FANDOM


Magic Level Formula

I'm having a hard time coming up with a formula for determining the mana needed for a specific level. It appears to be an exponential formula, but I haven't been able to pin it down yet.

Using nonlinear regression on the values in the magic level table, I figure that the formula must be something similar to:


1600 * e(lvl * a)


Where "lvl" is the desired magic level, and "a" is the vocation multiplier. This formula is not correct, but pretty closly matches the shape of the curve.

If anyone else wants to take a crack at it, please do... and post your findings here.

-- WhitelacesTalk † χρισtoς αnεσtη, αληθως αnεσtη -- 14:51, 24 May 2006 (CDT)


I figured it out. Thanks to everyone that helped, well, nobody actually, but I did receive some moral support from a few friends.

-- WhitelacesTalk † χρισtoς αnεσtη, αληθως αnεσtη -- 12:43, 16 October 2006 (PDT)


I'm looking for someone to verify the amount of mana needed to go from magic level 4 to magic level 5 on a druid or sorcerer.

Is it 2340 or 2344 or something else?

Please reply with your results, thanks.

--Erig 06:18, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Tibia hours?

Would 24 hours = 1 day mean that it's 2.4 seconds to a minute and not 2.5?


Not sure, every time I try to extrapolate the math, I end up confusing myself between tibia minutes and RL minutes.

I can promise without a doubt that 1 RL hour is equal to 24 Tibia hours. Midnight in Tibia is always on the hour.

As far as how many Tibia minutes are in one second, I find that information to be less useful.

RL      Tibia
:00     12:00 Midnight
:15      6:00 AM
:30     12:00 Noon
:45      6:00 PM

-- WhitelacesTalk † χρισtoς αnεσtη, αληθως αnεσtη -- 12:43, 16 October 2006 (PDT)


There are 24 Tibian days in a rl day. So, 1 Tibian minute should be 1/24 minute irl. 60 / 24 = 2.5 seconds. So, 1 Tibian minute is 2.5 rl seconds.

Separate precise formulas?

Should there be some distinction made between formulas that are clearly prcise, like those for Hit Points or Cap, and those that are 'best fits' based on observations, like average spell damage and character speed? AtarNajuat 09:32, 12 November 2006 (PST)


Technically, all of the formulas on this page are based on observed values with known factors. The only difference is in the level of subjectivity, where it is not known what factors affect the ultimate outcome, and we are therefore not truly able to develop a completely accurate formula.

That being said, I'm not sure if we need to actually separate the formulas based on that (a logical organization of the formulas based on function is MUCH more valuable), but it would be very feasable to add a small notation that indicates known level of accuracy of the function.

-- WhitelacesTalk † χρισtoς αnεσtη, αληθως αnεσtη -- 07:50, 13 November 2006 (PST)

forum

I'm sorry if I destroy the composite of this post/site by saying this here (I am totally new here), but if you want the correct formulas for spell damage to all instant damage spells (both minimum and maximum damage), look at Thread ID 1371675 on the Tibia.com forum. // Arshalo

(There is also the exact numbers for how much damage the various amulets removes and how Armor works in that thread.)

Feel free to contact me about whatever you are wondering. The easiest way to contact me if probably by posting on the Inferna boards, since I don't understand one thing about how this site is working... If I knew how to post stuff here, I could post it.... But sadly I don't know how to post stuff here. It's kind of cool information. =)


Very cool post. I'm sure you will tell me that all of the informatoin there is completely accurate, but I mostly believe you already.

I'll start integrating your calculations into the damage calculator on the wiki here, and I'll post a message if anything looks funny.

-- WhitelacesTalk † χρισtoς αnεσtη, αληθως αnεσtη -- 07:15, 7 December 2006 (PST)

Mana/hitpoints formula

Well that formula can be simplificated to: paladins-level*10+105 mages-level*5+145 knights-level*15+65

//User:Joao Henrique


You are correct, but the way they are written now makes it clear that they only apply if the character was taken to the mainland at level 8. The formula needs to be modified if you go to mainland at level 9 or higher.

