Jump to content

Help me understand PPMs: Gaussian's in Aim (or equivalents)


Seroster01

Recommended Posts

As the title would imply I'm a bit hazy on how to determine the frequency of Gaussian's BU procs when slotted into Aim (the character I'm trying to implement it on is a Water Sent so it's technically Tidal Forces, but AFAIK that's just semantics?).

 

This is probably oversimplified, but my general understanding of the system is that each proc IO has a default PPM that would result in a functional 90% chance to trigger if the power it's in has no slotted +rech & the IO hasn't procced its allotted # of times in the last 60 seconds. As such, it seems on paper that an unenhanced Aim would have the 90% chance to trigger on every activation due to the 90s base recharge of the power. So with that laid out, the part that has me befuddled is how slotting +rech affects the chance for it to proc & how the whole thing interacts with high levels of global +rech.

 

So the final math equation is this: if I have a power with a 90s recharge time slotted with the BU proc + ED-capped recharge reduction, does that mean I've cut the chance for it to proc on any given activation in half? If you add that part of the equation to an amount of +rech that the Planner says will result in a ~30s CD, how frequently should I expect it to go off when I activate the power?

 

Thanks in advance for any responses. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes I read that before the post, but I didn't really understand it. In a spot of luck I decided to open the spreadsheets listed in the article (I don't usually open them on my phone cause they're hard to browse on it) and discovered there's actually a PPM calculator google doc.  Experimenting  with the sheet clarified the maths for me, though it looks like I need to look at the in-game activation time for that step.

 

Most of my confusion was how MRT was calculated, mostly because I couldn't figure out of the slotted +rech in the equation was supposed to be put in decimal form (.95) or percentage form (95). I may still have it wrong, but it seems like the results make more sense in decimal form so I assume that's the proper version. 🤷‍♂️

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...