|
|
I'm looking at rings with dam affix which is better?
|
|
|
avg damage = (min + max)/2
+20 min dam ===> (20 + 0)/2 = 10 avg +20 max mad = 10 avg 10-20 dam = 15 avg go with the 3rd one |
|
|
Min and Max damage are effectively the same in terms of average dps, so the better will always be the one with the most total damage. It's the same with OHs.
|
|
|
thanks guys
|
|
|
Its different in the sense that its displaying how many affixes you've used.
+10 minimum damage +22 maximum damage is two affixes 10-22 damage is one affix 44-90 damage is three affixes, it has merged your min-max roll with your min dam and max dam rolls. |
|
|
avg damage = (min + max)/2 +min damage is also + max damage, so the first line would be 20 min dam ===> (20+20)/2 = 20 avg
see above. Min damage is actually exactly twice as good as max damage
Edited by Vladis#1395 on 11/18/2012 3:19 PM PST
|
|
|
+min damage is also + max damage, so the first line would be no its not. for me right now i'm dealing 554-1405 damage. If i were to replace my nats ring with a ring that dealt +20 min damage I would be instead dealing 574-1405 damage. You don't just magically increase the top number. The reason people were getting more from min damage than max damage in 1.04 was because elemental damage was glitched to not consider max damage in the equation.
Edited by Shandlar#1961 on 11/18/2012 3:22 PM PST
|
|
|
is it just me, or do all of the math geeks play Wizard? lol
|
|
|
I'd prefer min dmg over max dmg if I had the choice given the same numbers. Increasing the min lessens the range of your damage increasing the consistency of causing higher dps when attacking. Theoretically, at least (I've done no testing).
|
|
|
yup the math geeks play wiz, thats y we keep overcomin the nerfs
|
|
|
+min damage is also + max damage, so the first line would be Actually you both are right. There are two Min dmg rolls: Damage_Min#Physical Damage_Bonus_Min#Physical The second one is just a pure plus to minimum dmg. The first one however, is a plus to both min and max. However, there is a second roll with it called: Damage_Delta#Physical In that case Min = Damage_Min#Physical and max = Damage_Min#Physical + Damage_Delta#Physical So that's why a higher min roll on the double affix rolls, means a higher base for your max on that. However, you could roll a terrible delta and it be 14-15. But he is right that in half the cases min is added to your max. |
|
|
^now your just going to confuse people lol. Those are two entirely different affixes.
You can roll... + 20 Minimum Damage or + 20 Maximum Damage Which apply half their value to your 'average damage' Or you can roll + 20-40 Damage (Physical) Which is in essence 60 Damage (+20 Minimum damage, +40 Maximum Damage) They are different affixes though, so '+minimum damage' wont half the time magically increase your maximum too. |
|
|
Well what i'm saying is that last roll, is actually
+20min/max +20max but yeah, according to the tooltip you are correct. |
|
|
The geeks play wizards The jocks play barbarians The goths play Demon Hunters The posers play monks And the creepy foreign exchange kids play witch doctors |
|
|
Its different in the sense that its displaying how many affixes you've used. huh? using my examples which is better?
Edited by Aimless#1700 on 11/18/2012 4:35 PM PST
|
|
|
lol and crack addicts play WD. |
|
|
You didn't list any examples.
|
|
|
^ D'oh
|
|
|
Trust the AH average damage search -- that's all I'm saying -- because of the min damage roll display bug.
|
Threats of violence. We take these seriously and will alert the proper authorities.
Posts containing personal information about other players. This includes physical addresses, e-mail addresses, phone numbers, and inappropriate photos and/or videos.
Harassing or discriminatory language. This will not be tolerated.