-- Salve! Crepidas meas per clavos ad solum adfixinte?
--  Whitelaces †  Talk †  -- 10:10, 22 January 2007 (PST)

so im editing it and putting sidenotes about that left rookgaard on level stuff, much easier. User:Joao Henrique

Formulas

I wonder why damage formula on this page is ((a * 1/3) + (b * 1/2)) * c, and Damage Calculator uses formula discovered/made by Arshalo. It doesn't make sense to me.
 Djomla 
 Talk   Contributions 


I made the damage calculator, and based the calculations on Arshalo's research... I'm not sure why Wisling changed the formula on this page. He never explained his actions. Maybe this one is more accurate? I don't know.

-- Non curo. Si metrum non habet, non est poema.
--  Whitelaces †  Talk †  -- 14:32, 20 February 2007 (PST)


More Formulas

I've seen on other web sites articles on the formulas for skill advancement and weapon damage. I've not seen articles on the weapon hitting and shield effectiveness formulas. I am not qualified to add to this page, but has thought been given to adding these formulas? Bombur Thumper


Any information you have would be helpful. If there are known formulas for any of these things, it would be great to add them.

-- Non plaudite. Modo pecuniam jacite
--  Whitelaces †  Talk †  -- 10:42, 6 April 2007 (PDT)

Someone posted a formule on the melee page, ive put it here, but the values arent exactly the same from the calculator template (on the weapon page)--Delatus 02:13, 4 May 2007 (PDT)

Damage Formulas as of Summer Update 2007

Has anyone figured the new role of level in melee damage, and by how much is its meaning decreased in dealing magic damage?

Marian Moczymorda 13:26, 6 July 2007 (CET)


I have seen many damages since the summer update of 2007:
Full Attack :9
Balanced :7
Full Defence :5

   Rikuno †  Talk †   22:37, 7 July 2007 (PDT)

---

dunno if anybody wants to work on the new magic damage formula, but i'm sure he will need some values:
with lvl 71 & mlvl 70, i had a max vis of 178
with lvl 72 & mlvl 70, i got a max vis of 181
   Tharjah †  8 July 2007

---

I'm currently tasking a large group of knights and paladins on Trimera, in the guild Divine Horde in collecting data for proper calculation of damage. We have currently taken over 24000 hits worth of data, but more need to be taken to polish up our formulas. Mage damage will be coming soon after this.

Currently the formula is polished to 1.5% of accuracy, roughly. I'll update this when the formulas are polished.

- Caprizon - 08-03-07


---

I am not sure if the formula is correct (magic of vis), I check in tibia forums that they say for 12 lvls it is add 1 point of vis and 1.8 per ml. with test I get that.

The min Formula will be
Damage vis = (1.8*ml)+(lvl/12)
And the max
Damage vis = (2.5*ml)+(lvl/12) ==

Formula For Blocking Melee With Armor


Is there any formula to know how much melee damage armor blocks?
I know that with a total armor of 38 I can block almost all rotworms hits.
 Kwigon the sharpshooter   Talk   -April-03-2008.


Spell damage formula

I've been testing my icicle damage with 4 characters of different levels and magic levels. 1 character from each vocation was used. I tested on witches that doesn't have weakness or strength against ice damage so if you test on other monsters you might get different results (behemoths for example gives me 10% more damage so if you test on those you need to add 10% to the formula). I've found that this formula seems to be extremely accurate for the max damage:
(level*0.2+magic level*3)+18
I round the level*0.2 down since Craban stated you get +1 damage every 5 levels. So if you are for example level 38 you get 7.6 and you round it down to 7 (35 is the closest 5 level down and 35*0.2=7).

What I'm having problems with is the minimum damage. The closest I've gotten is not completely accurate for all characters.

Even if my formula for max damage seems to be accurate it doesn't look like a good formula for other types of runes/spells. Probably there's another variable somewhere in there. Maybe ((level*0.2+magic level*3)*1)+18 so that the *1 and +18 could be changed to make other spell damages.

All this needs more testing and if someone else wants to try the formula and see that it works for them it would be good.
Nevaran 15:48, 17 April 2008 (UTC)


After some more testing I've found a formula that seems to work for the minimum damage of icicles. However it still needs testing. Just because it works for me and one of my guildmates doesn't mean it's correct. Anyhow, here it is:
((level*0.2+magic level*1.81)*1)+10
Nevaran 00:49, 18 April 2008 (UTC)


I've done some tests with the strikespells on 4 mages of different levels and magic levels. This seems to be accurate:
Max damage (level*0.2+magic level*2.21)+13
Min damage (level*0.2+magic level*1.40)+8
level*0.2 should be rounded down like I explained earlier.

