Author Message

Alleyoop1980

Rank 0
Joined
15 Feb 2013
Posts
25
Location
Austria
PostedMar 01, 2013 12:15 pm
Basic math tells us that if there is a 8-15 than the final max has to count:
8*R = 8
4*R+ = 4
2*R++ = 2
1*HR = 1
------------------
15 Wink
Advertisement

felipescaldini

Rank 0
Joined
15 Feb 2013
Posts
12
Location
Malaysia
PostedMar 01, 2013 12:19 pm
Indeed, I just didn't pay enought attention, but what about the best method of doing a 4-3 then?

frascht

Rank 0
frascht
Joined
10 Dec 2011
Posts
14
Location
Singapore
PostedMar 10, 2013 2:18 am
felipescaldini wrote:
Frascht, you gave an example of a 4-2, isn't it? The final maxing doesn't count.

And in your 4-2 example, wouldn't:

R+R=R+
(R+)+R=R++
(MaxR++)+(MaxR)=HR

Be better?  
welp delayed reply sorry.

No, it counts, for legendaryVX's chart. Otherwise, the first and lowest 86.629% should be "4-0" (this was how we used to referred it in the past in RoB, instead of 4-1". In RoB, 86.629% is when evolving the cards to final form, without levelling it even once in the process, then maxing it in the end.

My apologies for not noticing earlier since I stopped playing Rage for a long period of time, but legendaryVX's chart was a little different which might explain this. The values (without the final maxing included) are,

 
8-14: 100.00%
8-13: 99.963%
8-12: 99.925% 7-12: 99.813%
8-11: 99.888% 7-11: 99.775%
8-10: 99.850% 7-10: 99.738% 6-10: 99.625%
8-9: 99.813% 7-9: 99.700% 6-9: 99.588%
8-8: 99.775% 7-8: 99.663% 6-8: 99.551% 5-8: 98.502%
8-7: 99.738% 7-7: 99.625% 6-7: 99.513% 5-7: 98.464%
8-6: 99.700% 7-6: 99.588% 6-6: 99.476% 5-6: 98.427% 4-6: 96.629%
8-5: 99.251% 7-5: 99.213% 6-5: 99.101% 5-5: 98.052% 4-5: 96.592%
8-4: 98.783% 7-4: 98.764% 6-4: 98.727% 5-4: 97.678% 4-4: 96.554%
8-3: 98.333% 7-3: 98.296% 6-3: 98.277% 5-3: 97.303% 4-3: 96.180%
8-2: 97.865% 7-2: 97.846% 6-2: 97.809% 5-2: 96.854% 4-2: 95.730%
8-1: 92.509% 7-1: 92.491% 6-1: 92.453% 5-1: 92.266% 4-1: 91.985%
8-0: 87.135% 7-0: 87.116% 6-0: 87.116% 5-0: 86.910% 4-0: 86.629%  


by which 4-0 is the lowest form, which is 4-1 in legendaryVX's list.

felipescaldini wrote:
Indeed, I just didn't pay enought attention, but what about the best method of doing a 4-3 then?  


[base card] + [base card] = [base card+]
[maxed base card+] + [base card] = [base card++]
[maxed base card++] + [base card] = [final form of base card] <- which is then maxed

dstrauss30

Rank 0
Joined
23 Jan 2013
Posts
25
Location
United States
PostedMar 10, 2013 12:35 pm
The chart is a great basic tool, but I think it's going to be somewhat off for this game. First of all them maximum stat possibility should be based on when the bonus event that provides 10%/10% is active as it just was.

Also, is there not a difference between maxing the R version vs the R++ version? If you were doing the 4-1 method, and maxed the first R and no others, the 10% bonus will be based on a lower total than if you maxed the R++ before the final evolution. (Note the numbers in this example are made up and assume that the stat increase from lvl1 to max is the same for all card versions; which I don't think it is.)

R base stats 1500/1500 maxed 2000/2000 -> HR (this card maxed only) = 3200/3200
R+ base stats 2000/200 maxed 2500/2500 -> HR (this card maxed only) =3250/3250
R++ base stats 2500/2500 maxed 3000/3000 -> HR (this card maxed only) =3300/3300
HR base stats 3000/3000

If the 10% bonus were based only on the stat increase of 500 (which would be a pathetic 50 attack) then these would scale properly. However, since that's not the case, I there is variation on the % of best possible stats you get in any combination here short of maxing all cards in the process.
Display posts from previous:   Sort by: