship between x and y axis. Recalculated, this value is equivalent to a slope of weapon damage per ten percent of enemy health on a graph of skill damage vs. fraction of enemy health.


Revised Skill Description: Deals 16/15 damage, and applies Concealed Blade, causing your attacks to do 100% more damage per 10% enemy health reduced if enemy health is below 40% (at 0% HP, skill deals 4 times weapon damage) for 20 seconds.


Formula: (next atk)*16/15=initial skill damage
-((fraction enemy HP remaining)*-7.5+4)*(next atk)=skill damage (for when enemy has <40% health)


T/A Notes: I bet most people will have to read the quantitative analysis a couple of times before they get what it means. For some reason, I designed the graph weird. I took the additional damage the skill gave my attacks and divided it by my normal weapon damage to get my Y-axis. What I should have done is just plotted skill damage vs. enemy health but the graph I made is equivalent to this. What all this pseudo-science bunk means is that you gain 100% of your weapon damage each time you reduce the enemy’s health by 10% or 10% of your weapon damage per 1% enemy health. I was pleasantly surprised to see all of my data points lying on the line of best fit. Actually, the line was drawn by the software which only knows how to connect dots (it doesn’t know how to draw a line of best fit). That’s like a kindergartner who only knows how to say the number “11” answering “what’s the square root of 121?”. Lucky punk, haha. Oh, I also made another graph with a different average weapon damage for kicks. This one has an anomaly in it but it generally mimics the first. I used critical hits for the same reason stated for Opportunity Strike.


Data:


Stiletto vs. Fraction Enemy Health (atk=98)
Stiletto vs. Fraction Enemy Health (atk=54)


Pirate Multi Skill Data Table


Stiletto: 98/210 Atk/Crit ,104 Initial Hit, Enemy Total Health=3811 (Berserker), (enemy health – player atk), “c” indicates critical hit


1535-104, 1431-116, 1315-138, 1177-354c, 823-233, 590-278, 312-332, 1432-116, 1316-138, 1178-165, 1013-421c, 592-595c 1450-241, 1209-159, 1050-189, 861-226, 635-578c, 57-381 1325-292c, 1033-193, 840-493c, 347-325, 22-388 1298-304c, 994-200, 794-512c, 282-338 1453-112, 1341-133, 1208-159, 1049-190, 859-226, 633-578c, 55-381c


Footwork:


Original Skill Description: Increases haste and chance to dodge by 30% for 15s.


Qualitative Analysis:
-Skill increases the rate at which skills cool-down (decreases skill cool-down times)
-Upon activation, Footwork sets all skills in the process of cooling down to a point equivalent to if the skills had cooled down to the new haste value. Eg. A skill is at 10 secs of a 60 sec cool-down. Activating Footwork sets the skill to 20 secs of a 30 sec cool-down. However, once the skill deactivates, this bonus is revoked and skills are reset to their original cool-down points.


Quantitative Analysis:
-Through observation of dodges over 500 enemy attacks (from Undead Berserker) an effective dodge rate of 0.408 was seen before the use of Footwork. Repeating the test for when the skill was active produced an effective dodge rate of 0.694. This supports the original skill description.
-Trials were conducted for different haste values with and without skill use. Each trial consisted of over 100 data points regarding player attack speed. Skill use was assumed to add 30% haste and attack rates under skill influence were paired with appropriate haste values. Assuming haste values affecting attack rate is the same when the skill is used, a graph of the average attack speed vs haste should be linear (and unbroken) with the data collected. The graph supports the original skill description.


Revised Skill Description: Same as original


Formulas:(haste)+30%=skill boosted haste
(evasion)+30%=skill boosted evasion


T/A Notes: Again, excellent graphs were produced with the data obtained. I couldn’t be happier with the results. For the qualitative statements, it’s best to just play the game and observe what I observed rather than to make sense of what I wrote. It was like trying to describe a turtle trying to right itself after flipping over on some gum, you have to see it for yourself. I’ll stop talking now. No, actually I have more to say. Due to the skill taking back the bonus to skill cool-down, I had to rely on attack rate to test the haste component. The reason why a linear graph supports the description is that I plotted points that would be expected if the skill indeed added 30 units of haste. Since a line passes through both the expected and known points, it supports the skill description. It is interesting to note that if you have below 8% haste, your attack speed may be greater than 1.5 seconds.


