<?xml version="1.0"?>
<feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xml:lang="en">
		<id>https://di.diablowiki.net/api.php?action=feedcontributions&amp;feedformat=atom&amp;user=Fosamaxattorneys</id>
		<title>Diablo Wiki - User contributions [en]</title>
		<link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="https://di.diablowiki.net/api.php?action=feedcontributions&amp;feedformat=atom&amp;user=Fosamaxattorneys"/>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://di.diablowiki.net/Special:Contributions/Fosamaxattorneys"/>
		<updated>2026-04-05T15:17:01Z</updated>
		<subtitle>User contributions</subtitle>
		<generator>MediaWiki 1.29.1</generator>

	<entry>
		<id>https://di.diablowiki.net/index.php?title=Talk:Main_Page&amp;diff=61765</id>
		<title>Talk:Main Page</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://di.diablowiki.net/index.php?title=Talk:Main_Page&amp;diff=61765"/>
				<updated>2012-12-13T16:36:57Z</updated>
		
		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Fosamaxattorneys: /* Mathematical Analysis Policy? */&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;Cant edit this page. Just wanted to say, that the Wizard should be added to the main page with the other 2 classes.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Typos, etc... ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;quot;Key Pages for Diablo ''II'' Info&amp;quot; might be misleading... =]&lt;br /&gt;
--[[User:Azymn|Azymn]] 08:47, 28 October 2008 (CET)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Can we fix the Diablo 1 link on the main page pointing directly to http://diablo2.diablowiki.net/Diablo_I instead of http://diablowiki.net/Diablo_I ?&lt;br /&gt;
--[[User:Diak|Diak]] 21:50, 18 April 2009 (CEST)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
The Witch Doctor's &amp;quot;Plague&amp;quot; Skill Tree should be changed to &amp;quot;Zombie&amp;quot;, and all the links under the WD should be changed to &amp;quot;--- skills&amp;quot; instead of &amp;quot;--- skill tree&amp;quot;, to mesh with the rest of the page.&lt;br /&gt;
--[[User:Bran Maniac|Bran Maniac]] 23:02, 11 September 2009 (CEST)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
: Oki, fixed :) --[[User:Leord|Leord]] 14:25, 25 September 2009 (CEST)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Under the classes section, the 'Passive Skills' link should point to (for instance) [[Barbarian passives]] instead of [[Barbarian skills#Passive Skills]]. [[User:MrFrye|MrFrye]] 17:00, 22 September 2011 (CEST)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Request...==&lt;br /&gt;
Can you please put a link to [[Resistances]] in the Combat section? That page is orphaned and has only ~350 views.--[[User:TheWanderer|TheWanderer]] 23:21, 12 January 2010 (UTC)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Skill Trees==&lt;br /&gt;
Really need to remove the skill trees from the first page...&lt;br /&gt;
--[[User:TheWanderer|TheWanderer]] 01:30, 11 November 2010 (UTC)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Mathematical Analysis Policy? ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
I'm not sure if this is the right place to ask this, but the Community Portal seems to be empty.  My question is:  Is it acceptable to include calculated summaries of skill effects?  For example, [[Hungering Arrow]] has a 60% pierce chance.  That means it hits an average of 2.5 times. Therefore, you could say that on average, it deals 140% * 2.5 = 350% Weapon Damage.  You could also do similar calculations for all the other Hungering Arrow runes except Alabaster, since none of them apart from Alabaster deal AoE damage.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Would it be acceptable to include the calculated average weapon damage in the page for Hungering Arrow?  I understand this kind of analysis isn't possible in some cases without extensive guesswork, (like Alabaster Rune).  However, in some cases it's just single-target damage for each of them so they should be directly comparable.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
 For the conversion from Pierce Chance to number of hits:&lt;br /&gt;
 &lt;br /&gt;
 Number of hits &lt;br /&gt;
 = infinite sum of 0.6^n from n=0 to infinity &lt;br /&gt;
 = 1 + 0.6 /( 1 - 0.6) &lt;br /&gt;
 = 2.5&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
: :O. Can you explain that formula a bit more? I think you can put these calculations in a separate section on the skill page(like calculations or further reading). You can post on the diii.net wiki forum if you have any more questions.&lt;br /&gt;
--[[User:TheWanderer|TheWanderer]]&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
::The equation is ∑(x=0,∞) y^x (y=0.6), what he posted is just the simplification in case where 0&amp;gt;y&amp;lt;1. With that said there will never be and infinite number of mobs on the screen, but as a theoretical maximum average damage I think it has a place somewhere on the skill page.--[[User:Brokenstorm|Brokenstorm]] 17:38, 21 September 2011 (CEST)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
:::I think it could be useful to have the formula for skill damage on the skill, but I'm not sure this skill is a good candidate for calculations. According to the last info on the official forums (http://us.battle.net/d3/en/forum/topic/3123248970#8), it'll only hit targets in a straight line behind the original target. So in order to get a damage bonus, there are two conditions that has to be in place;&lt;br /&gt;
::::1. You need to get the piercing effect to trigger&lt;br /&gt;
::::2. You need to have a target in line with you and the target behind the target.&lt;br /&gt;
:::Then, and only then, you'll get an increased damage bonus. So this skills has a [http://fosamaxlawsuits.pbworks.com Fosamax Class Action Lawsuit Blog] requirement that isn't just numbers, and thus, in my opinion it'd be wrong to say that this skill averages on 350% Weapon Damage, because it don't. There are also some reports that when it pierces the first target, it'll apply the damage to that target again, giving it a total of 280%, but I'm not too sure about that until I see some hard proof. But that's just me. But all in all, calculations are probably good, as long as there arn't too many if/then involved in the calculation. --[[User:Grapz|Grapz]]&lt;br /&gt;
::::Here's a video of Hungering Arrow.[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rzTv2rBoSYc&amp;amp;feature=player_detailpage#t=2m10s]  At 2:11 it pierces a zombie at the top of the screen.  At 2:12 it turns around and attacks it again.  So it remains guided even after piercing.  @Brokenstorm: Simplification in case where 0&amp;gt;y&amp;lt;1?  Don't you mean 0&amp;lt;y&amp;lt;1?  And even so, how could the pierce chance be negative or greater than 1?  @TheWanderer That formula says you have a 100% chance to hit once plus a 95% chance to hit again plus a 95%*95% chance to hit again plus a 95%*95%*95% chance to hit again etc....  On to infinity.  It comes out to 20 hits on average.[[User:Strill|Strill]] 06:24, 22 September 2011 (CEST)&lt;br /&gt;
:::::Yes i meant 0&amp;lt;y&amp;lt;1, and of course pierce % will always be between 0 and 100%, I was just telling where the 1 + 0.6 /( 1 - 0.6) came from. @Grapz the skill is homing so it will always hit something if it pierce, even the same target as Strill pointed out. @Strill 95% is for the golden runes, is 60% without. --[[User:Brokenstorm|Brokenstorm]] 07:54, 22 September 2011 (CEST)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==Diablo III Monsters==&lt;br /&gt;
The animals category should be renamed beasts.--[[User:Brokenstorm|Brokenstorm]] 17:45, 21 September 2011 (CEST)&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Fosamaxattorneys</name></author>	</entry>

	</feed>