I've been wrestling with balancing skill damages in my game for a while; I reached the point where physical attack skills made sense to me, only to find that things seem to work differently for skills that *don't* use attack power.
When I tested a spell with a power of 1, 100% Int-F, 0% Magic Defense-F, against an enemy with resistance C, I found that the spell would often do... maybe, at most, 3-5 damage, possibly none at all, despite the user's Intelligence being 70 or higher. Should not the spell be doing 70 or so damage, plus-minus variance?
The attack damage formula seems to make sense; a skill with 100% attack-F seems to add 100% of the user's attack. But damage seems drastically reduced than what it should be for skills that rely on a stat for damage. I've tried looking through the scripts myriad times to figure out why this is, as well as the help file and websites such as this which purport to list the calculations. I also tried making a new game with a "Blank slate" on changed scripts, and running a similar experiment, to find very similar results: changing the default 'Fire' skill to 1 power and 0% Magic-Defense-F, it would only do about 4 damage to a basilisk with 100% elemental effect.
Changing the power back to 140 causes the skill's damage to jump to 900-ish; I was under the impression power was meant to be *added* to damage? Is this not the case with: power = skill.power + user.atk * skill.atk_f / 100 ... ?
Am I vastly misunderstanding the damage formulas used by RMXP? Is this true for anyone else?
Thanks,
- Kriss
(In my personal game, the only change I've made to the skill damage script in Game_Battler3 was on lines 130-131, changing the / 200 to / 100, so damage would no longer be half of the differences).
When I tested a spell with a power of 1, 100% Int-F, 0% Magic Defense-F, against an enemy with resistance C, I found that the spell would often do... maybe, at most, 3-5 damage, possibly none at all, despite the user's Intelligence being 70 or higher. Should not the spell be doing 70 or so damage, plus-minus variance?
The attack damage formula seems to make sense; a skill with 100% attack-F seems to add 100% of the user's attack. But damage seems drastically reduced than what it should be for skills that rely on a stat for damage. I've tried looking through the scripts myriad times to figure out why this is, as well as the help file and websites such as this which purport to list the calculations. I also tried making a new game with a "Blank slate" on changed scripts, and running a similar experiment, to find very similar results: changing the default 'Fire' skill to 1 power and 0% Magic-Defense-F, it would only do about 4 damage to a basilisk with 100% elemental effect.
Changing the power back to 140 causes the skill's damage to jump to 900-ish; I was under the impression power was meant to be *added* to damage? Is this not the case with: power = skill.power + user.atk * skill.atk_f / 100 ... ?
Am I vastly misunderstanding the damage formulas used by RMXP? Is this true for anyone else?
Thanks,
- Kriss
(In my personal game, the only change I've made to the skill damage script in Game_Battler3 was on lines 130-131, changing the / 200 to / 100, so damage would no longer be half of the differences).