Re: [心得] 蓋茲(修理裝備)
防禦 │█████ 50
血量 │██▍ 24
推
10/26 18:28,
10/26 18:28
→
10/26 18:28,
10/26 18:28
推
10/26 18:34,
10/26 18:34
推
10/27 16:37,
10/27 16:37
揪竟,點3HP還是3DEF會比較硬呢?
已知
1.血量正比於(HP+20)
2.被打到的傷害,正比於 (100+敵方攻擊-自身防禦)
假設
存活的時間與血量成正比、與受到傷害成反比
因此可以得到一個公式
用來衡量一台機體點了 HP 及 DEF 之後有"多硬"(相較於未點):
(增幅血量/原始血量)*(原始傷害/增幅傷害)
於是我們用BR蓋茲的數據得到以下表格
3HP 2HP1DEF 1HP2DEF 3DEF
A機攻55 1.272727273 1.240909091 1.205741627 1.166666667
B機攻45 1.272727273 1.247474747 1.219251337 1.1875
C機攻35 1.272727273 1.255681818 1.236363636 1.214285714
結論
若不考慮損失速度的缺點 以及 保留攻擊得到的效益
3HP蓋茲還是比較硬,而點防對攻擊低的敵人比較有效果
點防對於白丘之類的高攻機體根本是無用
以現在(還會持續很久)的環境來說,3HP可能比較適合
ps.我記得以前好像說過腦波全防會比較硬@_@
--
※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc)
◆ From: 59.115.99.226
※ 編輯: leafwind 來自: 59.115.99.226 (11/02 01:22)
推
11/02 01:28, , 1F
11/02 01:28, 1F
推
11/02 01:30, , 2F
11/02 01:30, 2F
→
11/02 01:31, , 3F
11/02 01:31, 3F
→
11/02 01:49, , 4F
11/02 01:49, 4F
推
11/02 01:50, , 5F
11/02 01:50, 5F
→
11/02 01:53, , 6F
11/02 01:53, 6F
→
11/02 01:53, , 7F
11/02 01:53, 7F
→
11/02 01:53, , 8F
11/02 01:53, 8F
推
11/02 01:54, , 9F
11/02 01:54, 9F
推
11/02 01:55, , 10F
11/02 01:55, 10F
→
11/02 01:55, , 11F
11/02 01:55, 11F
→
11/02 01:58, , 12F
11/02 01:58, 12F
推
11/02 02:00, , 13F
11/02 02:00, 13F
→
11/02 02:00, , 14F
11/02 02:00, 14F
推
11/02 02:04, , 15F
11/02 02:04, 15F
→
11/02 02:05, , 16F
11/02 02:05, 16F
推
11/02 02:19, , 17F
11/02 02:19, 17F
推
11/02 02:23, , 18F
11/02 02:23, 18F
→
11/02 02:32, , 19F
11/02 02:32, 19F
→
11/02 02:32, , 20F
11/02 02:32, 20F
→
11/02 02:33, , 21F
11/02 02:33, 21F
→
11/02 02:34, , 22F
11/02 02:34, 22F
→
11/02 02:34, , 23F
11/02 02:34, 23F
推
11/02 02:34, , 24F
11/02 02:34, 24F
→
11/02 02:34, , 25F
11/02 02:34, 25F
→
11/02 02:35, , 26F
11/02 02:35, 26F
→
11/02 02:35, , 27F
11/02 02:35, 27F
→
11/02 02:35, , 28F
11/02 02:35, 28F
→
11/02 02:36, , 29F
11/02 02:36, 29F
→
11/02 02:36, , 30F
11/02 02:36, 30F
→
11/02 02:36, , 31F
11/02 02:36, 31F
推
11/02 02:38, , 32F
11/02 02:38, 32F
→
11/02 02:38, , 33F
11/02 02:38, 33F
→
11/02 02:39, , 34F
11/02 02:39, 34F
→
11/02 02:40, , 35F
11/02 02:40, 35F
→
11/02 02:40, , 36F
11/02 02:40, 36F
→
11/02 02:48, , 37F
11/02 02:48, 37F
推
11/02 02:51, , 38F
11/02 02:51, 38F
→
11/02 02:51, , 39F
11/02 02:51, 39F
→
11/02 02:51, , 40F
11/02 02:51, 40F
→
11/02 02:51, , 41F
11/02 02:51, 41F
→
11/02 02:51, , 42F
11/02 02:51, 42F
→
11/02 02:51, , 43F
11/02 02:51, 43F
→
11/02 02:51, , 44F
11/02 02:51, 44F
→
11/02 02:51, , 45F
11/02 02:51, 45F
→
11/02 02:51, , 46F
11/02 02:51, 46F
→
11/02 02:51, , 47F
11/02 02:51, 47F
推
11/02 02:52, , 48F
11/02 02:52, 48F
→
11/02 02:52, , 49F
11/02 02:52, 49F
推
11/02 02:52, , 50F
11/02 02:52, 50F
→
11/02 02:52, , 51F
11/02 02:52, 51F
推
11/02 02:54, , 52F
11/02 02:54, 52F
→
11/02 02:55, , 53F
11/02 02:55, 53F
→
11/02 02:55, , 54F
11/02 02:55, 54F
→
11/02 02:55, , 55F
11/02 02:55, 55F
→
11/02 02:55, , 56F
11/02 02:55, 56F
→
11/02 02:56, , 57F
11/02 02:56, 57F
→
11/02 02:57, , 58F
11/02 02:57, 58F
→
11/02 03:01, , 59F
11/02 03:01, 59F
→
11/02 03:06, , 60F
11/02 03:06, 60F
→
11/02 03:50, , 61F
11/02 03:50, 61F
推
11/02 05:12, , 62F
11/02 05:12, 62F
推
11/02 09:59, , 63F
11/02 09:59, 63F
推
11/02 10:49, , 64F
11/02 10:49, 64F
→
11/02 12:17, , 65F
11/02 12:17, 65F
推
11/02 17:30, , 66F
11/02 17:30, 66F
→
11/02 17:46, , 67F
11/02 17:46, 67F
→
11/14 03:56, , 68F
11/14 03:56, 68F
→
12/15 17:31, , 69F
12/15 17:31, 69F
討論串 (同標題文章)