/v/ - Video Games

Because the english translation was absolute dogshit

Drain your life on video games.

Best guess? They got it mixed up with a different attack and thought they were naming something that would actually make sense drain. Didn't catch it until it was too late.

>>14052023

Nope

>Drain (Fire Orb, element fire)

>Mega Drain (Lightsaber, element fire)

>Drain Beam (Geyser, element neutral)

Actually, looking at the wiki I learned some cool shit.

I mean, I know about the B'Tub ring to get the sheep item, but I didn't know it became a stronger item when used 48 times (why 48?), or how the Quartz Charm increased Star Egg / Rock Candy in power

>>14052067

I miss items with hidden effects like that. FFXI in particular was filled with them, even if they were mostly useless.

>>14052067

Reading game wikis is dangerous, they made me reinstall Oblivion to check some shit that could be done with magic that I never tried.

The thing thats a drain are the jewish people. Destroying the entire planet, its a travesty that they exist, Kikes are not human.

>>14052998

What fun is there to have with Oblivion's magic aside from making a max area spell/staff and casting it in a room filled with movable objects?

>>14053036

Self-paralysis.

Also the usual touch attack of all weaknesses 100 for 1 second and as much damage as you can muster.

>>14053573

Why would you do self paralysis? What's the point?

>>14053902

Sliding down mountains with no fall damage is fun.

And also, I had this small issue of occasionally mysteriously teleporting into the sky for no discernible reason, and that helped out.

Also, apparently, you can stack weaknesses as long as they come from different spells. And they stack multiplicatively.

>>14053924

> And they stack multiplicatively

Oh boy

I always assumed the drain attacks had something in common. Like they were all fire elemental or something.

>>14053036

fortify your hores speed

>>14054803

But I don't want her running away

>>14054414

>>14053924

Wouldn't that be worse since it's percentage based?

>>14054869

Nope. Path of Exile works similarly.

Let's say you have an attack that does 80 damage. If you have modifiers that stack additively, let's say 20%, 40%, and 33%, you'd sum them then multiply it. Thus, your modifier would be 1.93x stronger, or 154.40.

If you instead took the modifiers and applied them multiplicatively, you'd get a modifier of 2.2344x, or 178.75.

Now there is a point where flat and additive modifiers are better, usually on the low scale of things. But at some point, each source of multiplication gets it stronger and stronger

>>14055682

I figured it meant something like "20% increase of a 40% increase" not "20% increase of the result of a 40% increase".

>>14055758

Those two statements mean the same thing

its what (((mark))) is doing to this board

>>14055766

It's the opposite order of operations.

>>14055827

(n * 1.2 * 1.4) is the same as (1.2 * 1.4 * n)

>>14055827

If I'm reading you right, what you're trying to say is:

"20% increase of a 40% increase" -> 8% (0.2 * 0.4 = 0.08)

"20% increase of the result of a 40% increase" -> 28% (100 * 1.4 * 0.2)

You did, however, say it in a very confusing way.

>>14055845

And I'm saying n(1.2 * 1.4) would be less, hence the confusion.

>>14055766

I see you've never played eve online

>>14055858

(n * 1.2 * 1.4) = (1.2 * 1.4 * n) = n (1.2 * 1.4)

These are all the same. Mathematically, there is no dependence on order to multiplicative percentages.

>>14055895

Is it? I figured the whole point of parenthesis was to do what was in them first. Hence the PEMDAS acronym.

>>14055938

Think of it like this:

Is (1 + 2) + 3 any different from 1 + (2 + 3)? No.

Is (1 * 2) * 3 any different from 1 * (2 * 3)? No.

However:

(1 + 2) * 3 is different from 1 + (2 * 3).

At the risk of oversimplifying it, parentheses only matter for order when there are different "types" of math being done. If all you're doing is multiplying a bunch of numbers, you can do it in any order with or without parentheses. It'll turn out the same. And effectively all you're doing with n (1.2 * 1.4) is a bunch of sequential multiplication the same as (n * 1.2 * 1.4) or (1.2 * n * 1.4) or what have you.

>>14055984

I fucked up and realized I meant to write n(1.2 * .4) is less than n(1.2 * 1.4).

>>14055848 is right.

>>14055938

hows Christmas vacation going? did you do finish your homework yet?

eighth graders intuitively understand the communicative nature of multiplication.