Data:


Atk Speed vs. Haste
Atk Speed vs. Haste Unedited


Footwork:


Haste Component (attacks/secs): Represented by above graphs


Haste=13.88
34/47.41, 28/39.59, 33/46.13, 33/46.69, 37/52.12
avg=0.7113+/-0.3 atk/sec (1.4058+/-0.3 sec/atk)


Haste=13.88+Skill
15/15.22, 16/15.09, 15/15.37, 16/15.49, 15/14.87, 16/15.56, 16/15.56, 16/15.35, 15/15.00, 16/15.47
avg=1.0196+/-0.3 atk/sec (0.9807+/-0.3sec/atk)


Haste=19.13
36/48.88, 33/43.06, 28/36.82, 31/40.68, 31/41.21,
avg=0.1739+/-0.3 atk/sec (1.3261+/-0.3 sec/atk)


Haste=19.13+Skill
17/15.13, 16/15.03, 17/15.65, 17/15.25, 16/15.21, 18/15.72, 16/15.09, 17/15.43, 18/15.50, 17/15.63
avg=1.0997+/-0.3 atk/sec (0.9093+/-0.3 sec/atk)


Haste=8.00
23/34.53, 22/32.88, 21/31.44, 21/30.94, 26/38.69, 25/37.00, 21/31.31
avg=1.4909+/-0.3 sec/atk


Haste=8.00+Skill
14/14.60, 14/14.50, 14/14.56, 14/15.31, 14/15.25, 14/14.84, 14/15.92, 14/14.91, 14/14.56, 14/15.25
avg=1.0693+/-0.3 sec/atk


Dodge Component:


Baseline – Evasion=19.60+Passive Skill
(204, 42, 71)/500 (Dodge, Miss, Critical)/Enemy attacks
Effective Evasion=0.408


Skill – Evasion=19.60+Passive Skill+Footwork
(347, 50, 88)/500 (Dodge, Miss, Critical)/Enemy attacks
Effective Evasion=0.694
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________


Ranger:ran01


Special T/A Note: Unfortunately, the level cap has not been raised and so I couldn’t gather data for multiple levels. As such, you’ll find my quantitative data relatively lacking this time around. Good news is Ranger was a very accommodating skill set to test without such data.


Marked for Death:


Original Skill Description: Deals light damage and applies Death Mark to your foe. Death Mark can stack up to 5 times unless consumed by a skill or allowed to fade, and reduces foe’s damage up to 5% until consumed


Qualitative Analysis:
-Skill applies “+marks” on the player and “+death mark” on the enemy
-The buff “+marks” mulitplies the damage/effects of the other three Ranger skills thus if the player switches targets, all boosts gained will be applied to the new target
-Skill damage is 15% of average weapon damage
-Skill damage does not vary with weapon damage range


Quantitative Analysis:
-100 samples each of damaged received by the Red Dragon were collected while under the effect of 1 and 5 use(s) of the skill. Without criticals, the averages of each test were 91+/-1 and 90+/-1. Damage without skill effect averaged 90+/-1


Revised Skill Description: Deals 15% of average weapon damage, applies Marks to you, and applies Death Mark to your foe. Death Mark/Marks can stack up to 5 times unless consumed by a skill or allowed to fade.


Formula: (avg wpn dmg)*0.15=skill dmg


T/A Notes: Given that Marks it the effect that actually boosts the other skills, Death Marks doesn’t do anything as my data does not support that the damage mitigation effect is present. I figured since the max stack was 5 and the description said up to 5% damage reduction, I looked at if there was a difference if I used 1 or 5 death marks. No effect for either. On that note, the first use of this skill does nothing other than some damage. You need to shoot at least twice to see any effect for the other skills.


