Celtic Heroes

My question is which is better to have on an item, 100 strength or 100 heat/cold damage? Which would you choose and why?

Str vs elemental... Rogue I'd rather Str, ranger I'd rather heat/cold. Not sure on warriors, probably Str too

How about after 350 strength? Would you do more damage with 450 strength or 350 strength and 100 cold damage?

It all depends on class again. Since rogues and warriors have str skills the extra 100 str would boost all those skills as well as provide damage. Ranger on the other hand will only get a boost to their Pierce damage from the 100 str, which imo is not as good as the elemental damage since peirce is heavily resisted.

Strength scales as the square root and is roughly half or just over half the damage determining factor.

So going from 100 -> 200 is like 1 -> 1.4 or 40% more, this will boost autos and skills 20-25% which is probably close to or over 100 at these low amounts.

Going from 1400-1500 is like 3.74 -> 3.87 or 3.5% more, this will boost autos and skills 1.75-2.2% which is quite a bit less than 100 at these levels.

Using the skill and auto formulas it becomes obvious why everyone prefers direct damage additions, it does not suffer from the "plateu" (actually just a square root).

I don't have any fancy forumla but I did go ahead and put on/take off a 100 strength ring to check what it gave me as a full strength level 222 rogue.

from 1350 to 1450 strength my stat increases were as follows:

Auto Damage +38, Quickstrike Damage +97, Assasinate Damage +222, Sneaky Attack Damage +301

In my opinion, this outweighs 100 fire or cold damge added to auto attack alone. I dont think I would ever equip a ring on my rogue that had nothing but elemental damage on it. For ranger it may be a different story since the skills are dex based.

If you're comparing a valor ring to a godly hrung damage ring its not even a competition due to the attack and health on the valor. I think even on a ranger there is no comparison and the valor ring would be superior regardless.

^Except 100 dmg would be , +100 auto damage, + 100 assassinate, +100 sneaky, and with the auto's speed, with how long sneaky's cooldown is and same for assassinate not to mention its only usable at 30% I think autos provide a greater dps, I may be wrong as Im a warrior, but as a warrior Id prefer direct dmg as even if Pummel will have 10k dmg it'll hit low on bosses, double is the most dps skill affected directly by dmg more than str, Rupture is good but for few extra DoT dmg I wouldnt take str (my str is 2025 and Rupture ticks 1174) and shatter.... Meh.

Overall Id take the elemental dmg, more dmg never hurts as long as u dont sacrifice other stats too much, but more str isnt always that good, even when u have 230 pierce dmg and Frenzy.

You make a good point, I forgot the dmg ring adds to sneaky and assasinate as well. If the ring has additional stats like health and attack in addition to strength that would still be my choice. I suppose it's debatable if not.

Only direct dmg rings worth equipping is poison dmg rings(for appropriate bosses) and the new divine dmg ones. Forget heat/cold/magic damage rings. The boosts to sneaky and assassinate isnt even worth mentioning,two highly resisted fluctuating skills,one of which can plummet dps if missed.

To OP , depends on boss too. If im fighting some edls like gron,ilfryn Id use heat dmg ammy, for levelling,dls Id use wyld ammy.

For rogues and warriors I'd take 100 strength, for rangers I'd take 100 elemental.

BUT, for rangers I would take a valour ring over a 100 elemental unless it's poison on carrow boss begause 400 attack is important over an extra 40-50 damage on stat page