DMG and Atk

[Wise Donkey]

I know there are a few who frequent these forums that know formulas and theories for Damage, so here is my question:

How do DMG and Atk relate? Is a "23 DMG +5 Atk" weapon as good as a "28 DMG" weapon?

Thanks for any insight you can give.:thumbsup:

EDIT: Assume equal delay.

[Skoal]

I would say 28 dmg would win but I would like to know what job you are planning on using this with.

[Armando]

28 DMG beats 23 DMG +5 Attack in every conceivable situation if the Delay is the same. I'd explain why but I have to leave for class in 3 minutes.

[Wise Donkey]

I would say 28 dmg would win but I would like to know what job you are planning on using this with.

These are not references to actual weapons, just examples I pulled outta the air. I am just trying to understand DMG and Atk better.

Armando - Please explain when you get out of class. Or someone else with the knowledge.

[IfritnoItazura]

You can figure out all that yourself:

http://wiki.ffxiclopedia.org/Calculating_Physical_Damage

Weapon's Damage rating affects Base Damage (http://wiki.ffxiclopedia.org/Base_Damage), and Attack affects pDIF (http://wiki.ffxiclopedia.org/PDIF).

There a quite a few variables involved, but the actual math is about 8th grade level for U.S. students (or 6th grade for East Asians). Keep playing with them, and you should be able to see why Armando say what he did.

[Wise Donkey]

Thanks IfritnoItazura, I didn't think about checking the ffxiclopedia. :thumbsup:

[Wise Donkey]

Ok, I have been trying to figure something out, maybe to no avail, maybe someone can help me out here. Is there a way to figure out how much +Atk is equal to +1 Weapon DMG? Assuming as many constants as possible, can that be quantified? Thanks again!

[IfritnoItazura]

They are not equivalent; you can't convert from one to another.

[Toksyuryel]

DMG will affect the maximum potential damage you can do, while ATK will affect the CONSISTENCY with which you hit close to/at that damage. STR is also a big factor in the maximum potential damage figure. Basically your ATK is compared to their DEF to determine how often you'll hit your max damage or close to it, and your STR and DMG is compared to their VIT to determine what that max damage is (see the linked wiki article for the actual formulas)

[IfritnoItazura]

DMG will affect the maximum potential damage you can do, while ATK will affect the CONSISTENCY with which you hit close to/at that damage.

This is not a correct interpretation of the equation. -_-;

Both the damage rating and the attack contribute to actual damage, but each to a different term within the equation. Honestly, follow the link(s) I posted; it's all there.

[Sabaron]

This is quite a question. The answer is that it depends. I wrote a spreadsheet for it.

My damage calculator is attached as a ZIP file containing .ods (OpenOffice) and .xls (MSExcel) formats.

Disclaimer: I do not claim that my math is correct. Use at your own risk. Check me if you like; flame if you must.

It seems there was an error! I forgot to switch out the fixed numbers for a reference (jargon). Needless to say, the damage codes at the bottom of the sheet will be incorrect and if you downloaded a previous version (before this correction notice appeared) you will need to replace the number "38" in cells B39 and B49 with the reference "B2".

[Lmnop]

This is not a correct interpretation of the equation. -_-;
Both the damage rating and the attack contribute to actual damage, but each to a different term within the equation. Honestly, follow the link(s) I posted; it's all there.


He's not entirely wrong. More like a slice of the right. It's not the whole cake, but there's not really anything wrong with what he said. I.e. high attack will make your damage more consistent, but it also increases maximum damage. weapon DMG can be used to figure the maximum amount of damage you could possibly attain, but it's not gonna happen on exp mobs. Errr.. I'm not so sure on the str/vit stuff. It's just more damage.

[Jugil]

The following equation is your base damage for a normal hit (not a WS). There are some additional terms included for weapon skills, but it's not neccessary for this discussion.

