Coruscanti Testing

For conclusions on the data in this thread

Regardless if this is or isn't what its doing, I fully support your adventure on finding out this enigma of a weapon!

Good luck Sylow! :D

It's obviously doing something to your attack, in my opinion. It isn't just auto-capping it or doubling it (which would have the same effect), because then you would expect damage all the way up to ~161.

It looks like closer to +50~60% Attack.

We can't conclude an exact proc rate because the distributions are overlapping, but ~3-5% seems like a good enough estimation to me! If it is +55%, we would expect about 2/9 of the distribution to overlap.

60% would be such a wonky number.

Here's a graphic for the critical data:

I don't know if that's any help to narrow anything down.

Wasn't the JP testing for Borealis 10% activation/50%WSDMG, preliminary NA testing 15% activation/65%WSDMG?

In other words, pretty similar.

143/62 = 2.31 pDIF = At least 1.85 cRatio = At least 1.9 Ratio

568/512 = 1.11 Ratio

1.9/1.11 = 1.72

So now I'm getting like +75% Attack.

Also, it is clear that it isn't a damage multiplier, because the 1.0 frequency spike (around 62 to 62*1.05 damage) isn't replicated higher in the distribution.

Empyrean Weaponskill modifiers.

That's not an attack boost, though.

With +75% Attack, I'd expect that almost exactly none of the non-crit distribution would overlap with the conditions you used. I guess we don't know if it can activate on DAs (like Empyrean aftermath) or not (like Relic extra damage) though.

That would kind of explain the jump from 86 to 101. If they were overlapping, I don't think you'd produce a gap like that.

There's also a jump in the critical data from 156 to 173.

I've never seen the testing on Borealis, to be perfectly honest.

That's a good point, but also something problematic. It might not be as simple as +Attack.

Your minimum non-crit damage with Coruscanti is higher than the capped-attack minimum non-crit damage. Same deal for the crits. I'm not sure what it's doing, but it is definitely messing around inside the pDIF equations instead of simply working outside of them as a flat multiplier.

Someone light the Motenten beacon.

He's not online! D:

I was getting the LOTR light the beacons clip, then I somehow ended up watching Nick Cage get tortured by bees in Wicker Man.

Non-crit range of
Non-anomaly : 86-47 = 39
Anomaly: = 143-101 = 42

Crit range of :
Non-anomaly : 156-100 = 56
Anomaly : 193-173 = 20

Hmm... is there any D49 dagger we can compare with?
EDIT: Daka+3 and Supernal knife..

ADD:
Gotta agree with Byrth. It can't be simply flat % dmg up, otherwise we'll see a displacement of the graph on anomaly region.

Hmm.. Although it lacks the data range from 144-152..
It seems that it turns normal damage to crit. 101-143 anomaly on normal damage is within the normal crit(non-anomaly).

If the real pDIF function makes crit act like a trigger.. ODSD might trigger it once without counting it as crit? And the anomaly on crit one is actually triggering the crit signal twice?

To put it simply : ODSD might be a crit trigger without counting them as crit.

The total amount of the anomaly for non-crit is 28.. still comparatively small to other tests for determining pDIF min and max, so it's still open a possibility the highest data 153 could come up.

Motenten was nice enough to provide me with what max damage should have been vs. T Bluffs:


Since DNC has Critical Attack Bonus III, the actual value for a max crit is 173.

Interestingly, this increases the lower end of the zone of suspicion on the Non-Crits to 85.

Still can't explain what makes the gap of 20 damage in critical section.
And can't explain the gap of 16 damage on non-crit one.

tbh, it's better not too clutch too tightly with the current working pDIF model, because it's still not accurate to make tight fit for everything.

I would think it would be accurate enough to pin down maximum and minimum values?

Min damage: 1.04 cRatio * 1.15 - 0.4375 = 0.7585
62 * 0.7585 = 47.027

Matches observed minimum.