Data:


Ranger Data


Red Dragon Damage with 1 Death Mark (ATP=211, wpn lvl 0)


84,92,188,98,82,88,94,99,93,168,85,
84,168,84,87,85,98,97,192,83,82,
98,89,81,180,190,88,178,166,86,99,
98,93,85,97,162,84,93,164,99,93,
86,98,97,99,96,90,88,92,98,192,
93,97,88,88,88,85,190,97,84,194,
93,83,93,88,92,85,88,95,87,88,
85,84,97,83,95,83,176,182,82,190,
89,194,85,96,95,87,178,98,90,82,
94,84,85,95,88,88,92,95,84,98


Hi=99
Low=81
Median=90
Average=91+/-1 (84 data points)


Red Dragon Damage with 5 Death Marks (ATP=211, wpn lvl 0)


87,93,164,95,85,91,95,166,85,178,
83,196,99,98,194,85,91,89,188,91,
94,98,194,168,91,198,94,196,93,194,
92,84,82,88,88,90,87,93,86,87,
86,87,86,86,85,85,87,86,194,88,
98,84,92,192,172,99,82,81,82,94,
92,190,96,96,98,96,93,92,86,174,
83,81,87,91,92,85,85,84,168,93,
86,81,180,82,92,92,95,95,97,176,
84,172,184,89,98,92,170,90,93,90,


Hi=99
Low=81
Median=90
Average=90+/-1 (78 data points)


Scorching Arrow:


Original Skill Description: Launches a flaming arrow at your enemy, dealing moderate damage, also burning them with a fire Damage over Time (DoT). Fire damage over time can be increased by Death Mark.


Qualitative Analysis:
-Marked for Death multiplies the skills’ DoT by the number of stacks of “+marks” on the player
-Initial skill damage is 60% of average weapon damage
-Initial skill damage does not vary with weapon damage range
-Total DoT damage is 1.75 times average weapon damage
-DoT is delivered to the enemy five times


Revised Skill Description: Launches a flaming arrow at your enemy, dealing 60% average weapon damage, also burning them with a fire Damage over Time (DoT) for 175% average weapon damage. Fire damage over time can be multiplied by a number equal to Marks stacked on player.


Formula: (avg wpn dmg)*0.6*(# of Marks stacked on player)=initial skill dmg
(avg wpn dmg)*1.75*(# of Marks stacked on player)= total DoT
(avg wpn dmg)*1.75/5*(# of Marks stacked on player)=dmg per delivery of DoT




T/A Notes: Since the skill effects depend on weapon damage, they also indirectly depend on weapon level. As I previously described, the weapon level adds an additional (and mostly unknown) bonus to damage on top of your strength stat.


Data:


Ranger Data


Explosive Bolt


Original Skill Description: This arrow has an explosive tip which explodes on impact, dealing high damage. Nearby foes can also be caught in the explosion for minor damage. Damage increased by Death Mark.


Qualitative Analysis:
-Damage to primary target is equal to average weapon damage
-Damage to secondary targets is 75% of average weapon damage
-Skill damage to primary target is multiplied by the number of “+marks” stacks on the player
-Skill does not vary with weapon damage range
-Damage multiplied a number equal to the Marks stacked on player


Revised Skill Description: This arrow has an explosive tip which explodes on impact, dealing average weapon damage. Nearby foes can also be caught in the explosion for 75% damage. Damage to targeted enemy multiplied by a number equal to Marks stacked on player.


Formula: (avg wpn dmg)*(# of Marks stacked on player)=primary skill dmg
(avg wpn dmg)*0.75=secondary skill dmg or AoE


T/A Notes: Not much more to describe. Straightforward.


Data:


Ranger Data


Vampiric Shot


Original Skill Description: You fire a magic arrow inscribed with runes at your target, dealing moderate damage to them but also applying a HoT effect to yourself. Both damage and Heal Over Time effects are increased by Death Mark.


Qualitative Analysis:
-Both damage and HoT are multiplied by the number of “+marks” stacks on the player
-Total HoT is 4.5 times average weapon damage
-HoT delivered over five times
-Skill damage is half average weapon damage
-Skill damage does not vary with weapon damage range


Revised Skill Description: You fire a magic arrow inscribed with runes at your target, dealing 50% average weapon damage to them but also applying a HoT effect to yourself healing a total of 450% of your average weapon damage. Both damage and Heal Over Time effects are multiplied by a number equal to the Marks stacked on the player.


Formula: (avg wpn dmg)*0.5*(# of Marks stacked on player)=skill dmg
(avg wpn dmg)*4.5*(# of Marks stacked on players)=total HoT
(avg wpn dmg)*4.5/5*(# of Marks stacked on players)=HP per HoT delivery


T/A Notes: I highly suspected the healing factor depended on stats directly but the data suggests it is more dependent on weapon damage. As my special note above said, the skill set was very nice to me in that I didn’t very much need the quantitative data I was planning on getting.