The icicle (and I assume fireball) damage seems to be what I posted before (it has been accurate on all charaters I've tried so far):
Max damage (level*0.2+magic level*3.00)+18
Min damage (level*0.2+magic level*1.81)+10

The conclusion is that the formula for spells is:
(level*0.2+magic level*x)+y
Where x is a decimal number and y is an integer.

If anyone feels that this observed data is enough to make an addition to the article feel free to do so. Also if anyone feels like finding the numbers for the rest of the runes and instant spells go ahead. I might do SD and/or avalanche someday if nobody else does it first.
Nevaran 02:52, 19 April 2008 (UTC)


i have also come to think that level/5 is like base damage for all spells using that ive done this SD formula:

Min = Level/5 + MagLevel*4 + 30 Max = Level/5 + MagLevel*7 + 60

Sajgra 18:27, 17 June 2008 (UTC)


That SD formula is not correct. According to that I could hit max 632 but I have in fact hit max ~650.
I've only tested well (5 bp's) with one character and blocked for a guild mate that used 1 bp (not enough for a confirmed min/max). The formula I've gotten from that is not accurate but I guess getting close:
min = (level*0.2 + magic level*4.53) + 34
max = (level*0.2 + magic level*7.59) + 36
Need to try at least 5 bp's more on each character and on more characters (to get more diversity of level and magic levels) to make a really accurate formula.
Nevaran 21:49, 17 June 2008 (UTC)


yea i know its not 100% accurate but i tried to keep it simple because i doubt they would use a very complex formula.

Sajgra 19:39, 19 June 2008 (UTC)


I've done some more testing and this seems to be a working formula for SD:
Max = (level*0.2 + magic level*7.395) + 46
Min = (level*0.2 + magic level*4.53) + 34
It still needs some testing, so if anyone's interested to check if it works the same for all levels/magic levels It'd be awesome. However I think it's as close as I can get.
Nevaran 13:33, 24 June 2008 (UTC)


Did somebody find any problem with Nevaran's formulas?
Let's test the formulas!

<·> Hunter of Dragoes <·> My Talk <·> My Contributions <·> 21:05, 11 November 2008 (UTC)


I've not tried it but they look fairly close to me. At the very least, they're closer than we had (I think we're still using the formulas from before the mage 'downgrade'?) -- Sixorish 23:23, 11 November 2008 (UTC)


I tested the formula for sds out, it said I could do 275 pvp. My best hit so far has been 274 (without eq) level 82 ml 66 so its very close, also the strike spells are accurate for me too. Not too sure on the icicles as when I use them I dont have much time to watch my hits. Beejay 03:47, 12 November 2008 (UTC)


I've figured out that my ice wave could sometimes onehit stalkers (neutral to ice) since level 48, and my magic level was around 50 by then (I don't remember the correct value), but the formula says that only now (level 60 and magic level 54) I should get 120 as maximum hit (and that is total stalker's hp). Kamiel, 19 April 2009


I don't know what formula you've used, but with my formula I get 121 as max (54 as min) when having level 45 (48 rounded down to 45) and magic level 50. This formula might not be exactly accurate, but it would allow one-hitting stalkers.
Nevaran 21:23, 19 April 2009 (UTC)


moved from top of section

The user pages calculate damage for Thunderstorm and Great Fireball differently, it looks like the min and max damages for GFB are about 10 higher. However, the formula page has them calculated exactly the same. Does anyone have any testing experience with either spell?
Miltonr 01:14, 2 June 2009 (UTC)MiltonR


The math behind them are indeed different: The template's is based on Nevaran's testing (User:Nevaran/Spelltests). -- Sixorish 02:53, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Easy way to calculate formula for blocking melee with armor


The Sea Shells do 200 melee damage if you are naked and they do less damage if you wear armor. I will test more by adding or removing armor, if any one else get seashell hit post how much you got hit and the total of armor you where wearing. (wearing or not a shield don't matter for this)
Edited: May 27

  • Wearing total armor 31 blocked 22 and 24 got hit 178 and 176 of 200 damage
  • Wearing total armor 21 blocked 19 got hit 181 of 200 damage
  • Wearing total armor 12 blocked 7 got hit 193 of 200 damage
  • Wearing total armor 0 blocked 0 got hit 200 of 200 damage

Seems even if the shell always hit 200, armor not always block the same damage like if you using total armor of 31 you block 20 to 9 damage.
 Kwigon the sharpshooter   Talk   -May-21-2008.


