PHYS-005autoAttack

DEF-ignore variants — full vs hard-only vs soft-only vs none

Same attacker, same high-DEF/high-soft-DEF defender. Four skills with different defIgnore configurations. Damage should clearly differ: full-ignore highest, then hard-only or soft-only depending on which dominates, then no-ignore lowest. Verifies that skill.defIgnore.{hard,soft} is wired through correctly.

physicalDamagedefIgnorehardDEFvsSoftDEF

Action

autoAttack

Auto-attack in expected mode

mode: expected
context.mapType: pvp

Actors

Knight

player · knight · Lv80

attacker

Primary stats

str

agi

vit

int

dex

luk

Equipment

mainhand: claymore · sword_2h · +7 · ATK 180

High-VIT tank (high soft DEF) wearing plate (high hard DEF)

player · Lv90

defender

Primary stats

str

agi

vit

int

dex

luk

demihumanneutral 1mediumnormal

HP 12000 / 12000

Hard DEF 80

Hard MDEF 30

Expected output

From the scenario fixture. Numerical values marked as null are placeholders pending rAthena verification.

Implementation note: this scenario is illustrative — 'normal attack' doesn't take a skillId, so the test runner needs to model each variant as a different action shape OR define fake test-only skills with the listed defIgnore configs. In practice, you'd use real RO skills with these properties (e.g., Asura ignores both, certain skills ignore hard only).

Show full expected JSON

{
  "propertyAssertions": [
    "damage(full ignore) > damage(hard only ignore)",
    "damage(full ignore) > damage(soft only ignore)",
    "damage(hard only ignore) > damage(no ignore)",
    "damage(soft only ignore) > damage(no ignore)",
    "(damage(full) - damage(none)) == (damage(full) - damage(hard)) + (damage(full) - damage(soft))",
    "// last assertion: ignoring both should equal sum of individual contributions in flat DEF model"
  ]
}

Computed: DamageResult

Server-evaluated by calculatePhysicalDamage() from @ro/core.

Outcome

hit

1 hit · 335 damage

335

Pipeline breakdown

D-003 steps 2–13

WeaponratioATK	303
× size × skill	303
× (1 + 0.0% ATK%)	303
+ StatusATK (195)	498
× 1.00 element	498
× (1 + 0.0% race/elem/size/class)	498
crit none	498
− 0 hard DEF	498
− 163 soft DEF	335
× (1 − 0.0% taken%)	335
+ MasteryATK (0)	335
floor + min(1)	335

Inputs

From attacker / defender ResolvedStats

StatusATK	195
WeaponATK	303
EquipATK	0
MasteryATK	0
Size mult	1.00×
Element mult	1.00×
Race%	0.0%
Element%	0.0%
Size%	0.0%
Class%	0.0%
Taken%	0.0%

Hits (1): hit 335

Variant matrix · 4 cells

Each cell re-applies the variant's overrides to the base scenario and re-runs the same pipeline that produced the single result above.

skillId × defIgnore

Highest in row is highlighted emerald; lowest rose. Hover any cell to see the full variant label.

skillId \ defIgnore	[object Object]	[object Object]	[object Object]	[object Object]
_normal	335	—	—	—
_hardOnly	—	335	—	—
_softOnly	—	—	335	—
_full	—	—	—	335

Property assertions

Pattern-matched checks from the scenario's expected. ⊙ marks assertions the parser doesn't recognize (the raw string is shown so devs can verify by eye).

⊙
damage(full ignore) > damage(hard only ignore)
⊙
damage(full ignore) > damage(soft only ignore)
⊙
damage(hard only ignore) > damage(no ignore)
⊙
damage(soft only ignore) > damage(no ignore)
⊙
(damage(full) - damage(none)) == (damage(full) - damage(hard)) + (damage(full) - damage(soft))
⊙
// last assertion: ignoring both should equal sum of individual contributions in flat DEF model