Dbase = D + fSTR

D is straight foward, that is just your weapon's damage, plain and simple. fSTR is a function of your strength versus the mob's vitality [(STR - VITmob +4)/4], and is capped by a function of your damage [(the integer portion of D/9) + 8]. For simplicity, we will just say fSTR is 3 (i.e. you have 8 more STR than the mob has VIT).

So, taking your numbers (DMG: 23 vs. 28), you can have a base damage of 26 vs. 31 respectively, which is about a 15% swing.

Next, we calculate your pDIF. The first step is calculating your attack-mob defense ratio:

cR = (ATK/DEFmob) - 0.05*(LVLmob - LVLyou) ; the level difference cannot be less than zero.

Let's assume your level difference is 0, and your ATK = 150 vs. mob's DEF = 150. Therefore, cR = 1 OR cR = 155/150 = 1.033 (+5 ATK).

based upon your cR, your pDIFmax = 1 + 1.2*(cR - 5/6). with cR = 1 and 1.033, your maximum pDIF = 1.2 and 1.24 respectively.

For your maximum hit, multiply your Dbase by your pDIFmax:

DMG:28 weapon | Hit = 31*1.2 = 37.2
DMG:23 +5 ATK weapon | Hit = 26*1.24 = 32.24

using similar calcs, your maximum critical hit is as follows (crit hits modify the pDIF):

68.2 with the DMG:28 weapon vs. 58.2 with the DMG:23 weapon.

Note/Edit: This is based upon several assumptions I made about STR, VIT, ATK, DEF, etc.

[LyonheartLakshmi]

Ok, I have been trying to figure something out, maybe to no avail, maybe someone can help me out here. Is there a way to figure out how much +Atk is equal to +1 Weapon DMG? Assuming as many constants as possible, can that be quantified? Thanks again!
I assume you want to know that for comparing low damage weapons with stat buffs to high damage weapons without them. When making such comparisons, keep the following in mind: you can get +attack (and many other significant stat boosts) in almost any equipment slot. However, nothing outside of your weapon slot can boost base damage.

Whether that lower damage weapon with +attack will help you more than a higher damage weapon is very situational. You have to consider what other gear you will be wearing and what kind of mobs (particular level range) you will be fighting. +attack will be more important if you're fighting IT++ or if your gear/food setup is lacking in +attack. However, if you happen to be eating meat, have a lot of +attack from other gear, static with a BRD, or tend to fight VT/low IT, then the higher base damage weapon may be more beneficial.

[Armando]

D is straight foward, that is just your weapon's damage, plain and simple. fSTR is a function of your strength versus the mob's vitality [(STR - VITmob +4)/4], and is capped by a function of your damage [(the integer portion of D/9) + 8]. For simplicity, we will just say fSTR is 3 (i.e. you have 8 more STR than the mob has VIT).HOLD IT. [(STR - VIT + 4)/4] is an approximation. Different weapon ranks get different fSTR values with the same STR-VIT difference. Just wanted to throw that out there.He's not entirely wrong. More like a slice of the right. It's not the whole cake, but there's not really anything wrong with what he said. I.e. high attack will make your damage more consistent, but it also increases maximum damage. weapon DMG can be used to figure the maximum amount of damage you could possibly attain, but it's not gonna happen on exp mobs. Errr.. I'm not so sure on the str/vit stuff. It's just more damage.I don't know, that's a bit iffy to me. If by consistent you mean having a narrower range of damage possibilities, this isn't true. If you mean you'll be hitting close to max damage more consistently, then this isn't true in at least one scenario I've tested; when you have capped Attack, your damage is distributed practically perfectly.

[Jugil]

HOLD IT. [(STR - VIT + 4)/4] is an approximation. Different weapon ranks get different fSTR values with the same STR-VIT difference. Just wanted to throw that out there.
Ya, that's correct. I was under the impression that your weapon rank was given as the integer portion of D/9? Edit: Forgot to add that I was under the assumption that this mainly affected the fSTR cap.