I think I took 176 damage from it yesterday. Wearing Helmet of the Deep (Arm:2), DSM (Arm:15), MMS (Def:37), G legs (Arm:9), BOH (Arm:0), Platinum Amulet (Arm:2) = wearing 28 total armor. But I am only 90% sure that it was 176...


Sadonic 07:09, 20 May 2008 (UTC)


Will try to check it out, though I have gotten either a pearl or 'Nothing is inside' for the last 2 weeks..

Temahk 07:25, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Okay, inside the Pits of Inferno are some strange slits, which do 60 damage when I'm naked.

  • Wearing total armor of 8, I got hit 53-56
  • Wearing total armor of 10, I got hit 51-55
  • Wearing total armor of 11, I got hit 51-55
  • Wearing total armor of 18, I got hit 43-50
  • Wearing total armor of 21, I got hit 41-50
  • Wearing total armor of 29, I got hit 33-46

Cant be bothered to do more, and it seems damage isn't 100% certain on those things. But I figured I'd post it, might help someone :)

Temahk 17:59, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Check Gorak's formulas on TibiaNews.

This are the armor block formula in the link.
Min Reduced = Round(total armor value * 0 .475)
Max Reduced = Round{[(total armor value * 0.475)-1] + Min Reduced}
<·> Hunter of Dragoes <·> My Talk <·> My Contributions <·> 18:22, 8 June 2008 (UTC)


Wow from what I have tested those 2 formulas work for the damages I took and the ones Temahk took. Would be nice to get some of those formulas in tibianews link in the wiki formula page "can we take them?".
 Kwigon the sharpshooter   Talk   -June-8-2008.


I tried a formula for exura which worked very well The formula was average healed= 8+lv*0.2+ml*1.5

This formula seemed to work for a variety of lvs including; A lv16 sorcrer, a lv26 knight, a 47 druid, a lv127 knight and a lv260 paladin please check your average exura healing and compare it to the formula =D.


Your healing formula seems accurate for my knight if not a little low (level 50 ml 6). However my druid (level 82 ml 66) looks to be closer to the formula that wiki already uses and the same for my sorcerer. Beejay 17:56, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

about ml formulas after 8.1 update

min = (level / 5) + (magic level * c value)

max = (level / 5) + (magic level * d value)

The c values are roughly:

0.6 for Light Magic Missiles (LMM) (note: if your min damage is lower than 10 then min damage is 10).

1.5 for Light Healing [exura]

1.4 for Strike Spells [exori vis/flam/mort/frigo/tera] (note: when you finish the operation add + 10) to get the correct damage.

1 for Ice Wave [exevo frigo hur]

1.2 for Fire Wave [exevo flam hur]

1.2 for Heavy Magic Missiles [HMM] (note: if your min damage is lower than 20 then min damage is 20).

1.2 for Stalagmite [S] (note: if your min damage is lower than 20 then min damage is 20).

1.8 for Fireball [FB] (note: when you finish the operation add + 10) to get the correct damage and (if your min damage is lower than 20 then min damage is 20).

1.8 for Icicle [I](note: when you finish the operation add + 10) to get the correct damage and (if your min damage is lower than 20 then min damage is 20).

0 for Explosion [adevo mas hur] (note: the min damage of this spell is 0).

5 for Intense Healing [exura gran]

1.4 for Stone Shower [SS] (note: if your min damage is lower than 40 then min damage is 40).

1.4 for Thunderstorm [T] (note: if your min damage is lower than 40 then min damage is 40).

1.4 for Great Fireball [GFB] (note: if your min damage is lower than 40 then min damage is 40).

1.4 for Avalanche [A] (note: if your min damage is lower than 40 then min damage is 40).

4 for Sudden Death [SD] (note: when you finish the operation add + 60) to get the correct damage.