Data:


Ranger Data
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________


Shamansham01


Special T/A Notes: For this skill set, I advise you to read Elemental Embrace first as it affects all other skills. Also, I will be referring to “hit order” in my analysis of Elemental Embrace. It simply means the order any skill is cast (1st, 2nd, 3rd, etc) under Elemental Embrace with the first hit being any regular skill used against an enemy without Elemental Embrace. The second hit would be right after using Elemental Embrace and so on. It may help you to understand if you look at the graphs for the skill. I would like you to know that I tested Shaman during a period of rapid change. Namely, enhancements and stats were being modified by the moderating team. Thus, some of my data is not repeatable due to these changes. However, that should not have grossly changed how the skills worked. Stats are the input, skills are the machinery, and skill effects are the output. It doesn’t matter what is inputted or what is put out, what I am trying to do is understand the machinery and clear up the mystery of any black boxes.


Multi-Skill Analysis: Ancestor’s Flame and Hydrophobia


Original Skill Descriptions:


Ancestor’s Flame: Deals moderate damage to up to three targets, and applies Scorched Spirit. Damage increased by Elemental Embrace.


Hydrophobia: Deals moderate damage to up to three targets. Any damage caused to targets affected by Scorched Spirit will heal the shaman for a portion of the damage dealt. Healing increased by Elemental Embrace.


Qualitative Analysis:
-Both skills do the same damage when no skill interactions are present.
-Both skills receive a weapon level bonus to damage.
-Both skills strike up to three targets.


-Ancestor’s Flame deals progressively more damage with Elemental Embrace. Specifically, it deals 10% more of it’s regular damage for every spell cast under Elemental Embrace.


-Hydrophobia deals double damage when Scorched Spirit is placed on an enemy.
-Hydrophobia healing will succeed if Scorched Spirit is placed on the target(s). The skill does not need to deal any damage for healing to occur (dodges and misses on a target with Scorched Spirit will yield healing)
-Hydrophobia healing is approximately 12% of non-critical damage dealt with skill.
-Hydrophobia healing does not change if a critical hit is dealt with the skill.
-Hydrophobia healing is multiplied for every enemy afflicted with Scorched Spirit the skill is cast on; healing is twice as powerful when two enemies are hit and three times as powerful when three enemies are hit.
-Hydrophobia skill damage does not increase with Elemental Embrace.
-Under the effect of Elemental Embrace, the first opportunity to heal with Hydrophobia corresponds to the fourth hit in the hit order of Elemental Embrace. This first healing opportunity under Elemental Embrace is 2/3 more than regular healing. Subsequent healing opportunities heal for 10% more than the first healing opportunity for every hit in the hit order of Elemental Embrace (in other words, for every spell cast on the target, healing is increased by 10% of 5/3*normal healing).


Quantitative Analysis:
-A graph of skill damage vs. spell power revealed a relationship of 0.20 points of skill damage per point of spell power. It is assumed this graph is representative of both skills. Graph was standardized to the level 4 Wooden Hammer.


Formulas:
-0.20*SP+(wpn lvl bonus)+(correction factor)=aflame/hydro skill dmg
-(aflame/hydro dmg)*(1+0.1*(hit order-1))=aflame damage under elemental embrace


-(aflame/hydro skill damage)*2=hydro dmg post scorched spirit
-(hydro dmg post scorched spirit)*0.12=hydro healing
-(hydro healing)*2/3*(1+0.1*(hit order-4)=hydro healing under elemental embrace


Revised Skill Descriptions:


Ancestor’s Flame: Deals 0.20 damage per unit of spell power plus weapon level bonus to up to three targets, and applies Scorched Spirit. Damage increased by Elemental Embrace by 10% of normal skill damage for every spell cast on the target (except for subsequent Elemental Embrace attacks after the first Elemental Embrace).


Hydrophobia: Deals 0.20 damage per unit of spell power plus weapon level bonus to up to three targets. Deals double damage to any targets afflicted by Scorched Spirit. Any casting attempt against targets affected by Scorched Spirit will heal the shaman for 12% of non-critical damage dealt. Healing increased by Elemental Embrace by 2/3. Subsequent healing under Elemental Embrace is increased by 10% of this value for every spell, except for Elemental Embrace, cast on the target.


