Does open wound activate without being hit?

[sbc84]

Did anyone systematically test this?

By testing, I mean one person (using 100%open wound and poison-hit marker) hitting a test high defense, 75%blocking target.

[D1ce]

Did anyone systematically test this?

By testing, I mean one person (using 100%open wound and poison-hit marker) hitting a test high defense, 75%blocking target.
i think we should test weapon-only ow vs gear based ow, then stacked [both] ow.

[Cloud_Walker]

weapon-only ow vs gear based ow

does not matter

[NeoSyrex]

does not matter

Maybe not, but it couldn't hurt to check. It is apparent not enough information is known in this area, so the more tests ran, the better. And it seems that it could be a valid possibility that off-hand OW works differently, so why not check?

[Cloud_Walker]

Maybe not, but it couldn't hurt to check. It is apparent not enough information is known in this area, so the more tests ran, the better. And it seems that it could be a valid possibility that off-hand OW works differently, so why not check?

I tested this VERY extensively in 1.09, and I strongly believe that it didn't change for 1.10. Yes, I'm saying I don't know this for a fact, and now I expect to see some of you come and pry that open on me. Oh well. What do I know?

[NeoSyrex]

I tested this VERY extensively in 1.09, and I strongly believe that it didn't change for 1.10. Yes, I'm saying I don't know this for a fact, and now I expect to see some of you come and pry that open on me. Oh well. What do I know?

Actually, I saw your post in the other OW thread and had already assumed this to be the case. So in other words, I believe it is possible that the effect could have changed from 1.09 to 1.10. I am aware that something like this is unlikely to change, but because it is relatively simple to check why not do so?

[Cloud_Walker]

Actually, I saw your post in the other OW thread and had already assumed this to be the case. So in other words, I believe it is possible that the effect could have changed from 1.09 to 1.10. I am aware that something like this is unlikely to change, but because it is relatively simple to check why not do so?

Despite obvious things such as damage and defense (and when weirlding 2 weapons), where an attribute is located (armor, weapon, ring, ammy, jewel, charm) did nothing to change the effectiveness of that attribute in 1.09. I know some may be tired of me saying "...in 1.09...", but I spent 20 months figuring out how this game worked with patch 1.09d, and not only did I learn these raw facts, but I also learned how things change.

1.10 sure changed a lot of things. Most of these things, however, dealt with parameter sizes and bugs. In the "is OW considered BM?" thread, I stated that in 1.09, OW could be activated without being hit. That was a fact. That has also changed with 1.10. Here you might hold me to this and say "hey man, what the hell do you know? you just proved yourself wrong with a test." But doesn't it seem like that should have been changed a long time ago? Yes, OW worked that way in 1.09, but do you really think the creators of this game intended OW to work that way? I don't.

And this brings me back to our discussion. Sure things like bugs and stats limits and damage rollovers may have changed with 1.10 (the latter two likely to reduce character file sizes), but not something like effectiveness of attribute location. I can put 100% Open Wounds on a charm and still have it work. I can put Life Steal on a jewel and still leech just as well as if I had a BotD (note, I'm talking about single player, which is where I run my tests).

I tried my best to explain this, and it probably won't be enough considering none of you have had the experience I have with this game (NOT boasting), but to think that such a thing as OW activating or not without being hit depending on the location of the attribute changing with the new patch is utterly ridiculous.

I know I could have ran a test in the time it took to write this post, but I have to draw the line somewhere.



To answer the question that this topic was created for: no.

[NeoSyrex]

And this brings me back to our discussion. Sure things like bugs and stats limits and damage rollovers may have changed with 1.10 (the latter two likely to reduce character file sizes), but not something like effectiveness of attribute location. I can put 100% Open Wounds on a charm and still have it work. I can put Life Steal on a jewel and still leech just as well as if I had a BotD (note, I'm talking about single player, which is where I run my tests).

I tried my best to explain this, and it probably won't be enough considering none of you have had the experience I have with this game (NOT boasting), but to think that such a thing as OW activating or not without being hit depending on the location of the attribute changing with the new patch is utterly ridiculous.

If by "experience with this game" you mean anything less than mapping the game's assembly langauge that statement regarding your knowledge of the game is untrue, even laughable. MPQ viewing and editing is extremely simple, if thats what you were referring to.

