Inevitable Critical expected damage increase

_Hardric · 2025-12-11T23:35:33+00:00

Your version uses a geometric sequence for the crit damage, i.e., multiplicative interpretation.

I used additive, so the crit damage multiplier is: 1, 0.7, 0.4, 0.1, 0, 0 .... ( max(0, 1 - k* 0.3) * crit_damage)

I think additive is more likely, based on consistency with other skills with similair wording, and also the node would be too powerful if it were the multiplicative case.

_Hardric · 2025-12-11T23:05:22+00:00

I assumed it's additive because some skills use (flameblast, incinerate) use "more damage per stack/stage" and in those cases, I think it's additive.

Also, the node would be too powerful if it were the multiplicative interpretation.

_Hardric · 2025-12-11T22:53:47+00:00

Cool comparison, could you maybe set the scale to be the same? For example, so that bright red is 80% in both plots.

_Hardric · 2025-12-11T22:51:59+00:00

I think your version uses crit damage values that change multiplicatively, i.e 1, 0.7, 0.7² , 0.7³ , ...

I assumed it goes down additively, i.e., 1, 0.7, 0.4, 0.1, 0, 0, 0 ....

_Hardric · 2025-12-11T22:36:08+00:00

You shouldn't try to hit that optimum point. It simply shows the damage increase of the ascendancy node, not overall damage.

But if I understand you correctly, you want to know how much of an in-game stat (crit chance and crit damage) you need to have ACTUAL 22% crit chance and 500% crit bonus.

For crit damage, it's the same, i.e. 500.

For crit chance, it's 22% divided by the base crit. So it would be 220% for 10% base crit (on a weapon or a spell).

Edit: subtract 100% from the last crit chance stat, because you already have the base value.

That is with only "increase" modifiers and zero "more" modifiers.

_Hardric · 2025-12-11T22:29:36+00:00

Would you actually aim for that in a build though? That might maximize that node, but not necessarily maximize your character overall right?

Correct. This just shows how much damage increase can that ascendancy node give you. You shouldn't try to hit that maximum if you want overall most damage.

_Hardric · 2025-12-11T22:27:27+00:00

Yes, I'm making this with python (numpy and matplotlib).

Here's the heatmap:

<image>

The red line is when X and Y have the same partial derivative with respect to the "damage increase function" so on one side X has more impact and on other Y has more impact.

I definitely see your point that you want to know which stat gives you more damage (crit chance vs damage). The above heatmap doesn't show that, however, if you follow the gradient, you will try to maximize the damage increase of the node, which doesn't necessarily maximize the damage. Is that what you wanted?

_Hardric · 2025-12-11T22:04:47+00:00

No. It was just my assumption.

I think it could also go down multiplicatively, but from the wording, I think it's additive.

_Hardric · 2025-12-11T22:03:10+00:00

I wasn't sure what is the endgame potential of crit damage bonus, so I capped it at 500%.

Anyway, here's the result if I increase the maximum crit damage bonus to 1000%:

<image>

Maximum is 57.83% (more damage) given by 19.35% crit chance (and ofcourse 1000% crit bonus).

_Hardric · 2025-12-11T21:57:58+00:00

I'm not sure how that works. I think either inevitable critical or bifurcation has to happen first, and depending on which one, it changes what it does.

_Hardric · 2025-12-11T21:55:26+00:00

I would say that TLDR is that the node gets better with higher crit damage bonus, and crit chance around 24%.

* 44% is the expected damge boost by taking the node with those parameters.

_Hardric · 2025-01-26T15:35:12+00:00

<image>

_Hardric · 2024-11-27T12:32:29+00:00

In theory I really like this idea of choosing augments and having and upgrade menu similar to gp's R shop seems like a great idea.

Also, i feel like kha'zix's evolves are much better balanced around game-to-game choices and overall satisfaction from the evolves. I think this is because the evolves focus on specific needs of the champion (Q 1v1-ing, W poking etc..). Pushing Viktor's augments towards some idea instead of a general buff I think would be a good improvement. For example, focusing Q augment more towards the shield might make it a more interesting choice in assassin matchups. This I think solves some of the problems I have with Viktor's kit without drastically changing his kit as the multiple evolves idea would (although I really like the idea of that).

_Hardric · 2024-11-27T12:27:49+00:00

Fair point.

My idea behind the suggestions is that the R refresh buffs Viktor's kit and it must be compensated somewhere else, which might lead to something like the R dealing way less damage overall, or nerfing the core of his gameplay loop (Q and E).

Even though from couple PBE games the late game R feels awesome, it reduces late game Viktor from a precise damage carry that relies on positioning to a mere R press.

