Leqesai

My God this thread...

Steel path presumes higher use of aoe. This is why enemy density is much higher in steel path. If anything it would be more common to see aoe in Steel Path than non steel path.

Considering the duration is based on the combo meter you would think it receive benefit from heavy attack boosting things (and by extension tennokai) but because it doesn't I don't think an exception should be made unless the whole system is re evaluated, as you suggest.

The disc is not boosted by mods like killing blow that boost heavy attack... that's my entire point....

And my argument is it should not be an exception. It makes sense that it doesn't work. It isn't a tennokai attack.

You're comparing apples to oranges. Both Spring-Loaded Blade and Motus Impact affect general melee range. Opportunity's Reach specifically boosts Tennokai Attack range. The disc is not the Tennokai attack in the same way it isn't the heavy attack (that which benefits from Killing Blow)

Why would a mod that boost tennokai attacks boost the disc... honestly it doesn't seem like this should work so I'm not surprised that it doesn't. The disc benefits from general melee not specific melee. Killing Blow doesn't affect the disc so why would this mod?

Many people would do well to realize this; not just in this community but in the real world as well.

I think it is more often than naught that players who leave early don't have a lot of relics.

You are proposing a buff to status right? Sounds like an increase in power to me.

What content would need this jump in power? You're proposing something that would affect all systems in the game unless it is locked behind some kind of endgame feature, which would have a significant effect on the game balance.

You are the one making the argument. It is on you to use accurate numbers if that's what you are trying to do. It isn't on me or anyone else to provide the numbers for your argument. I sure as heck don't know the actual numbers because there are way too many variables to calculate (weapon type, element ratio, damage reduction, number of targets, status, rate of fire, accuracy etc etc etc). It's silly to try and crunch those numbers. We all know it is a drop in dps if you are comparing galvanized buffs to no galvanized buffs... less numbers means less numbers.

Of course it affects dps, but we shouldn't go around claiming it's some arbitrary percentages when all we are really saying is there is a significant decrease in dps with galvanized mods. But the guy is not factoring important information then throwing out percentages. People will read these percentages then get all mixed up because the actual change in dps is not what they are suggesting. I'm annoyed for sure. Because people like you throw out percentages without knowing what they are saying, which can get people all confused. You aren't wrong about galvanized mods dropping the dps (in case-dependent scenarios) but you are throwing around random percentages to try and reinforce your point without the actual numbers to back it up. It's like saying, "man, milk is way more expensive today than it was last year. It's gone up like 82%!" Without actually doing the math in an attempt to illustrate the severity of the increase rather than the actual increased value itself. Numbers/percentages are not adjectives one uses to illustrate the magnitude of a thing.

They are implying a percentage of dps based on the base values without actually crunching numbers. It is gibberish.

Yes, you did a good job of reiterating well known information about galvanized mods, as was directly quoted from the wiki in the original post.

Not arguing the info about the mods. That is obvious information that is both well documented on the wiki and directly quotable from the topic creators original post...

You are literally using random percentages dude. "Basically 20%" is not math. You are doing pseudo math to explain a very basic (and obvious) point about the efficiency of ineffective mods in a use case scenario. As another user pointed out. Your numbers are fantasy-land but the point about the mods not working is true. Problem is you are talking gobbledygook with the math on this and you don't seem to see how it is problematic. All you need to do is point out that some things don't work with the clone. The pseudo math percentage stuff is misleading. If you are going to actually crunch the numbers great, show your work, otherwise don't just throw around random numbers. There are way more factors at play than your oversimplification would insinuate.

I'm going to say you're wrong because it seems like you're pulling percentages out of the air. You've not created a compelling argument. You've thrown around some random numbers with some uncalculated factors (aside from your personal feelings/bias or secret calculations). Your comments on this are ultimately borderline incomprehensible to anyone actually interested in the numbers at play with these calculations. If someone can come in here and adequately explain the pseudo-math you're suggesting then I'll happily change my tune, but until then I'm firm behind my belief that you're posting gobbledygook.

What are you on about? Where are you pulling this 20% and 40% stuff...

Edit duplicate

Interesting.