Also, I should reference: Damage Calc (http://www.freewebs.com/vzx-01/dmgcalc.htm)

Edit2: OK poked around on several websites, and saw fSTR2 table, and realized what you were talking about Armando. I had neglected the fSTR2 table as I haven't ever really focused on ranged XD. I guess the only question I would have is: Would it be safe to assume I could replace the 2 in the denominator of the fSTR2 table with 4 as an approximation for fSTR?

[IfritnoItazura]

He's not entirely wrong. More like a slice of the right. It's not the whole cake, but there's not really anything wrong with what he said. I.e. high attack will make your damage more consistent, but it also increases maximum damage.

Excuse me?!

Post and explain where in the equation that "high attack will make your damage more consistent", and clarify what you think "consistent" means--I'm sure Armando will be wiling check the math for us.

If there's another source for that information, point it out.

[Karinya]

Well, if you hold D and fSTR constant (and assuming we're talking about normal hits), as you increase PDIF, both the minimum and maximum damage will increase (in certain A/D Ratio ranges), which means the *proportional* difference between them decreases, although the absolute difference does not.

It's really a matter of perspective whether or not you think 40-60 is "more consistent" than 10-30. The difference between your biggest hit and your smallest hit is still 20 points, but it's 50% more damage instead of triple the damage. Obviously those specific numbers are made up and represent a pretty extreme amount of Attack change, but that's the *kind* of thing that happens if you increase attack holding all other factors constant.


Since it's a multiplicative equation, the more DMG you already have, the more you benefit from each point of ATK and vice versa. So there is no real answer to "which is better" - you need both. LyonheartLakshmi's point about being able to get attack in other slots is a good one, but if the amount of attack on the weapon is really big, like Juggernaut, it may still be worth giving up some DMG for it.

Generally, though, when I DD I'm reluctant to give up more than 1-2 points of DMG relative to the most damaging weapon I could be using, unless it's for a really nice benefit (e.g. multiple hits, or a really substantial change in delay). Most other stats on weapons don't do THAT much. In your example I would take the DMG 28 weapon except maybe if I was fighting an enemy with so much DEF that I found myself often hitting for 0 or very small amounts (and not because of stoneskin-like effects).

[Sabaron]

First off, the Damage Calculation Spreadsheet I posted uses the information from the Freewebs site posted by Jugil. The equations are rather complex and it takes a while to formulate them especially when working with say... a calculator--enter the spreadsheet. It will do all that for you and you can see all of the "in-between" calculations.

To the correctness/incorrectness of the statement made by Toksyuriel. The statement does not clearly explain the effects of Attack on damage and is, therefore, incorrect.

Let us take the for-instance example using my calculator:

1. Damage code 34 with a delay of 226 and Attack +14 (Wise Wizard's Anelace (http://wiki.ffxiclopedia.org/Wise_Wizard%27s_Anelace)).

If you examine the maxline and minline damages for the weapon you will see this (in the format min+/max+):

Assumption: Attacker has 246 attack (with sword) and Defender has 246 defense.
+0 [Even Match]: 6%/6%
+1: 6%/6%
+2: 6%/6%
+3: 6%/6%
+4: 6%/2%
+5 [to +10]: 6%/0%

As you can see, versus +5 level or better mobs, the damage is made "more consistent" as the minline increases but the maxline does not. However, this increase in consistency is also measurable as an increase in overall damage by averaging the maxline and minline bonuses to achieve a 3% overall damage increase vs. IT mobs. At lower level, both lines increase by 6% for an overall increase of 6%. All of this is provided the defense of the monster vs. a non-attack-modifying sword /checks in such a way as it does not indicate any "High/Low Defense" differential. Let us assume that a monster checks as High Defense with the WWA Equipped. High Defense check occurs whenever the monster's defense is higher (even 1 point) than your attack. Therefore, we can raise the monster's defense score to 261 which, apparently, screws up my calculator in some interesting way (I'll have to look into that).