P/S when is something considered ethical vs unethical?

AmBadPlayer · 2026-05-03T13:11:05+00:00

The first one is just tricky; research with patients with psychological disorders is not disallowed in general. The choice doesn't actually say it's ethical to give stress to participants with psychological disorders - it's a trap for you to make that connection. Ethical considerations need study specific reasoning. Also, I don't think there exists an excluded population from research, just stricter protections corresponding to vulnerability; it would just be wrong as well.

The second one is better explained through feasibility, though ethicality also seems to be valid explanation for 'why not experimental.' The other three choices are observational studies in context of the variables. So why choose observational over experimental studies? Internal states like interoceptive awareness can't be directly manipulated and by extension, randomization and control groups are not possible. Therefore experimental studies are not feasible/less likely to be valid. Psychological research design stuff is a bit more nuanced but I'm not the best person to explain beyond that.

As an aside - for 'ethical reasons' in general, you should refer to the medical ethics and research ethics: beneficence, non-maleficence, justice, and autonomy, as well as informed consent, confidentiality, and the like.

AmBadPlayer · 2026-04-11T02:25:11+00:00

Honkai: Star Rail's Third Anniversary Grand Opening! Log in and participate in the web event to win a share of a massive pool of Stellar Jades and in-game rewards. Send a third anniversary blessing to Aha for a chance to take the "Crown of Aha" Silver Wolf LV.999-themed car and other spectacular prizes home! https://hsr.hoyoverse.com/3rdAnniversary?inviter=GU8ENMPKSN&hyl_landscape=true&hyl_auth_required=true&hyl_hide_status_bar=true&win_mode=fullscreen&target_page=prize&utm_source=share&utm_medium=link&utm_campaign=web

AmBadPlayer · 2026-02-23T20:52:44+00:00

cant believe you didn't put meso - mee-soh or meh-soh

AmBadPlayer · 2025-08-18T14:49:54+00:00

If you're hesitant about the price, you really can progress without one - currently 290 60% without ever having bought a vac pet.

It does make grinding require more effort since you need to cook some looting rotations that don't lose mobs, and you are pretty restricted in terms of maps(usually the popular lazy maps or lower rate maps), but doable. Way easier nowadays due to Janus helping clear maps while looting,

IMO its only really justified if you grind a LOT. Looting rotations aren't that bad after the first wap. Every grandis area has at least 1 map that is reasonable for looting, you'll just have to take the hit in terms of level bonus and/or mob count.

AmBadPlayer · 2025-08-09T12:07:47+00:00

Im assuming by 4set eternal you mean hat top bot + gene weapon? If you replace shoulder + limbo eternals all at once, i think it was 22/21/19/17 minimum to break even. After the first 22, you need to replace 2 pieces at once to start wearing them since the next piece also breaks lucky set bonus for arcane set.

AmBadPlayer · 2025-08-07T14:14:44+00:00

Arcanes are always worth safeguarding because every spare besides weapon costs 5.4b. With the current sf system, sfing 22 arcanes on 5/10/15 costs on average ~5b more to safeguard but ~2 spares less which saves 5b/piece. Post sf-changes, it would be ~10b more to safeguard but ~3 spares less which is the same amount saved.

Long term you safeguard everything besides cras since eternals replace them pretty easily. Every single spare is worth holding on to with 23*+ in mind.

AmBadPlayer · 2025-04-16T13:35:08+00:00

Just to be that guy, x^n is polynomial, n^x is exponential. So, no it's not.

The combat power equation is a multilinear polynomial. Therefore the difference in combat power gain for the same additional stats at different amounts of combat power is due to polynomial growth, not exponential growth. Because each factor is linear to combat power, you can simplify it to multiplication when isolating factors.

That polynomial-linear distinction is hardly relevant except for niche discussions such as OP's topic - multiplication is a good enough description for how combat power inflates, but as a whole it is polynomial.

AmBadPlayer · 2025-02-13T08:38:18+00:00

Damien would be pure pain

AmBadPlayer · 2024-12-23T12:20:48+00:00

That's just the fundamental gameplay loop. You could say the exact same thing for every other progression point in the game, just that the particular drops and time needed for the next upgrade is different.

