Proposed

In proposal stage.

04/12/2022

Sheet

Rationale

Some units scale better or worse than others, and the KQMS should have the ability to standardize such calcs. Units like Ayaka contribute over 70% of the damage output of a team, and players do not typically invest fully into the 3 other units that buff their carry. Therefore, the KQMS should have alternative, optional investment profiles for calculations.

Ayato Investment Tests
Allocation Notation: (Distributed, static, cap increase per unshared mainstat)

KQMS:
(20, 2, 2n)x4

  • Distribute 20 substats. 2 flat substats into each stat. Cap for a specific substat is 10 - (2*number of same stat, main stat artifacts). Kazuha has a cap of 6 EM distributed subs with 3xEM artifacts.

Hyper-invest:
(25, 2, 3n)x1
(10, 3, 2n)x3

Low-invest:
(20, 2, 2n)x1
(10, 2, 2n)x3

Most Impacted

Status: Proposed

KQMC:

  • 20 distributed, 2 static subs per stat, 2n cap increase per unshared mainstat.



Hyper-invest:

  • 25 distributed, 2 static subs per stat, 3n cap increase per unshared mainstat for the hyper.
  • 10 distributed, 3 static subs per stat, 2n cap increase per unshared mainstat for non-hyper units.



Low-invest:

  • 20 distributed, 2 static subs per stat, 2n cap increase per unshared mainstat for the carry.
  • 10 distributed, 2 static subs per stat, 2n cap increase per unshared mainstat for non-carry units.



Questions:

  • Does providing these additional allocations properly represent investment?
  • Is there a qualitative difference between the new allocations and the KQMS?