Because “-” is a binary operator that reduces the real number on the left hand side by the real number on the right hand side. 100% = 1, and 50% = 0.5, remember that % is just a notation for *0.01
My calculator does not show 25%, it shows 0%. And math should not be dependent on what calculator you use. I suspect that your calculator interprets “-x%” as " *(1-x)/100 " whereas my calculator use the mathematically correct notation that x% just means x/100
Let’s say you have a pair of pants that costs 50 Euro, then their prince increases by 20% and then there is 20% sale. The final price is calculated as 50*(1+0.2)*(1-0.2) = 48 Euro
Damage Modification is supposed to be additive. Much of the game has been balanced around that fact. I confirmed in game, however, that 2x Amarastan Crushers are in fact not 0 damage. If I had to guess, I imagine this bug comes from the fact that ABB has a chance to Freeze… because CC is, technically, a damage type and odd things happen when you convert to/from it or multiply it in some fashion.
Rest assured this is the next thing I’ll be hounding after @Zantai to get fixed.
I am not that dense, man, I understand how simple math works. 1-0,5-0,5 is indeed 0, but that is if the value of the last 50% is relative to initial 1 (100%). If game thinks it needs to substract 50% of already reduced damage by first substraction it will do 0,5 - 50% and not 0,5 - 0,5.
As I have already said maybe it’s not 0,5*0,5 but 0,5 - 50%.
This is probably the most pointless of conversations, but I’ve been poking the hornet’s nest all night, so what’s one more stab at it?
Grim Dawn does not deal in %'s…much. Resists are flat values which are only treated as a % multiplier at the end. Same goes for regular damage increase - if you have three sources of +30% Physical Damage, you wind up with +90%, not +219.7%. Presumably, and in most circumstances hitherto, Damage Modification behaves the same way and the % does not matter until the end calculation.
But hey, as long as we’re doing math incorrectly, I can (correctly) allege that 50 + 50 = 160. Figure that one out.
Thank god this is not my math class where I really need to explain how to express mathematical relations in a proper way I am on vacation now, I should not waste my time correcting improper usage of percentage increase/decrease I am off to the gym now and later the beach!
“Presumably”. But it’s a 150 year old game engine some mechanics of which even Crate can’t explain sometimes.
But anyway, @Ceno and @malawiglenn what do you think of the little video I recorded? Is it possible that game thinks the same way? Because if you think about, it might very well be true since you equip one Crusher AFTER another and not simultaneously.
Absolutely. I haven’t checked the exact numbers (because I was too lazy) but sure, I wouldn’t discount it as a possibility that it boils down to 25% damage. I still hold this to be a possible offender too, though:
Edit: Secondary theory that this happens because it’s two skill modifiers doing it instead of global buffs, like (Old) Maiven’s and Prismatic Rage. Skill Modifiers have a history of stacking in unintended ways.
Does that math apply to -% resistances too? For example if a monster has 100% fire resistance , and I have 2 sources of -30% fire res. Would that mean the monster is 49% fire resistances after those 2 sources apply 100% - 30% - 30%? Or still 40% (100%- (30%+30%) )?
If not then it looks inconsistent. -% should behave the same throughout GD.
Even my default calc on android does that. It has something to do with its programming that when mad_lee typed “100-50%-50%” it became 100(1-0.5)(1-0.5) or sth like that.
The shit math they observed was a bug. It should work the same as the Rr mechanics we know. Source: Zantai hinself said it should be zero damage on double crusher.
Yes in some programming languages you can do special things with the predefined operators.
In C++ you know, n++ means n = n + 1 but that does not make sense from a mathematical point of view.
Yea I know how the miscalculation happend and it can be more user friendly (even though it’s straight up mathematically incorrect) for some people (who honestly also don’t know/care about the rules of math). I just like to make fun of apple products, that’s all tbh
I am on vacation now, I should not waste my time correcting improper usage of percentage increase/decrease 
I am off to the gym now and later the beach!