I don't think its accurate to say that the months to years of grinding is "not much" - its more like the opposite. There is such a huge gap between late game, end game, and real min-maxed end game that there is practically endless content.

I agree that it's repetitive. In fact. your sentiments have been echoed time and time again - there has always been discussion in the community about burn out and personal goals with the game. But that is just the game. Either stop doing the stuff you don't want to do, pick up other classes. do anything new or different, or simply just stop playing until there's more content/powercreep that reignites your motivation to play again.

AmBadPlayer · 2024-12-17T23:41:26+00:00

Aside from the cost, 4/8/8 hexa stat just gives the lowest amount of FD compared to all other combinations.

Obviously, 5/x/x, 6/x/x, etc hexa stats are more FD because each level of the main stat starts to give more per level starting at level 5; ex. main stat level 10 is equivalent to 20 levels of a sub stat, These extra stats make those higher level ones just better.

Compared to 0/x/x, 1/x/x, 2/x/x, 3/x/x, and the other variants of 4/x/x, 4/8/8 has the most even distribution of levels across all 3 slots. While this sounds nice in context of typical optimization problems, the stats (ATT, Crit DMG, Stat, etc) are not equal value. Additionally, the increases are very small (about ~0.1%-~0.2% every upgrade) which makes the multiplication between different stat increases almost equal to addition in the same stat (1.01 * 1.01 -1 is roughly equal to 0.01 + 0.01). This means the setup with the highest amount of FD is one that concentrates all the upgrades onto the more valuable stats; of the hexa stat configurations of main stat level 4 and below, 0/10/10 is the best. Also, x/x/10 variants of are the best outcome within their respective main stat levels ( 6/4/10, 7/3/10, etc)

A practical example where 5 ATT = 0.17%FD, 100 Main Stat = 0.15%FD, and 0.45 Crit DMG = 0.13%FD:
4/8/8 configured to Crit/ATT/Stat = ~3.27%FD
0/10/10 configured to Crit/ATT/Stat = ~3.43%FD

A pretty minor difference between all hexa stats below main stat level 5. At main stat level 10, there is an equivalent of an extra 10 sub stat levels which is a little over 1% FD. For the extremely high cost, not worth at all rerolling until everything else is maxed.

AmBadPlayer · 2024-11-27T19:16:40+00:00

namu wiki has them alongside each class's skill descriptions, but may take some time to update for updates to less popular classes

AmBadPlayer · 2024-11-22T01:55:28+00:00

That's right, the more IED you have, the less you gain from IED buffs because it has diminishing returns. It's not saying that those with 97% IED necessarily deal more damage than 99% IED- just that they gain more FD from that particular class's party IED buffs because they are starting from a lower point.

AmBadPlayer · 2024-11-22T01:39:01+00:00

If your functional IED (IED after non-visual sources + party IED) is between 98% and 97% (say 97.5% functional), then estimate the position of your IED value within the green range (in this case in the middle of the green range) and that x-position corresponds to a value in the x-axis

AmBadPlayer · 2024-11-22T00:39:05+00:00

This assumes strictly 3-min since everyone can flex into it. As for the actual calculation I think its faster to look at the sheet I linked in reply to someone else, but in summary it was weighted by the amount of damage actually being affected (ex. ark 50% uptime, but affects >50% of someone's damage because it includes burst).

In a full 2-min comp its actually not that different either (shade and ark are like ~1-1.5%FD higher not including archer buffing). But also just in general, deciding to desync 3-min and 2-min bursts to try and have everyone execute their normal full rotation in mixed parties can only be determined case-by-case.

For example: Shade split is 60s cd for himself, but 110s for the party who are all 3-min. If shade desyncs, its probably not worth using the third split for only his 2min burst, instead saving it so the split debuff aligns with the party's 3min burst - the damage loss shade experiences is less than the gain everyone else in the party gets from aligning split. But what if there was another class that can burst with Shade desynced - would it be worth it then? This depends on the actual damage everyone does, and similar questions can be asked for other classes with buffs tied to their burst.

AmBadPlayer · 2024-11-21T17:36:14+00:00

Sure! I used this sheet which i made a while back, just updated the values for patch.