2.5 for Energy Beam [exevo vis lux]

2.5 for Great Energy Beam [exevo gran vis lux]

4 for Divine Caldera [exevo mas san]

3.5 for Terra Wave [exevo tera hur]

4.5 for Energy Wave [exevo vis hur]

10 for Ultimate Healing [exura vita]

10 for Heal friend [exura sio]

11 for Wound Cleansing [exana mort]

5 for Rage of the sky's [exevo gran mas vis]

7 for Hell's core [exevo gran mas flam]

5 for Wraght of Nature [exevo gran mas tera]

6 for Eternal Winter [exevo gran mas frigo]

18.5 for Divine Healing [exura san]

The d values are roughly:

1 for Light Magic Missiles (LMM) (note: when you finish the operation add + 10) to get the correct damage and (if your max damage is lower than 20 then max damage is 20).

2 for Light Healing [exura]

2.1 for Strike Spells [exori vis/flam/mort/frigo/tera] (note: when you finish the operation add + 20) to get the correct damage.

2 for Ice Wave [exevo frigo hur]

2 for Fire Wave [exevo flam hur] (note: when you finish the operation add + 10) to get the correct damage.

2 for Heavy Magic Missiles [HMM] (note: when you finish the operation add + 10) to get the correct damage and (if your max damage is lower than 40 then max damage is 40).

2 for Stalagmite [S] (note: when you finish the operation add + 10) to get the correct damage and (if your max damage is lower than 40 then max damage is 40).

3 for Fireball [FB] (note: when you finish the operation add + 15) to get the correct damage and (if your max damage is lower than 40 then max damage is 40).

3 for Icicle [I](note: when you finish the operation add + 15) to get the correct damage and (if your max damage is lower than 40 then max damage is 40).

4.8 for Explosion [adevo mas hur]

6 for Intense Healing [exura gran]

2.8 for Stone Shower [SS] (note: if your max damage is lower than 70 then max damage is 70).

2.8 for Thunderstorm [T] (note: if your max damage is lower than 70 then max damage is 70).

2.8 for Great Fireball [GFB] (note: if your max damage is lower than 70 then max damage is 70).

2.8 for Avalanche [A] (note: if your max damage is lower than 70 then max damage is 70).

7 for Sudden Death [SD] (note: when you finish the operation add + 60) to get the correct damage.

5 for Energy Beam [exevo vis lux]

9 for Great Energy Beam [exevo gran vis lux]

6 for Divine Caldera [exevo mas san]

7 for Terra Wave [exevo tera hur]

9 for Energy Wave [exevo vis hur]

12 for Ultimate Healing [exura vita]

14 for Heal friend [exura sio]

15 for Wound Cleansing [exana mort]

12 for Rage of the sky's [exevo gran mas vis]

14 for Hell's core [exevo gran mas flam]

10 for Wraght of Nature [exevo gran mas tera]

12 for Eternal Winter [exevo gran mas frigo]

25 for Divine Healing [exura san] —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Zane voldemort (talkcontribs). Remember to sign your comments!

Melee, Exori and Exori Gran

Problem Report #21626:
The formulas for melee damage are incorrect. Having done my own calculations, the maximum damage on full attack for a melee weapon with attack W with skill S and level L is 0.085*W*S (L/5). The maximum damage of exori is 0.05*W*S (L/5) and of exori gran is 0.12*W*S (L/5). These are providing the target has 0 armor and has no or -% to melee damage taken. I've tested these thoroughly and am convinced they are correct (I was encouraged to test them after I discovered the previous ones were inaccurate).

Current Melee Formulas

The current melee formulas on this page are extremely inaccurate, I have hit far more than they predict on nightmares (upwards of 490), they do not take into the account the changes which were made around summer 2007 to knights. (Also, the exori gran and exori formulas are pretty inaccurate too!). I've been working on more accurate formulas, and have found almost certainly accurate formulas for both exori, exori gran and normal melee on full attack. Approximate formulas appear to be Melee = 0.086*W*S+(L/5); Exori = 0.05*W*S+(L/5); Exori Gran = 0.12*W*S+(L/5), L=Level, W=weapon attack, S=weapon skill, they are not perfect, but they are all very accurate and I've based them on both my damage and other peoples on my server (note: the melee formula also works for paladins!). All formulas assume 0% resistance to melee either way (not weak or strong) and 0 armor values (So they're really only completely accurate on say naked PVP targets (in which case the damage would be halved) or low armor non weak monsters like nightmares)

Necro Dragonheart 18:48, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Automated transfer of Problem Report #21626

The following message was left by Anonymous via PR #21626 on 2009-04-29 21:54:46 UTC

The formulas for melee damage are incorrect. Having done my own calculations, the maximum damage on full attack for a melee weapon with attack W with skill S and level L is 0.085*W*S (L/5). The maximum damage of exori is 0.05*W*S (L/5) and of exori gran is 0.12*W*S (L/5). These are providing the target has 0 armor and has no or -% to melee damage taken. I've tested these thoroughly and am convinced they are correct (I was encouraged to test them after I discovered the previous ones were inaccurate).


