Carbineer Archive
Thread: Stat formulas
Page 1 of 1
EisMan_Buckeye
Mon Jun 28, 2004 6:16 pm
#1
I remember the post TA is talking about, too bad I can remember WHERE it is lol. I do know from personal experiance that around 1500 Strength/Quickness/Focus reduces HAM costs to near null. Other than that, I don't know the formulas.
jfang
Tue Jun 29, 2004 12:54 am
#2
I was wondering about the effects of various stats, and thought "if anybody knows, it would be the carbineer forums". 
Does anybody know the specific formula for the various stats. Health, action, and mind are obvious, each point gives you one more maximum to each pool respectively. What about constitution/stamina/willpower and strength/quickness/focus?
For example, I could imagine the formula for the regenerative stats to be something like "10*stat point/minute". and the cost mitigation stats to be something like "cost = base cost * (1-(stat/1500))".
However, aside from the "everybody knows 1500 focus eliminates all mind cost", I haven't heard of anybody running any real tests or knowing any real forumla.Does anybody know anything more detailed than the"old wife's tale"answers?
9,687 more to go...
TAfirehawk
Tue Jun 29, 2004 12:58 am
#3
Wow, wish I could remember the post......there is a formula out there that included /sit to regen.....it might have been Doc or Medic to holo-grind maybe, not sure.
But I do know that I saw a proposed formula for it and I should have bookmarked.....
novamarine
Tue Jun 29, 2004 6:39 am
#4
Do a search for novamarine and quickness. I did some research on this long ago before I was correspondant. I just hope the graph is still on my website.
novamarine
Tue Jun 29, 2004 6:43 am
#5
FWIW...
http://forums.station.sony.com/swg/board/message?board.id=carabineer&message.id=10149&highlight=quickness#M10149
That formula might be a tad off since you hit zero at 1500....
MasterTexiria
Tue Jun 29, 2004 7:00 am
#6
Well that was a great thread, if you need help to update it once the new ham system is pushed live along with the change to armor and doc buff (if it happens)
jfang
Tue Jun 29, 2004 7:08 am
#7
Wow, very nice. Two follow up questions though:
1) You said you played with cripple shot, and that the quickness formula was linear. However, are those constants, or scaled to the shot? For example, would somebody with 400 quickness firing a 10 action cost shot have no action cost, or something like 7 action cost? I am guessing that it is constant (which coupled with the bugged max HAM cost is why everybody likes 1500), but just wondering if there were real tests done.
2) Did you get around to playing with stamina?
Great work. Too bad to run a similar test now you would need to book two hours of an image designer's time. 
9,679 more to go...
TAfirehawk
Tue Jun 29, 2004 7:14 am
#8
jfang wrote:
Great work. Too bad to run a similar test now you would need to book two hours of an image designer's time.
9,679 more to go...
Not true, get a Master in a salon and there is no timer now
novamarine
Tue Jun 29, 2004 7:31 am
#9
jfang wrote:
Wow, very nice. Two follow up questions though:
1) You said you played with cripple shot, and that the quickness formula was linear. However, are those constants, or scaled to the shot? For example, would somebody with 400 quickness firing a 10 action cost shot have no action cost, or something like 7 action cost? I am guessing that it is constant (which coupled with the bugged max HAM cost is why everybody likes 1500), but just wondering if there were real tests done.
My test was scaled to the shot. Someone with the same quickness, same carbine would have the same cost to fire cripple but this would not work for burstshot. In essence, my goal was to show that tons of points pumped into quickness is pretty useless which I think I showed. I wasn't really after the generic formula though finding the 1500 sweet spot was nice. If I find the data at home, I'll post it. Someone better at math than me can probably pull the formula out of it.
2) Did you get around to playing with stamina?
I remember doing the tests. So maybe I should go searching.
Great work. Too bad to run a similar test now you would need to book two hours of an image designer's time.
Actually, that thread is misleading. If the excel sheet was still online (is it? I didnt even check) you would see I gathered numbers from almost zero to well above 1500. I used a combination of 1, 2, 3, 4 ,etc pieces of armor to get the low numbers and buffs to get the higher numbers. Buffs were still random back then so every time I got buffed I took a data point with and without my armor. The numbers in that post are actually theoretical numbers backcalculated from the equation.
novamarine
Tue Jun 29, 2004 7:44 am
#10
I just did a search for stamina results and turned up nothing. If I remember right, I was in the middle of collection data on how stamina affected regen when I stumbled upon the forumla in another thread and then stopped collecting data points. I know that forumla is out there somewhere...
Page 1 of 1