Abberant vs Standard Dinos

[RipRavage]

So I was just curious as to what everybody thought about choosing normal or abberant variants of dinos to tame and breed.  Aberrant Dinos do 10% more base damage, but have 10% less health, so for some Dinos this is a blessing and others it is a curse.  A good example of a mixed bag is the Spino, the abberant Spino gets a nice boost to its attack yet is suffers from a 10% drop onto its base health which is pretty mediocre even on normal Spino variant.  Which Dinos do you preffer standard and which Dinos do you prefer aberrant?

[banggugyangu]

17 hours ago, RipRavage said:

Aberrant Dinos do 10% more base damage, but have 10% less health, so for some Dinos this is a blessing and others it is a curse

Where do you get this information?  I haven't tamed a single aberrant dino who's stats didn't line up perfectly with the calculations based on what's on the wiki.

[Guest DJRone89]

25 minutes ago, banggugyangu said:

Where do you get this information?  I haven't tamed a single aberrant dino who's stats didn't line up perfectly with the calculations based on what's on the wiki.

Think of it like the imprinting buff. The wiki isn’t official either.

[banggugyangu]

9 minutes ago, DJRone89 said:

Think of it like the imprinting buff. The wiki isn’t official either.

What's your point on the wiki not being official?  It doesn't matter if it's official if it's still correct.  As I said, all of the dinos I've tamed have had stats that line up perfectly with the stats and growth that the wiki shows for the regular versions.  Imprinting shows a discrepancy in the stats screen.  Having an imprint will result in stats that wild dinos can't show.  Aberrant dinos haven't shown that ever for me.

[RipRavage]

50 minutes ago, banggugyangu said:

What's your point on the wiki not being official?  It doesn't matter if it's official if it's still correct.  As I said, all of the dinos I've tamed have had stats that line up perfectly with the stats and growth that the wiki shows for the regular versions.  Imprinting shows a discrepancy in the stats screen.  Having an imprint will result in stats that wild dinos can't show.  Aberrant dinos haven't shown that ever for me.

I'm just going off the official Wiki stating that this is the case buddy.  Every aberrant creature I've attempted tamed generally seems to have a higher melee percentage that what I've found on the Island or scorched earth.

From the wiki

Compared to their standard versions, Aberrant creatures have 4% less health, deal 5% more damage and glow in the dark.

[Wazzamaniac]

24 minutes ago, RipRavage said:

I'm just going off the official Wiki stating that this is the case buddy.  Every aberrant creature I've attempted tamed generally seems to have a higher melee percentage that what I've found on the Island or scorched earth.

From the wiki

Compared to their standard versions, Aberrant creatures have 4% less health, deal 5% more damage and glow in the dark.

This is also quoted from Jen on twitter, I believe.

[banggugyangu]

I think we need actual testing on this, because as I said, the numbers line up for the non-aberrant variants' stats.  Perhaps there is a weighting for wild levels on the aberrant variants to average lower health levels and higher melee levels, but as far as the stats themselves, I calculate them out both by hand and by dododex and always have had them come out the same.  As far as melee damage, the base damage is 100% the same between aberrant and non-aberrant variants.  This is easy to test and confirm.  Use a dummy to see how much damage you do; divide by the melee damage %; there's your base damage  (account for any brofist if you're on a dino you imprinted).  For "deal 5% more damage"  this could be interpreted as several things:  1)  more base damage (not the case), 2)  5% more damage on top of the existing levels (4 levels on a carnivore would be 120% melee damage, another 5% would be 126%.   Also not the case.  You'll never knock out a wild megalo and see 126% melee damage), or 3) +5% base damage resulting in an extra level for almost every carnivore (4 wild levels on a megalo would become 5 wild levels [125%]).  The last scenario is the only one I can't confirm to not be the case and is extremely difficult to test.  The only way to actually test this is to knock out level 5 dinos until you see one with all 5 levels in visible stats (no movement speed levels) and then calculate if there's an extra melee level.  I'll see if I can do just that tonight, as I have a gun that knocks out almost any level 5 dino with a single dart.

 

As far as "4% less health" goes,  I can confirm this is not the case.  There's no situation where 4% less health wouldn't cause a discrepancy in the stat growth numbers on any dino.  No dino in the game gains 4% of their health per wild level.  This means that if you knock out a dino, subtract the base health,, and divide the rest by the health per level and it comes out with a whole number (no decimal) that isn't a multiple of the percentage of its base it gains per level divided by 4, then it's instantly debunked.: 

A megalo starts with 1025 health and gains 205 per level (20% of its base)

a level 5 megalo with 0 wild health:  1025 (4% less is 984)

+1 wild level:  1230 (4% less is 1180.8)

+2 wild levels:  1435 (4% less is 1377.6)

+3 wild levels:  1640 (4% less is 1574.4)

+4 wild levels:  1845 (4% less is 1771.2)

+5 wild levels:  2050 (4% less is 1968)

In 5 levels (the maximum possibilities for a level 5 megalo) there's not a single value where 4% less health would line up with any possible outcome of no reduced health value, so any level 5 knock out of megalos is adequate for confirming or debunking the health segment.