I have a question, to calculate the damage you recive from monsters, you first calculate min/max armor and then do the other formula, right?? Camioneto 21:51, 13 July 2009 (UTC)


I don't understand the formula to calculate how much a shield and skills block, can some one calculate for me, how much attack a monster has to have for a player with armor 41 / skills 80 / shield 37+3 so that the monster max melee ends in 252
--Kwigon the sharpshooter 01:03, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Exp from Killing other Players on PvP-Enforced World

I didn't quite understand the formula, but if I understood it right you would gain this much experience, if you're a level 30 killing a level 140:

(((140 * 1,1) - 30)/140) * (43812800 * 0,05) = 1940281 experience


Is this right, or have I gotten it all wrong?

Then a level 30 would gain 1,940,281 experience by killing a level 140. He would be almost level 54, by the cost of 100,000gp and 591,472 experience loss.

It would be expensive, indeed, but only an example.


Best regards,

Nymph.

I edited the section on maximum melee damage since the formulae were out of date and inaccurate. I replaced it with an accurate one but kept the format. I also edited the section on knights spells/abilities, the formulae for whirlwind throw and grounshaker were accurate, but those for berserk and fierce berserk were wrong, so I edited these to the correct formulae (the old ones gave me a max fierce berserk of like 800 when its closer to 670!). Again, I kept the old layout but just modified the formulae. Necro Dragonheart 15:18, September 18, 2009 (UTC)

light healing formula

i believe the formula for light healing needs +10

eg a character of level 10 with magic level 0, using this formula the minimum amount would be

10/2+1.5*0=2 whereas it appears that the minimum amount for light healing is at least 10. Monti macaroi 02:45, September 22, 2009 (UTC)


Actually, most of those formulas are way off. I started testing formulas last year and posted them on User:Nevaran/Spelltests and there you can see that the minimum for light healing is (using your example):
10*0.2+0*1.4+8 = 10
Maximum is (still using your example):
10*0.2+0*1.795+11 = 13
The reason why I haven't posted them on this page yet is because they are not complete. Although most of the runes and instants are there, the ultimate and powerful waves aren't. Also a few healing spells that aren't there.
Nevaran 09:56, September 22, 2009 (UTC)

Non working magic damage formulas

I tested with a program that tests different values on variables inside formulas. I have some accurate magic damage data now and I've found that these formulas will not work, whatever x, y and z values are(z can be zero or negative number too):

(lvl*x)+(mlvl*y)+z

(lvl/x)+(mlvl*y)+z

--Daniel Letalis 11:36, October 21, 2009 (UTC)


Did you test the formulas on the formula page or the formulas on my spell tests? My tests aren't complete (still missing some spells/runes and some aren't tested well enough), but they are more accurate than the ones on the formula page.
Nevaran 14:45, October 21, 2009 (UTC)


Yes as x,y and z are dynamic in the tests they included those formulas and millions more similar formulas. I will keep testing with formulas with 1 to 3 dynamic values, hope I can find some exact formula soon.

Also I don't know much about maths but I guess it should be possible, anyone knows about a math method to possibly find a formula having several values for lvl,ml,min and max damage?

--Daniel Letalis 22:44, October 21, 2009 (UTC)


That's weird. My formulas works in game for all my characters and my friends' characters.
x shouldn't be dynamic. CIP has said that you get +1 damage/healing every 5 levels. So the level parameter should always be level/5 or level*0.2 (rounded down).
y is a decimal number (does your program test with fractions or just integers?).
z is an integer.
If you test on a monster with weakness/resistance you have to add that after doing the base calculation. For example if you test exori frigo on a dragon you have to multiply the formula with 1.1 (10% weakness) to get the correct damage. That formula would then look like this: ((level/2) + (mlvl*y) + z) * 1.1
Oh, and by the way. These formulas are only for the minimum and maximum damages. Not for every damage you can do in between.
Nevaran 09:13, October 22, 2009 (UTC)



Tx for the 1 damage every 5 lvl tip I completly forgot. +1 damage every 5 lvl is not lvl*0.2, it is floor(lvl*0.2). I calculate weakness/streng before testing formulas so I'm always working with "base" damage, I'm only testing high damages so I guess there can't be wrong calculations for creatures weakness/strengh.

