Does anyone know how Mug damage shown on the Mug trait is calculated?
Note: Weapon strength is always average weapon strength in these calculations because changing the weapon strength range did not effect the Mug Damage while changing the average did. From this, Mug damage fluctuates because the Mug Damage shown on the trait is an average damage based on your weapon damage. Furthermore, Mug damage infers average mug damage from here on.
When weapon strength = 0,
Mug Damage = 0.3997(Power)
I plotted 7 points, the Y intercept is -0.4481 so its safe to say that it is supposed to be zero since plotting damage shown is rounded to the nearest integer. This concludes that a portion of the mug damage is not dependent on weapon strength and directly proportional to Power.
Let weapon strength = w
While changing weapon damage and power
Assumption: Mug Damage = 0.3997(Power) + c(w), where c is an arbitrary constant
This was not the case as W did not increase linearly with
When weapon damage was kept constant, c(w) was not constant
Let x = Mug Damage – 0.3997(Power)
This leads to 2 options,
1. x is dependent on w to some exponent
2. x is dependent on w to some exponent and power to some exponent
Mug Damage = 0.3997(Power) + c(Power)^m(w)^n
I assumed m to be 1 and as a result, c = 0.000158 when w = 952.5 for my 7 data points; however, when w = 1000, c = 0.000179
From this, I know that a component of c must be dependent on w
Mug Damage = 0.3997(Power) + c(Power)(w)^n
For c I determined the value to be very small ~10^-12, while for n I found a value of ~3.45, which is also unlikely.
I am highly doubtful that these are the correct values, but it is possible
Does anyone know the value of c and n? If you found a mistake please point it out, it is also possible that there is an if, then line that completely ignores the (power)0.3997 part when a weapon is equipped
Ex.
If weapon damage = 0
Then Mug Damage = 0.3997(Power)
Other
Then “something else”
I don’t think this is the case as well.
On the spreadsheet, MD/Power is actually x/Power, its just labeled wrong.
n is simply calculated using ln(x1power2/x2power1)/ln(w1/w2), c is calculated simply through substituting back in.
