She has a 200 damage Multiplier, 7/meters per second, and 140 health multiplier. The bar stats here don’t really show her actual health, speed, and damage like they do for the other hero’s. I suggest that we make her bar stats look exactly like the should be instead of showing a false picture.
Well, think about it wizards are the lowest damage class but despite this she has a high damage multiplier making that accurate.
no she has the multiplier of 200 taht should be all the way at the end of the bar
Yes but wizards don’t have high damage equipment
I know and what is your point
So the bar shouldn’t be high because the overall damage is low, the bar measures damage not damage multiplier
she would deal 180 something damage with vine staff
If the other classes had it would be about 400 dps
they do more damage with negative damage multipliers than Usara with her op damage multiplier
So she is kind of a okay wizard now that I think of her. I think Nalfar is more OP
We are getting off topic
Yeah, I saw that too. That’s a strange bug. Because, Hattori has 180 or somathing like that and Usara has 200 and it isn’t as big as Hattori’s.
hattori has a damage Multiplier of 180x, not 190x.
can you power-swap with a neutral?
This isn’t on topic…
I think no. Only with friends.
The formula to calculate the “bar” isn’t that simple. I’ll try to find it sometime.
It does seem really wrong Ritic’s damage multiplier is 160% its longer that Usaras.
I’m guessing that her bar is lower because even though it’s 200x damage multiplier, she is a wizard, which means that she doesn’t have a good base damage in the first place. Think about it this way: A warrior might have more base power, but a lower multiplier than a wizard. Because of this, the warrior might have more damage after the multiplier, even though the wizard has a higher multiplier. I’m guessing that the “bar” formula changes depending on the hero’s class because a warrior is always going to be able to have more damage potential then a wizard. Also, the bar might not actually count the multiplier. Just a theory.
Thats a good theory and welcome back.
Thanks! I’ve been really busy these last couple months, but i’m going to try to be more active.