I applied the formula tester with a lot of damages(around 10,000 hits on different lvls/mls) from avalanche and thunderstorm using the floor() part and I can confirm that these 2 formulas are correct on min and max values

Thunderstorm
Max damage: floor(lvl*0.2)+(mlvl*2.6)+16
Min damage: floor(lvl*0.2)+(mlvl*1)+6

Avalanche
Max damage: floor(lvl*0.2)+(mlvl*2.8)+17
Min damage: floor(lvl*0.2)+(mlvl*1.2)+7

I will test other type of dagames when I have time.

As you are the one who got those formulas maybe you wanna start removing old formulas and adding confirmed formulas to the formula page.

Note: I found funny that the damages are increased 3 by 3 and 4 by 4 in both avalanche and thunderstorms.

Do you have any formula for rods/wands? Maybe their values only changes according to lvl damage bonus --Daniel Letalis 00:18, October 23, 2009 (UTC)


Floor() is a programming function? It means the same as the "rounded down" that I posted. I.e. that no matter if the end result is .1 or .9 it rounds down to 0 and not up to 1.
The rods/wands have fixed values. They don't change with level or magic level. I think I posted the rod damages on the rods' talk page, but the wands have been tested to do the same min/max for the same level wands.
If I have time this weekend I might start re-writing that part. I've been putting it off for so long because I've been wanting to get more accurate formulas for more spells/runes. I guess I can leave the old formulas for the ones I don't have yet...
Nevaran 14:03, October 23, 2009 (UTC)

Armor Damage reduction

I've been making tests with Spikes that deal 60 damage on Greenshore, I wanted to test if the formula here was accurate.

Bad thing is I can't calculate the damage I'm receiving from spikes with different legs and platinum amulet. Can anyone tell me how should I calculate the minimum and maximum damage for all items, wearing only one item at a time of this list: blue legs, dwarven legs, golden legs and platinum amulet.



I have new and correct formulas for armor and physical protection reduction(and got interesting facts), but as I tested with spikes, I couldn't test physical protection influence over shielding, I want to update the formulas here but I have this question, is physical protection applied after or before shielding? Any ideas on how to test this? --Daniel Letalis 04:03, June 4, 2010 (UTC)

Magic Power?

I just saw that there's a formula for "Magic Power" and my question is: What's magic power used for?
Nevaran 16:14, July 26, 2010 (UTC)

Melee Skill Levels formula

It says "Number of blood hits required to advance to the next skill level:", but is this accurate? Unless it was changed recently, the number of blood hits are only indirectly related to advancing melee skills. Vlobben 12:23, October 5, 2010 (UTC)

Maximum damage reduction

$ R_{min} = \left \lfloor \frac{t}{2} \right \rfloor $
$ R_{max} = \left\lfloor \frac{t}{2} \right\rfloor \cdot 2 - 1 $

For $ t \leq 1 $, Rmax is negative. It would suffice for t=1 to use the absolute value, but then when t=0, Rmax=1. According to my own tests (albeit not very exhaustive), when t=0 Rmax=0. So I propose we change it to:

$ R_{max} = \begin{cases} 0, & \mbox{if }t = 0 \\ t - 1, & \mbox{if }t \mid 2\mbox{ and if }t \neq 0\\ |t - 2|, & \mbox{if }t \nmid 2 \\ \end{cases} $
Thoughts? (the | indicates division, returning a Boolean value) -- Sixorish 03:44, November 27, 2010 (UTC)


Took me some time to get it, this formula would be more simple but maybe more complex for most users to understand. I can't think of a simpler way to write it. --Daniel Letalis 04:54, November 27, 2010 (UTC)


What makes it complex? The division symbol did seem an intricate thing to me before I studied some number theory, but that could be easily changed to any of these:
$ R_{max} = \begin{cases} 0, & \mbox{if }t = 0 \\ t - 1, & \mbox{if }t\mbox{ is even and if }t \neq 0\\ |t - 2|, & \mbox{if }t\mbox{ is odd} \\ \end{cases} $ $ R_{max} = \begin{cases} 0, & \mbox{if }t = 0 \\ t - 1, & \mbox{if }t \bmod 2 = 0\mbox{ and if }t \neq 0\\ |t - 2|, & \mbox{if }t \bmod 2 \neq 0 \\ \end{cases} $

The latter I suppose only CS/math majors would understand.