 

*Edit*  It would take 20 wild levels on a megalo's health before you would have your first overlap that didn't display a discrepency  (20 wild health levels would look like 19)

[Wazzamaniac]

8 minutes ago, banggugyangu said:

I think we need actual testing on this, because as I said, the numbers line up for the non-aberrant variants' stats.  Perhaps there is a weighting for wild levels on the aberrant variants to average lower health levels and higher melee levels, but as far as the stats themselves, I calculate them out both by hand and by dododex and always have had them come out the same.  As far as melee damage, the base damage is 100% the same between aberrant and non-aberrant variants.  This is easy to test and confirm.  Use a dummy to see how much damage you do; divide by the melee damage %; there's your base damage  (account for any brofist if you're on a dino you imprinted).  For "deal 5% more damage"  this could be interpreted as several things:  1)  more base damage (not the case), 2)  5% more damage on top of the existing levels (4 levels on a carnivore would be 120% melee damage, another 5% would be 126%.   Also not the case.  You'll never knock out a wild megalo and see 126% melee damage), or 3) +5% base damage resulting in an extra level for almost every carnivore (4 wild levels on a megalo would become 5 wild levels [125%]).  The last scenario is the only one I can't confirm to not be the case and is extremely difficult to test.  The only way to actually test this is to knock out level 5 dinos until you see one with all 5 levels in visible stats (no movement speed levels) and then calculate if there's an extra melee level.  I'll see if I can do just that tonight, as I have a gun that knocks out almost any level 5 dino with a single dart.

 

As far as "4% less health" goes,  I can confirm this is not the case.  There's no situation where 4% less health wouldn't cause a discrepancy in the stat growth numbers on any dino.  No dino in the game gains 4% of their health per wild level.  This means that if you knock out a dino, subtract the base health,, and divide the rest by the health per level and it comes out with a whole number (no decimal) that isn't a multiple of the percentage of its base it gains per level divided by 4, then it's instantly debunked.: 

A megalo starts with 1025 health and gains 205 per level (20% of its base)

a level 5 megalo with 0 wild health:  1025 (4% less is 984)

+1 wild level:  1230 (4% less is 1180.8)

+2 wild levels:  1435 (4% less is 1377.6)

+3 wild levels:  1640 (4% less is 1574.4)

+4 wild levels:  1845 (4% less is 1771.2)

+5 wild levels:  2050 (4% less is 1968)

In 5 levels (the maximum possibilities for a level 5 megalo) there's not a single value where 4% less health would line up with any possible outcome of no reduced health value, so any level 5 knock out of megalos is adequate for confirming or debunking the health segment.

 

*Edit*  It would take 20 wild levels on a megalo's health before you would have your first overlap that didn't display a discrepency  (20 wild health levels would look like 19)

It is different. If you enter the stats on smart breeder it will give you an error in hp on the aberrant versions of the dinos if you enter them in the non aberrant dino tab.

Also its an increase in base dmg, so megalos are like 78 base or something.

[Guest DJRone89]

2 hours ago, banggugyangu said:

What's your point on the wiki not being official?  It doesn't matter if it's official if it's still correct.  As I said, all of the dinos I've tamed have had stats that line up perfectly with the stats and growth that the wiki shows for the regular versions.  Imprinting shows a discrepancy in the stats screen.  Having an imprint will result in stats that wild dinos can't show.  Aberrant dinos haven't shown that ever for me.

I said imprint buff not imprinted stats. A dino that is mounted by the person who imprinted it will receive an added bonus for melee and resistance. The Aberrant versions likely receive the added melee and reduced health in the same way.

[banggugyangu]

Reduced health cannot happen "in the same way".  

@Wazzamaniac So is it something that shows after tame?  Because wilds have all come up correctly at knock out.

[Wazzamaniac]

3 minutes ago, banggugyangu said:

Reduced health cannot happen "in the same way".  

@Wazzamaniac So is it something that shows after tame?  Because wilds have all come up correctly at knock out.

Probably. But dododex ONLY works for wilds, and it doesnt show any error if the values arent exact, it will round the points up I think

[banggugyangu]

Like  I said,   I calculated myself as well.  It's a trivial matter for wild stats.  If the discrepancy is after tame, you would end up with level 5 dinos that lose health upon tame.

[Kraken]

The health reduction is on tamed only, the damage increase is for wild and tamed.