Maximum pre-secondary needed to generate 86 as a max value would be 82. That would require a ~1.33 pDif, which is 0.29 over cRatio, and would imply a multiplier of 0.28 instead of 0.25. It is conceivably possible, since the multiplier for Ratios close to 1.0 does not seem to mesh well with the values for higher ratios.

Note: formulas for minimum damage calculations are very solid; formulas for maximum damage are a bit more shaky.

Will work with 86 as the max value for now.


27 instances of damage between 101 and 147 (non-crit)
Total hits: 971 + 27 = 998


Range for nominal damage values (excluding secondary): 82 - 47 = 35
Range for boosted damage values (excluding secondary): ~141 - 101 = 40

So it's not simply a boost in the raw damage value. If so, then the max damage seen should have been around 143 after secondary.

If we assume we're working from a boosted cRatio, then we need to look at the pDifs of the boosted min/max.

Min: 101 = 1.629-1.645
Max: 147/1.05 ~= 141 = 2.275-2.290

Derived cRatio for each of these:

Min: ([1.629-1.645] + 0.7375) / 1.15 = 2.058-2.071

This gives us the maximum possible cRatio for the sample.

Max: [2.275-2.290] - 0.375 = 1.900-1.915

This gives us the minimum possible cRatio for the sample.


Since this is a one-handed weapon, essentially we're looking at capped attack/Ratio. Since this is +1 level, capped cRatio would have been 1.95.

We can guess that one of three things occurred:

1) Attack was boosted by ~100%, taking it from 1.04 to cap. This could be done with as little as +85% attack, but that seems an unlikely value.
2) cRatio itself was modified, either set as its maximum of 1.95, or some value added to the base (~0.85-0.9?)
3) Ratio was set at its maximum of 2.0, and level correction was ignored. This is within the bounds of the observed values.


Now let's look at crits to see how they compare.

critRatio = 2.04

Anomoly damage range: 173-193.
Factor out CAB3: 156-174
Factor out secondary: 156-166
pDif = 2.52-2.69

maximum critRatio = 2.895
minimum critRatio = 2.315

It doesn't tell us much, but we can determine a couple things.

If the crit ratio is still base cRatio + 1, then we're pretty tightly constrained around 1.9/2.9 as the cRatio/critRatio after the boost effect.

If the boost effect occurs -after- the ratio is adjusted to become a crit, it's more believable that it's a flat addition to wRatio, which could be roughly +0.85.

Of the three options I guessed at above, #3 does not appear to be viable when combined with the crit data.



Can't make any firm conclusion from the available data. I would recommend re-trying the test at a slightly lower attack value, only attack EMs, and (after solidifying the results for non-crits) add atmas with +crit rate (but not +crit damage) for a greater sampling of crit info.

All right, I hope people are killing Bluffs again so that there are EMs!

I understand why you're testing this, and I am one that really appreciates it.

But for something to require this amount of testing for an extremely minimal increase of damage, if there is any, shows me that the effect just does not exist.

I suppose it does not make sense to put this sort of text on a weapon, one that is very rare and requires an alliance, that has the additional effect that doesn't even raise the DPS of a weapon more than those "wind fan" type weapons.

I know SE said that it is indeed a very rare proc but I'm not buying it. For something to have such a rare proc rate it would be a noticeable rise in dmg.

So again, while I really appreciate you taking a lot of time out of your day(s) to obtain this data, I think it's clear that SE *** up and forgot to add this effect to the weapon.

And if that Borealis testing is true with a 10% proc rate, that proves the missing effect even more.

...Coru is still a sick wep though :P

We've already determined that it's doing something. Did you not read anything?

Huh? Sylow's posts indicate that the effect does work, just not in the way people thought it did.

Occasionally deals severe damage is just a misleading use of vocabulary.

I appreciate your testing, but I'm not going to read anything you've tested.

They really should change the Help text on that.

Still, This dagger is all about the DPS and Critical hit rate.

Still strongly disappointed in what its turning out to be, But happy we now have some grasp on what it does. Still a good weapon me thinks.