The example could exemplify how these operations work and why the formula is like this. Or, we could indicate that there are two "strands" of armor - one for even values and one for odd - that would make comprehension a lot easier but it might give the impression that odd or even values would be "better" than the other.

PS: I actually dislike this formula because of the inability(?) to convert |x| to a polynomial. -- Sixorish 05:33, November 27, 2010 (UTC)


I like it more with "odd" and "even", it took me some minutes to understand it (maybe lack of math knowledge or practice) and that's why I say it could be complex for other users. Also I don't understand why the "and if t ≠ 0" only on one case and why "|t - 2|" instead of "t - 2" --Daniel Letalis 06:05, November 27, 2010 (UTC)


Well if t=0 it couldn't be the last case because 0 is even, and the first line defines the case of 0 so only the second line needs t != 0. The |t-2| is there solely for the case of t=1 (being negative; -1 damage reduction?). It could also be expressed as $ \sqrt{t^2 - 4t + 4} $ but that would be more complex still. -- Sixorish 06:23, November 27, 2010 (UTC)


I don't see the need of "if t ≠ 0" because the 1st case already is chosen if "t = 0". I still think this formula could be harder to understand for many users but as long as everything is explained, I guess is ok.

This one looks more easy for me: $ R_{max} = \begin{cases} 0, & \mbox{if }t < 2 \\ t - 1, & \mbox{if }t\mbox{ is even} \\ t - 2, & \mbox{if }t\mbox{ is odd} \\ \end{cases} $

--Daniel Letalis 06:37, November 27, 2010 (UTC)


I think you mean this?
$ R_{max} = \begin{cases} t, & \mbox{if }t < 2 \\ t - 1, & \mbox{if }t\mbox{ is even} \\ t - 2, & \mbox{if }t\mbox{ is odd} \\ \end{cases} $
When Rmax = 1, max damage reduction is 1. -- Sixorish 06:42, November 27, 2010 (UTC)


Yes, also I think minimum reduction formula needs change when armor is 1, I don't know how I missed this, my tests were very complete :/

--Daniel Letalis 07:08, November 27, 2010 (UTC)

Cleanup

I think it's about time to clean this page up. Some of it's old and some of it contradicts with other sections because it's old.

Any objections to removing these? (I'm not certain if they're all old, so please check if you may know)

  • Melee Skill Levels
  • Magic Power
  • Fishing
  • Spell/Rune Damage/Healing
  • Melee
  • Melee based spells
  • Distance
  • Distance based spells
  • Armor and Defense

This is one of the most neglected pages on the wiki, and I would argue the most interesting for many players. -- Sixorish 20:33, September 10, 2011 (UTC)

Money you make from making runes

This is my first writing and thought if to this page could be added my formula of how much money you make per hour with each rune with only food. This is the fromula: P*Q*60/(M/(2/3)/60) p=price Q=quantity M=mana cost/ea (2/3) only if not promoted Smargoos (talk) 12:34, July 6, 2012 (UTC)


I wouldn't mind this being on a subpage but I think the Formula page should contain non-derived formulas only. This formula is derived from other constants and it's not a special formula defined in the game's coding. -- Sixorish (talk) 17:29, July 6, 2012 (UTC)

So should this be added some where?

Smargoos (talk) 21:16, July 6, 2012 (UTC)

Magic formulas

There is an issue with the constants for the magic formulas.

For example, heal friend has a min value of 10 and max value of 14 in this page, which leads to false results.

You page states that my ED level 121 ml 70 has a minimum heal of ~700, when other calculators (like tibia-stat) shows min of 510.

I know for a fact that I sometimes heal ~550, so your constant is off by very much. I did some calculating, and found that tibia-stat's constants for heal friend are- min value is 6.3, max is 14.3

This ofcourse is just a symptom. I assume other values are incorrect as well. Can you ask other sites with calculators for their values? Maybe average all of those values together?

Mahatesh (talk) 05:04, January 10, 2016 (UTC)Mahatesh

Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.