% enhanced defense/damage modifiers are affected by item location. That alone is enough to prove your entire argument wrong. The fact that you mentioned it as "obvious" doesn't change the fact that it is a valid reason, as it shows Blizzard's programmers already feel that item modifier location should make a difference to the modifier's effect on a character. And how can you possibly know what Blizzard's programmers see as obvious or not?

Yes, I understand what you are saying. Basically, you are assuming that there is no reason for Blizzard to change the aspect of the game that affects the chance for OW to happen, so they didn't. However, unless you've gone through every alteration to the hard-coded aspects of the game relevant to the calculation of OW, assuming thigs such as % OW from off-hand equipment acts exactly the same as 1.09 is just that, an assumption. It might be probable, even likely, but that doesn't change the fact that it could also be incorrect. When conducting "research" on a game, only by looking at the game's code can one be sure of anything. Anybody with even basic experience in examing the inner workings of a game should know this, let alone someone with your amount of experience. :rolleyes: And when modifiers of other types have already been shown to work differently depending on where they are coming from, I don't see how one could say that it is "utterly rediculous" for other modifiers to possibly work the same way.

[Cloud_Walker]

You are not understanding.

If by "experience with this game" you mean anything less than mapping the game's assembly langauge that statement regarding your knowledge of the game is untrue, even laughable. MPQ viewing and editing is extremely simple, if thats what you were referring to.

No, I'm not referring to MPQ viewing and editing. My experience comes from dueling on open Battle.net. Editing characters. Dueling them. I find it odd that many accuse open of just a pointless battle of hacks. People think that you can hack and be godly, even unkillable. What they do not realize is that once everyone tries to edit their items and become godly, the playing field is leveled again. So from there you go to testing the games limits and applying them to your character. You go to learning what breakpoints, rollovers, parameters, and limits work best vs. your opponent. For some, character editing became an art, where the perfect combination of numbers and attributes allowed for versatility and effectiveness across all aspects of dueling. I became very involved in this for 20 months. 20 months nonstop. I dueled every day, at least 2-3 duels. I tested very very much in the beginning, then slowed down as I ran out of stuff to learn. That was it, for 20 months: test, duel. You would be suprised how much you can learn about the game when you are constantly probing it's limits. Relating back to the topic, I can't even count how many times I saw OW activate without being hit, or when blocking. In one duel alone it could happen 20 times. Know that the average duel lasted about 5-15 minutes. I once had a duel that lasted an hour! That was just how much I played. Patience is key and you have no idea how intense such duels were. Soooo much strategy it sometimes made my head hurt.

THAT, is the experience I speak of.

% enhanced defense/damage modifiers are affected by item location. That alone is enough to prove your entire argument wrong.

Yes, I said that they are affected by item location. And no, it doesn't:

The fact that you mentioned it as "obvious" doesn't change the fact that it is a valid reason

Thanks. But I see what your really saying. However, you are looking at it the wrong way. An attribute affects an item, and an item affects the character. Enhanced Defense affects armor (boosts its defense), and then the high defense armor adds to your overall defense. The only effect Enhanced Defense will have on a charm, however, is just the addition of that attribute, which then goes on to affect the character. So, yes, location of the attribute Enhanced Defense does matter. Now let's look at Open Wounds. The effect Open Wounds has on a weapon is nothing more than just existing on that weapon. The attribute is added, no further changes. The weapon then goes on to affect the character, adding a XX% Chance of Open Wounds... on the character. Open Wounds ALSO does nothing but exist on a charm, ring, etc. Then the OW on the charm, ring, etc. is added to the character. In this case, the location of the attribute does not matter. See, not only is it obvious, but it's easy to figure out!

However, unless you've gone through every alteration to the hard-coded aspects of the game relevant to the calculation of OW, assuming thigs such as % OW from off-hand equipment acts exactly the same as 1.09 is just that, an assumption. It might be probable, even likely, but that doesn't change the fact that it could also be incorrect.

I know it may be incorrect. I just said that I am pretty damn sure it is correct. This is called advice: take it or leave it. By the way, if you do ever go "through every alteration to the hard-coded aspects of the game relevant to the calculation of OW" or any other attribute, please let me know. But pardon me if I don't. This was the whole point of my last post, and you missed it: I know I could have ran a test in the time it took to write this post, but I have to draw the line somewhere.

I don't see how one could say that it is "utterly rediculous" for other modifiers to possibly work the same way.

I'm sorry, I forgot to add ", from my viewpoint."