T/A Notes: Heh, these would be rather bland skills to test if it weren’t for Elemental Embrace. Without that last skill, these would be about the same as Mage skills. I wanted to have the 10% thing as a quantitative observation but I didn’t have the data. It took me quite some time just to get enough data to make the qualitative assertion so I’m quite satisfied with leaving as it is for now. For the skill damage vs. spell power data, I took data from when my character was at level 30 and 35 with varying enhancements. I find it odd that the slopes from each level are slightly off. It could be that during the time I was leveling up, something about the game system changed. For now, I went with the slope of the latest data (lvl 35) but really, the slopes are very similar so I don’t think it is of major concern. Also of note is that the graphs of skill damage vs. spell power for all skills have the same general pattern of data point placement. It prompts me to think there is a master graph that the staff use when designing spells. That is, they use the same graph but displace it and skew the slope to make the relationships for all spell-type skills. Hmm, it may be that I have already seen this master graph (if it exists) while testing a skill but I can’t be sure. Very interesting.


Data:


Skill Damage varying with Weapon Level
Shaman Qualitative Data
Hydrophobia Healing


Ancetor’s Flame/Hydrophobia Damage vs. Spell Power
Shaman Skill Damages vs. Spell Power (as represented in graphs)


See Elemental Embrace for skill interaction data


Dry Lightning:


Original Skill Description: Deals heavy damage to the target. Damage increased by Elemental Embrace.


Qualitative Analysis:
-Skill damage range varies with weapon damage range. Weapons with fixed damage results in the skill dealing fixed damage while weapons with large damage ranges results in the skill dealing large damage ranges.
-Skill damage increases with increasing weapon level.
-Damage dealt under Elemental Embrace is directly related to the hit order of Elemental Embrace. 10% of the normal skill damage is added for every spell cast under Elemental Embrace.


Quantitative Analysis:
-Skill damage dealt at various spell powers was graphed. Slope analysis reveals that 1.20 damage points is added for every unit of spell power added.


Formulas:


-1.2*SP+(wpn lvl bonus)+(correction factor)=skill dmg
-(skill dmg)*(1+0.1*(hit order-1))=skill dmg under Elemental Embrace


Revised Skill Description: Deals 1.2 damage per unit of spell power plus weapon level bonus to the target. Damage increased by Elemental Embrace; 10% of normal skill damage is added for every spell cast except for subsequent Elemental Embrace spells after the first casting of Elemental Embrace.


T/A Notes: I was once asked to describe this skill prior to my testing project. I responded, “it just does a lot of damage,” and that is how I still describe it. The original skill description’s simplicity suited the simplicity of the skill and I, for the first time, felt bad for making the revised skill description so complicated. Weapon level data is lacking since the skill doesn’t do fixed damage so the trick with un-enhanced weapons doesn’t work as well. Again, I went with the level 35 data for the quantitative analysis.


Data:


Dry Lightning Damage Varying with Weapon Level
Shaman Qualitative Data


Dry Lightning Damage vs. Spell Power
Shaman Skill Damages vs. Spell Power (as represented in graphs)


See Elemental Embrace for skill interaction data


Multi-Skill Analysis: Elemental Embrace and All Others


Original Skill Description: Deals light damage to target and applies Elemental Embrace, negating all target Evasion and Critical Strike chance. This effect also makes the Shaman’s spells more powerful, and gets stronger the more spells the Shaman casts against the target.


Qualitative Analysis:
-Skill lasts one minute.
-Skill damage increases with increasing weapon level.
-Player can still miss an attack with the skill effect active.
-Currently, there is no observed limit to the hit order of the skill. That is, there is no foreseen limit this skill can increase the effect of all other skills.
-Skill does not affect itself; skill damage does not increase under it’s own skill effect.
-Initially casting the skill will advance the hit order by one. In other words, all other skill effects will increase in magnitude after using Elemental Embrace. However, subsequent casting of the skill will not advance the hit order.
-Skill effect can be prolonged/continued by casting the spell again before the effect fades. Hit order is not reset if skill effect is successfully prolonged/continued.
-Skill effect fortification, on all other skills, depends on the current hit order. Each spell increases the damage/healing of any of the other skills. Each hit in the hit order adds 10% of a certain respective value of all other skills. See other skills for details.
-Spells that miss or are avoided by the target still advance the hit order and increase the effect of the next spell.