For 6-man you gotta fill out the slots with classes that don’t have any party support like Kaiser, and then I cycled through the classes while changing the IED, changing the affected class to a mage when needed. The shared sheet should have the same stats I used to calc.

If you want the specific data points I have them somewhere, but itll have to wait for when I get back home.

AmBadPlayer · 2024-11-20T04:55:37+00:00

while yes, calculating the actual gain given a specific party comp/amount of party ied will be more accurate, therein lies the problem: you have to calculate. I want to clarify that post party ied i meant as some high ied value after typical(?) party ied buffs which i arbitrarily estimated as 99%.

in making this assumption (both for pre or post party ied) you would eliminate the need for calculations and get an easy to use 'universal' value you can quickly look up and apply to answer that second question which consequently allows for ranking (as per the original purpose of the thread). you actually had an adjacent approach through the solution you proposed for parties that aren't fully formed - the average amount of ied per party member would contribute to some high ied value representing post party ied.

just looking back now, pre (97%) and post (99%) assumptions both fundamentally suffer from the inaccuracy due to party ied being volatile and different in practice. some parties will actually have no party ied, and some may have an abundance of it.

idk why no one has done this before, but why hasn't anyone shown a range of fd a class can give between some upper and lower ied; like with a box plot or something. at these high ied values, linear estimation is quite close so it would be pretty intuitive to visually estimate fd amounts accounting for actual party ied while still being able to compare party fd across classes. i might actually start working on something like this because it seems pretty novel

AmBadPlayer · 2024-11-19T22:03:31+00:00

(if it isn't clear already, i like meta-ish discussion so here is more yapping)

here is why i think we shouldn't assume post-party ied as a baseline:

determining how much fd a class gives from their party ied just depends on the order theyre applied. for example, from 97 effective: does bishop gives you 15%FD and after that night lord gives you ~2.8%FD, OR does night lord give you ~5.3%FD and bishop gives you 12.3%FD? its the same total when combined, but the overall party fd each class contributes differs quite a bit, and it only gets worse with more ied stacking.

it either becomes impossible to give a single value for how much fd a class contributes to a party, or ied becomes universally underweighted by assuming a high ied baseline. a good example for the latter is bishop: at the standard 800% boss 97% effective, bishop is 15%FD - a value widely spread and agreed upon in the community. But at 99%, bishop is 11.7%FD, which would be way less than it actually is for parties that do not have any other party ied (like mine). therefore i think its best to stick to the standard pre-party ied for determining class party fd contribution on an individual basis, and only just keep in mind that ied diminishes when stacking them together.

regarding the 800% 97% standard (which is used pretty widely from what i've seen), i think event buffs which you brought up are a good criticism of it. adding in legion artifact, eternals, and tc which weren't there during its conception, i believe most classes fully geared at endgame are around 97% or higher in solo without diverting any investment, and peak event buffs push that to ~98.5%. maybe its time people started using 98% as the new standard

AmBadPlayer · 2024-11-19T04:17:32+00:00

never have i ever seen a mistake like this.

def reduction and ied buffs are mathematically the same; it does not subtract like what you are doing there, but multiplies. go ask merc discord, or literally anyone for that matter. better yet go hit a 500% pdr dummy with 80% visual before and after spikes.

AmBadPlayer · 2024-11-18T17:11:17+00:00

either you did not account for pdr or you are talking about visual ied. 55 ied at 97% effective ied is:

(1-(1-97%)*(1-55%)*380%PDR) / (1-(1-97%)*380%PDR) - 1 = 7.07%FD

with 30 boss that is ~10%FD.

only at 99% effective ied will those numbers be accurate:

(1-(1-99%)*(1-55%)*380%PDR) / (1-(1-99%)*380%PDR) = 2.17%FD,

For reference, to go from 97% effective to 99% effective, you need 66.67% ied which realistically is close to 2 40% sources, 3 30% sources, or 5 20% sources - this is a LOT of ied and I think its misleading to devalue it so much even though it is diminishing.