[NeoSyrex]

No, I'm not referring to MPQ viewing and editing. My experience comes from dueling on open Battle.net. Editing characters. Dueling them. I find it odd that many accuse open of just a pointless battle of hacks. People think that you can hack and be godly, even unkillable. What they do not realize is that once everyone tries to edit their items and become godly, the playing field is leveled again. So from there you go to testing the games limits and applying them to your character. You go to learning what breakpoints, rollovers, parameters, and limits work best vs. your opponent. For some, character editing became an art, where the perfect combination of numbers and attributes allowed for versatility and effectiveness across all aspects of dueling. I became very involved in this for 20 months. 20 months nonstop. I dueled every day, at least 2-3 duels. I tested very very much in the beginning, then slowed down as I ran out of stuff to learn. That was it, for 20 months: test, duel. You would be suprised how much you can learn about the game when you are constantly probing it's limits. Relating back to the topic, I can't even count how many times I saw OW activate without being hit, or when blocking. In one duel alone it could happen 20 times. Know that the average duel lasted about 5-15 minutes. I once had a duel that lasted an hour! That was just how much I played. Patience is key and you have no idea how intense such duels were. Soooo much strategy it sometimes made my head hurt.

THAT, is the experience I speak of.

You can only scratch the surface of the game's workings without looking at the actual files. What is in question, whether or not weapon OW and non-weapon OW are treated seperately, is not possible to determined just by modifying items.


Thanks. But I see what your really saying. However, you are looking at it the wrong way. An attribute affects an item, and an item affects the character. Enhanced Defense affects armor (boosts its defense), and then the high defense armor adds to your overall defense. The only effect Enhanced Defense will have on a charm, however, is just the addition of that attribute, which then goes on to affect the character. So, yes, location of the attribute Enhanced Defense does matter. Now let's look at Open Wounds. The effect Open Wounds has on a weapon is nothing more than just existing on that weapon. The attribute is added, no further changes. The weapon then goes on to affect the character, adding a XX% Chance of Open Wounds... on the character. Open Wounds ALSO does nothing but exist on a charm, ring, etc. Then the OW on the charm, ring, etc. is added to the character. In this case, the location of the attribute does not matter. See, not only is it obvious, but it's easy to figure out!

First, you took my quote completely out of context.

Second, everything you just said about OW was a complete assumption, I don't see how you can even try to pass it off as fact without showing the code itself. Like I said, without knowing the game's coding all you can do is assume how things work, which leads to errors. You are making many assumptions right here. For example, you are assuming that the game just adds the % chance of OW from all items when it reaches the step to calculate OW. But what if it adds up the % from weapons at one point, and the % from everything else at another? Other modifiers do this, so why not open wounds? And what if one of these points happened after chance to hit was calculated, the other before? I am making as many assumptions as you are. So as one can see its not as "obvious" as you think.


I know it may be incorrect. I just said that I am pretty damn sure it is correct. This is called advice: take it or leave it. By the way, if you do ever go "through every alteration to the hard-coded aspects of the game relevant to the calculation of OW" or any other attribute, please let me know. But pardon me if I don't.

Please, I said that because I wanted to show that you cannot possibly know everything that affects OW without looking at the code itself. If this isn't an option, then the next best thing to do would be to check things that have a chance of being the case. I gave evidence why off-hand OW might work differently, so therefore it was worth checking.


This was the whole point of my last post, and you missed it: I know I could have ran a test in the time it took to write this post, but I have to draw the line somewhere.

I'm sorry, I forgot to add ", from my viewpoint."

I did see that statement in your last post. I showed why % OW from off-hand equipment might function differently, so I don't see why it would be necessary to "draw the line."

[Cloud_Walker]

Ok, this is becoming quite a burden.

You can only scratch the surface of the game's workings without looking at the actual files. What is in question, whether or not weapon OW and non-weapon OW are treated seperately, is not possible to determined just by modifying items.

Yes, it is possible to determine that from modifying items. This isn't that hard: when your trying to make the most from what the game has to offer (open dueling), very little gets by untested. A little edge with Open Wounds damage would be nice, considering you can do nothing about it if it gets activated. It is a melee damage bonus, so one could think that maybe if it's on a weapon it activates more often? Or maybe stacking amounts well above 100% can give the Open Wounds damage some sort of boost? ALL have been tested. No, nothing changes about Open Wounds when put on different inventory items. No, nothing changes about Open Wounds when % is stacked. This is as close to looking at the "hard coded" (I truly have no idea as to what I'm talking about here; is that what it's called? Hard coded?) parts of the game as you can get. "Oh that can't be true without looking at the code!" Well then, if the "code" made it so that Open Wounds works differently on different items, our test results would be different, right? They would reflect the "code".

You can only scratch the surface of the game's workings without looking at the actual files. What is in question, whether or not weapon OW and non-weapon OW are treated seperately, is not possible to determined just by modifying items.

See above.
Further, are you then saying that 80% of the information on these forums is not valid because most don't read code? Or all the information is valid because EVERYBODY reads code? I don't think so.

With that out of the way,

You are making many assumptions right here. For example, you are assuming that the game just adds the % chance of OW from all items when it reaches the step to calculate OW.

LOL DOES IT NOT???? Seriously, this is just basic stuff.

But what if it adds up the % from weapons at one point, and the % from everything else at another?

Who the hell cares? 1+2+3 and 3+2+1 both equal 6.

And what if one of these points happened after chance to hit was calculated, the other before?

Ah, I see. What if the code just starts running this equation, calculating whatever :scratch:, and then interrupts it, runs a different equation, then goes back to finishing the first one, giving a split chance with two results for one attribute? Heck, maybe Deadly Strike really gets rolled with only 1/2 the chance shown. Or maybe guided arrow really isn't physical damage, but some other, 7th kind of damage with the same properites as physical damage. Prove me wrong.

lol

Please, I said that because I wanted to show that you cannot possibly know everything that affects OW without looking at the code itself.

See above.

If this isn't an option, then the next best thing to do would be to check things that have a chance of being the case.

See below.

I gave evidence why off-hand OW might work differently, so therefore it was worth checking.

What evidence? That was just a bunch of what-ifs! See above!

I did see that statement in your last post.

Seeing ≠ Understanding.

. I showed why % OW from off-hand equipment might function differently,

See above.

so I don't see why it would be necessary to "draw the line."

Sigh. I was referring to me not being able to test everything.




This thread has made me midly insane, lol. I shouldn't care this much. It is an exercise in futility.

Out.

[NeoSyrex]

Yes, I tire of this too. You say I don't understand what you're talking about, but it really seems to be the other way around. The parts you think I don't understand are really just things you disagree on. I'll try to keep this simple.

Yes, it is possible to determine that from modifying items. This isn't that hard: when your trying to make the most from what the game has to offer (open dueling), very little gets by untested. A little edge with Open Wounds damage would be nice, considering you can do nothing about it if it gets activated. It is a melee damage bonus, so one could think that maybe if it's on a weapon it activates more often? Or maybe stacking amounts well above 100% can give the Open Wounds damage some sort of boost? ALL have been tested. No, nothing changes about Open Wounds when put on different inventory items. No, nothing changes about Open Wounds when % is stacked. This is as close to looking at the "hard coded" (I truly have no idea as to what I'm talking about here; is that what it's called? Hard coded?) parts of the game as you can get. "Oh that can't be true without looking at the code!" Well then, if the "code" made it so that Open Wounds works differently on different items, our test results would be different, right? They would reflect the "code".

The point is, you did this in 1.09 not 1.10.



Further, are you then saying that 80% of the information on these forums is not valid because most don't read code? Or all the information is valid because EVERYBODY reads code? I don't think so.

I didn't say that, I was saying that you can never be absolutely certain about how the game works without checking code. You can only go by what has a decent chance of being true, and % OW on weapons not being the same as % OW from non-weapons has a decent possibility of being true because other modifiers work the same way.


Ah, I see. What if the code just starts running this equation, calculating whatever :scratch:, and then interrupts it, runs a different equation, then goes back to finishing the first one, giving a split chance with two results for one attribute? Heck, maybe Deadly Strike really gets rolled with only 1/2 the chance shown. Or maybe guided arrow really isn't physical damage, but some other, 7th kind of damage with the same properites as physical damage. Prove me wrong.

As I said, you must go by what has a decent chance of being true.


Sigh. I was referring to me not being able to test everything.

What about my reply led you to believe I thought otherwise? If something has a decent chance of being true, it is worthy of testing.

This seems hopeless...

[bloembak]

Not saying it's wrong yet, but it can go that way. Make sure it stays decent okay, I'm sure you can :)