Quantitative Analysis:
-A graph of skill damage vs. spell power was made. The slope of the resulting line revealed that 0.16 points of damage is gained for every spell point gained. Graph was standardized to the level 4 Wooden Hammer.
-No enemy dodges or critical hits dealt by the enemy were observed in over 200 attacks (both from the player and the enemy)


Formula:
(SP)*0.16+(wpn lvl bonus)+(correction factor)=skill dmg


Revised Skill Description: Deals 0.16 damage per unit of spell power plus weapon level bonus to target and applies Elemental Embrace. This effect also makes the Shaman’s spells more powerful, and gets stronger the more spells the Shaman casts against the target.


T/A Notes: Wow. A very fun skill to analyze. No other skill in this guide prompted me to make three graphs about it’s effects. The hit order thing is just my way of communicating how the skill increases the effect of other skills. Take a look a the Damage vs. Hit Order graphs in the data. It displays the damage/healing done by the other skills with respect to the hit order. Number on the hit order axis is the skill without Elemental Embrace. Number two on the x-axis is the skill damage/healing done right after casting Elemental Embrace on the target. Number three is the skill damage/healing done after the second and so on and so forth. The skill was so entertaining to analyze, I used Excel to really get the most out of analyzing it. I usually prefer to use a simpler graphing software because then I could really enjoy figuring out a skill myself and not let a computer do all the work. The time trails concern me somewhat as I was forced to take half of the data in another testing session. As you can see the data is consistently different from the first half being just under 1 min. while the first five data points are just above 1 min. I blame micro-lag as I did not detect any lag when testing, or it could be that I was hyped on coffee when I did it the second time.


Data:


Elemental Embrace Damage vs. Spell Power
Shaman Skill Damages vs. Spell Power (as represented in graphs)


Damage vs. Hit Order SP=110
Damage vs. Hit Order SP=190
Damage vs. Hit Order SP=250
Damage vs Hit Order and Time Trails Raw Data




____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________


Warrior:war01


Multi Skill Analysis: Decisive Strike, Imbalancing Strike, and Prepared Strike


Original Skill Descriptions:


Decisive Strike: A powerful strike dealing 150% weapon damage.


Imbalancing Strike: A precise blow which stuns your opponent for 4 seconds.


Prepared Strike: Your next two auto attacks taken within 5 seconds will be powerful critical hits which cannot be avoided.


Qualitative Analysis:
-All three skills work as described.
-Imbalancing Strike deals 40% of average attack damage.
-Prepared Strike’s critical hits do 15% more damage than regular critical hits.
-All three skills vary with weapon damage.


Quantitative Analysis:
-Of 200 attacks attempted with Prepared Strikes, all 200 were confirmed to have hit.


Revised Skill Descriptions:


Decisive Strike: Same as original


Imbalancing Strike: A precise blow which deals 40% of weapon damage and stuns your opponent for 4 seconds.


Prepared Strike: Your next two auto attacks taken within 5 seconds will be 15% more powerful critical hits which cannot be avoided.


Formulas:
-(next atk)*1.5=decisive strike dmg
-(next atk)*0.4=imbal strike dmg
-(next atk)*(critical modifier)*1.15=prep strike dmg


T/A Notes: It was happy testing with these skills. I learned novel aspects of the skills with little hindrance. Decisive Strike was kinda boring though.


Data:


Warrior Multi Skill Data Table


On Guard:


Original Skill Description: Challenge your opponent, dealing 75% normal damage, and taking 50% damage from all sources for 10 seconds.


Qualitative Analysis:
-The attack done by activating the skill does 75% damage. Otherwise, player damage output for normal attacks is at 100%.
-Skill damage varies with weapon damage


Quantitative Analysis:
-100 data in the form of damage received from Red Dragon with the skill active were recorded. The average of the 76 non-critical hits is 36+/-1. Comparing to the baseline data for Red Dragon vs. rank 10 Warrior reveals that the skill had reduced damage by 56+/-2%.


Revised Skill Description: Challenge your opponent, dealing an extra attack for 75% weapon damage, and taking 45% damage from all sources for 10 seconds.


Formulas:
-(next atk)*0.75=skill dmg
-(next enemy atk)*0.45=mitigated enemy dmg


T/A Notes: I was surprised and suspicious of the results. However, checking over my work, everything should be as it should be.


Data:
On Guard vs. Red Dragon:


36,37,67,35,36,65,65,34,30,78
35,36,39,37,37,39,33,38,37,33
36,72,39,37,35,37,73,35,37,34
38,39,72,33,34,68,34,38,34,37
78,33,38,34,34,36,37,65,34,35
74,33,70,36,38,36,74,31,68,39
35,38,34,66,67,68,66,36,39,34
78,40,40,40,33,35,38,36,31,76
36,40,33,33,34,73,72,35,65,33
31,32,66,38,33,36,34,73,39,37,


Avg w/ Crit=44+/-1
Avg w/o Crit=36+/-1 (76 data points)
Hi=40
Low=33
Median=36.5
Damage reduction=0.56+/-0.02


____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

pass01

Several passive skills are redundant, in more than one way. So to reduce repetition, I put them in their own section. The general trend of passive skills is that they either work perfectly or don’t, so I used a different set-up. They are listed alphabetically.






Aggression: You deal 10% additional damage with physical attacks.


T/A Notes: Very easily tested with a fixed weapon. The damage range in the stats page is the damage you would see over enemies if you didn’t have this passive skill. With it, the damage you see done to enemies is 10% higher than the one in the stats page. Thus, it works.


Ancestral Teachings: Intellect increased 15%


T/A Notes: I do not see any noticeable changes upon gaining rank 4.


Elusive: Dodge chance increased by 15%


T/A Notes: I tested this one with Ninja class. Effective dodge rate after skill gain was indeed approximately 15%.


Data:
DMC Stats (numbers in stat page constant for all tests)


Crit=14.80% Evasion=13.08%


DMC Testing Prior to Passive Skills:


Player Attacks on Dark Draconian:
(82,52,154)/810 Crit avg=0.190


Dark Draconian Attacks on Player:
(91,54,84)/500 Dodge avg=0.182




DMC Testing Post Passive Skills:


Player Attacks on Dark Draconian:
(47,15,178)/500 Crit avg=0.356


Dark Draconian Attacks on Player:
(154,58,65)/500 Dodge avg=0.308


Notice something off? It’s because it is currently impossible for me to isolate variables for testing; I cannot change just the rates of dodges, misses, and critical hits. Moreover, it seems as if dodges, misses, and critical hits have some sort of interaction and may have caused the dodge rate to be slightly off. I was lucky that it only affected me this one time.
Considering how the other passive skills either work or don’t, I believe the data supports the idea that the skill works more than the idea that it doesn’t.


Hot Headed: Magic damage increased by 10%


T/A Notes: It seems similar to Pure Hearted both in skill description and in failure to give the desired effect. Qualitatively, I saw no change in spell damages for given spell powers after rank 4.


Incisive: Critical chance increased by 15%


T/A Notes: Same as elusive.


Data: See Elusive data.


Primal Fury:Crit chance increased by 8%


T/A Notes: Data shows an increase is critical rate which supports the idea the skill works. Seems to add a bit more than 8% though…


Data:


Prior to Passive Skills (stat critical hit rate=6.8)
(44,43,57)/500 crit avg=0.114


Post Passive Skills (stat critical hit rate=6.8)
(48,29,129)/500 crit avg=0.258


Pure Hearted: Increases healing by 10%


T/A Notes: It doesn’t work. All of my heals for a given spell power were the same upon gaining rank 4.


Ranger Secrets: Increases Dex by 15%


T/A Notes: No observed effect.


Resolute, Chilled Out, and Grounded: Damage taken reduced by 10%


T/A Notes: It’s good! Average damage of 90+/-1 (against Red Dragon) was reduced to 81+/-1 after gaining the skill. I assume these skills are just renames of the same skill. Qualitatively, I also observe them to be the same.


