Wereform Attack Speed Formula

[Ruvanal]

p.s. What is the animation length for Hunger/Rabies for the Werewolf, and Hunger for the Werebear? Oh, and Fury if it has its own animation.

Sorry, missed those the first time due to not having much time to even do the post.

Feral Rage, Maul and Fury use the A1 animations sequence.
Fire Claws use the A2 animation sequence.
Rabies and Hunger use S3 animation sequence.
Did I miss any?

For the wolf and bear forms the A1 (right paw swing)and A2 left paw swing) sequence are their normal attack length WereBear=12, WereWolf=13.

For the S3 sequence (biting attack animation) the lengths are WereBear=13, WereWolf=10.

Sorry to miss these earlier but not all of these special sequences are for attacks. some are for things like the shapeshift effect or kicking actions and such. Nor are they always consistent between the different classes either.


You might want to reconsider how you 'renamed' some of those variables. Their orginal designations came from before the .DCC files had been cracked and modders could look at and manipulate the animation files. The term 'base+1' can actually be particularly misleading in some ways. This 'base+1' is the anim_length, which in reality is the true "base" to working off of for many things. Some of which can more readily be seen if you are using that for expressing your figures.

First a quick digression about the repeat attack skills like Strafe and Zeal (Hammerman please fill in with facts ;) ). Most of the attack animation should be set for an appearance like a Golf Swing; the target is hit at some point near the mid point of the swing, not at the end (last frame). As such to run a series of multiple repeat attacks you would not be repeating the entire swing sequence, but in fact only a portion of the the overall attack. From the various posts that I have seen on this it appears that the standard amount of a repeat sequence is to use 1/2 of the frames for the repeating portion. Then this repeat_anim is what is used in the rollback formula to determine the number frames to actually roll back on the repetative cycle. Frames_to_rollback= rollback*repeat_anim/100
(yes this is different than what Jarulf has listed in the past, but can better fit what is being observered from what I can see)
In the case of Zeal the rollback is 100% and this would result in using the full amount of the repeat_anim.

For example lets look at the page that Hammerman first linked to and its example for Zeal. They are listing a Paladins 1 handed weapon base as being 14 (anim_length=15). They then give without much explanation that when using Zeal that a 1 handed weapon should use a value of 6. Does not seem to come from anywhere in particular does it? But if you take into account that Zeal uses a 100% frame rollback and that the anim_length is 15; you can get 15/2=7 as the amount of frames that are being used for the repeating sequence. Note that a Zeal base of 6 which would correspond to the anim_length of 7 (6+1) that is apparently being used in this case.

In a similar manner you can then try checking the repative cycles of skills like Strafe.
Amazon bow anim_length=14, repeat_anim would be 14/2=7, rollback of Strafe is 50%.
Frames_to_rollback= 50*7/100 =3
For Amazon using a xbow, anim_length=20, repeat_anim=20/2=10.
Frames_to_rollback= 50*10/100 =5
Which match the accepted figures.

Ama Fend has a rollback of 60%.
1ht anim_length is 15, repeat_anim=7
Frames_to_rollback= 60*7/100 =4
2ht anim_length=18, repeat_anim=9
Frames_to_rollback= 60*9/100 =5
How well does this fit with a rigourous testing of Fend?

This relationship would be somewhat obscured if one is alway thinking of the 'base' as the real value and not realising why the "+1" is including in certain spots.

The rollback for Fury is 100%.