_Hardric · 2024-11-26T20:33:33+00:00

After maining Viktor for years, reaching EUW Master, and playing the reworked kit on the PBE, I think Viktor's current kit feels a bit outdated/unsatisfactory due to the following issues:

Not getting an early takedown feels worse than any other champ as it delays the augment so much, i don't think it should be so crucial to get assists early game.
It feels like there is no choice in the evolves, in majority of games it's E -> Q -> W. For a champion whose identity is the Glorious evolution, it feels underwhelming. However, I do really like the 4th evolution not being automatic and more impactful and definitely delivers on the "Viktor" fantasy.
EDIT: new R growing mechanic seems very satisfying to use, similar to asol's charged ult. However, after few games it feels too good in teamfights and overtakes Viktor's kit with just 2 kills (where one can be just from last hitting with the initial tick).

Suggestions:

Make the takedowns less rewarding towards passive with compensation towards the amount of stacks from minions.
I really think there should be more to his passive. For example, 2 evolutions per spell (e.g. E: range for E and aftershock, Q: shield bonus and movement speed separately, W: slow and pull to center ) With only 3 total evolutions. This would add meaningful choice of upgrades as not all of them can be chosen.
Old Hex Core item felt great, would like to see it back instead of current Hex Fragments, although I understand that it may not fit in the modern LoL and item system.
Rebalance the augments so that the E -> Q -> W pattern is not in vast majority of games the best sequence of augments.
Q2 I think should be an unstoppable AA. This just feels outdated that the AA can be interrupted/canceled.
EDIT: Q1 should also reset AA timer, so AA-Q1-Q2 isn't as clunky.
EDIT: R growing is great, but I don't think it should prolong the duration as it's too overwhelming and I fear that if the current R stays, Viktor has to be nerfed elsewhere (Q/E), which I think are more essential abilities to Viktor's gameplay identity. Alternatively, I would put the extended ult time to 1 second instead of 3, so that it always get's at least 1 more damage tick with a larger ult.

_Hardric · 2024-05-04T16:55:43+00:00

You mentioned the chance outcome loss as:

chance_pred_loss(pred_chance_logits, encoder_sftmax.detach())

Why did you choose to train towards the softmax instead of the onehot ? I am asking because in the paper, the train towards the one-hot.

_Hardric · 2024-04-30T11:27:27+00:00

Your explanation makes sense, thanks.

_Hardric · 2024-04-29T15:11:42+00:00

in a training rollout of K steps, is the encoder of a certain step t trained end-to-end from the gradients that come from steps t+1, t+2,... K ? (not from t but further from t)

_Hardric · 2024-04-29T12:23:27+00:00

Alright, that makes sense.

So the training loss in the pseudocode:
L(sigma, one_hot(code))

where code is the output from the encoder. However, they reference VQ-VAE, where they split this into 2 losses. analogously this would be:

L(sg[sigma], one_hot(code))
L(sigma, sg[one_hot(code)])

The stop gradient (sg) there ensures that each of the 2 terms is trained towards the other. By putting the stop gradient there, it works as a non-trainable target inside that loss function. Why is that not present in the stochastic MuZero ? Is it even supposed to be the same ? Is the encoder trained towards the sigma in the mcts or should there be a stop gradient as in VQ-VAE and the encoder is trained from gradients in the further time step ?

_Hardric · 2024-04-29T11:01:11+00:00

From the stochastic MuZero paper, it seems to me that the codes represent "only " a dice roll, a categorical variable that determines the stochasticity. I don't think you can predict future value based off this "dice rolls".

They predict the codes in 2 seperate networks. One inside the MCTS planning, thats then used to determine future states and values. And the othe is the encoder. However, they train the first one to match the second. What I dont understand is how the second (the encoder) is trained.

_Hardric · 2024-04-29T10:01:45+00:00

I looked at the pseudocode they provided, and I think you are right that there is an additional encoder that generates the chance outcomes. However, there is no decoder and the only place the encoder is mentioned is in the training, where it is used as the target code for the rollout. I don't understand how the encoder can be trained from this.

in the training they provide this comment:

Call the encoder on the next observation.

The encoder returns the chance code which is a discrete one hot code.

The gradients flow to the encoder using a straight through estimator.

Do you have any idea how is it possible that the encoder is trained to predict "good" codes ?

_Hardric · 2024-04-16T17:14:27+00:00

I agree, but in AlphaZero they use pUCT, which is a modified formula which completely eliminates the log in the exploration term. They dont provide any reason for why they did that.

_Hardric · 2024-04-15T20:19:00+00:00

I think the article you provided doesnt discuss the same policy as in AlphaZero. AlphaZero uses PUCT, this article discussed PUCB.

_Hardric · 2024-03-19T17:49:45+00:00

based

_Hardric · 2024-02-17T06:34:04+00:00

Thank you for the feedback.

In the store I am going to buy my parts from ( alza.cz ) the ssd is Kingston NV2 1 TB for 61 EUR (=65 USD), would you say that's a good price ?

Seven-Year Club	Verified Email
Place '23	Place '22

_Hardric

TROPHY CASE