Data:
Alhiet vs. Dragon (prior to rank 4)


90,90,85,93,166,87,87,96,97,98
89,182,85,95,95,89,94,166,97,88
190,89,92,168,83,170,92,90,88,83
85,95,162,97,81,196,176,92,82,96
89,82,91,184,92,93,196,88,90,186
84,184,93,94,194,166,83,186,176,89
94,98,97,87,93,93,93,96,192,90
85,90,91,88,83,90,96,90,82,96
81,94,166,82,174,98,86,96,93,81
89,96,190,182,184,184,98,96,184,99


Avg w/ Crit=113+/-1
Avg w/o Crit=90+/-1 (75 data points)
Hi=99
Low=81
Median=90


No Skill, Rank 10 Warrior vs. Red Dragon:


85,76,87,77,78,169,82,83,84,87
144,82,84,83,78,167,75,77,75,80
80,87,83,82,76,87,74,82,77,82
171,84,84,80,77,80,74,86,164,175
76,86,79,86,176,78,79,79,80,79
74,77,83,81,166,77,79,80,84,82
80,86,167,85,83,157,73,85,79,80,
78,76,81,74,78,86,83,82,149,78
86,162,79,164,78,149,82,85,153,88
77,86,75,78,178,112,84,77,149,75


Avg w/ Crit=94+/-1
Avg w/o Crit=81+/-1 (82 data points)
Hi=89
Low=73
Median=81


Mage Rank 5 vs. Dragon:


169,84,83,74,82,155,162,87,88,75,84,84
86,77,86,76,89,73,87,151,85,80,175,78
160,76,85,85,89,164,77,74,167,151,75,157
77,155,173,81,74,78,79,76,144,167,77,76
86,82,77,77,160,151,76,84,81,158,75,82
88,160,88,131,77,79,87,176,87,77,160,80
76,78,79,158,153,77,83,83,146,79,87,175
77,84,75,149,151,84,151,79,162,166,86,81,
82,76,77,77


avg w/ critical hits=104+/-1
avg w/o critical hits=82+/-1 (79 data points)
Hi=89
Low=74
Median=81.5
If you’re looking at this and think something is slightly off, you’re right. Though, not so off that I’d revise everything but off enough that I’ve noted it.


Target Vitals: Crit chance increased by 8%


T/A Notes: It works. Similar to Incisive


Data:


DMC Testing Pre Rank 4: Critical=16.33
46,5,102/500 Crit avg=0.204


DMC Testing Post Rank 4: Critical= 16.33+skill
54,9,148/500 Crit avg=0.296


Quick Like Lightning: Your Haste is increased by 15%


T/A Notes: Everybody was Kung Fu fighting with this skill. Data says it works.


Data:
Quick Like Lightning: (using Arc Lightning Cool-down)


Time to cool-down (sec) Uncertainties=+/-0.3
9.56, 9.62, 9.66, 9.59, 9.50, 9.56, 9.53, 9.56, 9.50, 9.56 Haste=5.60 AVG=9.6
8.12, 8.09, 8.13, 8.12, 8.06, 8.09, 8.10, 8.09, 8.07, 8.03 Haste=5.60+Skill AVG=8.1
Expected=7.9 sec (8.1+/-0.3 within expected)

cred01

Major data contributors:


Mira 489 – Big thanks. She helped me with priority 3 (skill effects varying with stats) for every applicable skill. Basically, all the graphed data except for Rogue/Pirate Class.


A_hobo_ – Also helped me with some of the skills concerning priority 3. Also allowed me to test my testing (off-record) using the character stats he gave me.


Guide contributors:


Shump – Suggested the search codes.


coolboypai & dragonnightwolf – Got me to recycle excess space in the guide


coolboypai – Reminded me of the unstated limit.


BlueKatz – Corrected me on haste topic.


Leumas Dragonsword & Dragonnightwolf- For their awesome anti-typo abilities.


Indirect contributors:


Monsti – Her odd favour for the Ugly Stick reminded me that there were un-enhanced weapons with different weapon levels.


Dark! – His question in the AQW Q&A; reminded me about Mage mana regeneration on skills.


yabablaba – His question in the AQW Q&A; prompted me to retest Elemental Embrace after a recent skill fix by the staff.


On crediting this guide:


I don’t care. The information in this guide is my gift to the community and it is free-for-all to call their own. What you learn is yours.

Have a good one. Always.