you ppl are so dumb man, u dont even understand what the problem is with saying you do triple the damage LOL

There isn't a problem.

It's triple but the numeral figure as a whole is less.

it's not a "problem", it's wordplay. The reason a trick question is fun is because the trick is technically correct but unexpected.

I think you need to get out of the mindset that “amp = double damage” and think of it as “amp = -100% damage reduction” to understand.

Going from taking 50% less damge to taking 50% more damage = taking triple damage. Its just a fact. Cannot be debated. Thats why people find you so baffling.

This post was edited by phaedrus420 on Nov 29 2017 01:15pm

guilde: douche but right

there is no problem with saying you do triple the damage
for you, "the damage" can only refer to "the damage before physical resistance but after pvp penalty".
but this is stupid: your weapon damage is damage, your screen damage is damage, your damage after pvp penalty but before resist is damage, your damage after resist is damage, and the life lost... is still damage, by definition.

in the end, the most relevant "damage" is the final damage, ie how much life they lose. so we compare this value between with and without amp.

alone there is no problem saying triple dmg, but saying that alongside saying double damage with 0 dr, is kookoo

Not if you know how to comprehend anything...

I suppose the answer in post 2 could be misunderstood, causing someone to think that they will take more dmg if they have damage reduction, but personally i like the way he words it. And are people really going to think that more damage reduction with make them take more damage

Sticky this please