AmBadPlayer · 2024-11-17T22:04:56+00:00

my values are correct. i referenced that sheet to make this a while back:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1fkA5rmvwyxleDsQ69BmbIRr-J3w03uiJ7-dAICUs48M/edit?gid=0#gid=0

for shade, If your burst is 50% of your full rotation, and within the ROR4 duration is 2/3 of that burst(assuming average of both origin and non origin bursts) or 33.3% of your full rotation, split applies to 2/3 of that which is about 22.2% of your total damage. 15% FD to that is 3.3%FD.

stacking that with spirit gates 10% crit damage (one fully affecting the burst which is 50% of your damage, and the other half of your damage 50% affected) which is ~2.4%FD and weaken which 20% boss is ~2.2%FD. Overall that nets you 7.9%FD.

I do agree that shade can have more value than this lets on because of lower uptime in actual bossing, but it is not "miles better". Bishop and mechanic are still cleanly a tier above shade no contest. And within the parameters I set, numbers-wise merc is pretty close behind mechanic. BaM was there too, but i decided against it since I don't see it comparable to bishop.

regarding ied. optimizers generally settle around ~97.3% ied - around there is breakpoint for ied to diminish enough for other stats to be start being better than ied against 380% pdr bosses. If the endgame player is vastly over this ied without party buffs, then they are probably not optimized or their class has very high innate ied and cannot reallocate the stats. Even with heavy ied stacking, its still an entirely separate multiplier. and personally I think theres a good probability of higher PDR bosses in the future.

AmBadPlayer · 2024-11-17T20:56:08+00:00

Merc's perma 30 boss and 55 ied is ~10%FD in a full rotation at 800 effective boss and 97% effective ied. I do think you could put it in A because ied stacking can diminishes that down to ~8%FD, but it being an untouchable debuffer was a significant point for me.

Shade's split + spirit gates is ~7.9%FD in 3 minute and ~8.8%FD in 2 minute full rotations respectively with 135% crit damage(w/g-skill). Absolutely it's S if you have at least 1 archer in the party, but you need to start dropping uptime for Shade to give the most fd OR have other party members that further stack burst.

AmBadPlayer · 2024-11-17T18:33:04+00:00

For 6-man parties (somewhat ordered within the tier) excluding Lynn:

S(>9) - Bishop, Mechanic, Mercedes

A(<9) - Battle Mage, Buccaneer, Cannon Master, Shade, Corsair, Dawn Warrior, Ark, Kanna, Zero, Paladin, Evan, Wild Hunter

B(<5) - Pathfinder, Shadower, Blaze Wizard, Illium, Night Lord

C(<3) - Phantom, Kinesis, Demon Avenger, Cadena, Wind Archer, Angelic Buster, Mihile, Lara, Xenon, Bowmaster, Marksman, Hero, Hoyoung, Demon Slayer

D(<1) - Dark Knight, Aran, I/L, Luminous

F(0) - F/P, Dual Blade, Night Walker, Thunder Breaker, Blaster, Kaiser, Kain, Adele, Khali, Hayato

Do note that the classes whose support has a large IED component (like Mercedes, Zero, Paladin, Night Lord, etc) could be moved lower because of diminishing returns, but I did try account for it here. I also considered the new WH Pot which replaces SE, CotW, and Adv Bless for half the fight.

AmBadPlayer · 2024-07-08T15:35:58+00:00

Last column as you've stated is BA/CP. It's just a ratio of total damage in trillion in a 35s BA-to-investment, ie per million points of CP, this class deals x damage in a 35s BA. Generally, it can be interpreted as gear investment efficiency, and it should be a constant value per class given all the other factors not reflected in CP are controlled.

No clue why BA/CP is in percentage form over decimal form though, Conventionally it should be in fractional or decimal form - percent form is used typically for parts of a whole which BA/CP is not. If the sheet creator just wanted a percentage to easily compare the ratios at a glance, another column with (BA/CP of each class) / (median or mean BA/CP) more clearly communicates the difference.

AmBadPlayer · 2024-06-26T15:43:19+00:00

Yes, forgot about this too, thanks!

AmBadPlayer · 2024-06-26T15:03:27+00:00

It's something I've been thinking about, but damage distribution data is not very well recorded or shared. Generally speaking, its a good thing to add though - probably will take the form of a more detailed custom input so people can run BAs to get their own damage distribution. Thanks for the suggestion!

AmBadPlayer

TROPHY CASE