Calculating Dpp formula including buffs

So I've been using this formula based on what i know to calculate modified dpp after buffs and im fairly confident in it but know a second opinion couldn't hurt

modified dpp=(total damage*.9*.75+total damage*total crit chance*final crit)/(total cost )

broken down:
total damage = base damage +amped damage
where .9 =90% as the expected long term average hit rate
where .75= 75% as the expected long term average damage
total crit chance= 2%(expected long term crit at maxed hit rate) + additional crit chance from buffs
total crit damage= 100%( how much a crit adds to the current damage) + additional crit damage from buffs
total decay= amp decay + weapon decay
total ammo = amp ammo useage +weapon ammo useage
total cost* = total decay + total ammo + (((weapon markup-100%)*weapon tt)/total uses) +(((amp markup -100%)*amp tt)/total uses)



written fully we have
(((base damage + amped damage)*.9*.75+(base+amped)*(.02+additional crit chance)*(1+additional crit dmg))/(amp decay+amp cost + weapon decay+ weapon cost+ (markup paid-100%)/total uses for amp) + (markup paid-100%)/total uses for weapon))





notes :
* depreciation is a bit different for L and Ul weapons
** but i included the alternate formula calculation incase
*** over amping and overkill arent factored in yet

examples:
for both using mk2 imp with and with out +1% crit chance unamped
without crit+1%
(((72+0)*.9*.75+(72+0)*(.02+0)*(1+0)/(15.255)=3.280235 (which matches entropedia) and v2
with crit +1%
(((72+0)*.9*.75+(72+0)*(.02+0.01)*(1+0)/(15.255)=3.327434 which matches v2

The entropedia weapon compare v2 isnt correct??

krogfan said:

The entropedia weapon compare v2 isnt correct??

Click to expand...

i should probably include enhancer markup on mine now that you mention it but i did notice errors in the v2 in cost in general
example put an rdi beta on @10k% and it has the amp decay cost at .02 but only 97% of the amp is useable so it should actually be .02/97% =.0206 and if they were rounding that would appear as .021 but it appears at .020 that same issue occurs on the weapon decay, deprecating the markup/total uses is what ive been using and avoids that error

̶e̶x̶a̶m̶p̶l̶e̶ ̶ ̶l̶r̶ ̶3̶5̶@̶1̶5̶0̶%̶
̶l̶r̶-̶3̶5̶ ̶b̶a̶s̶e̶ ̶c̶o̶s̶t̶ ̶=̶1̶6̶.̶3̶9̶ ̶a̶f̶t̶e̶r̶ ̶a̶m̶m̶o̶ ̶a̶n̶d̶ ̶d̶e̶c̶a̶y̶
̶l̶r̶-̶3̶5̶ ̶m̶a̶r̶k̶u̶p̶ ̶c̶o̶s̶t̶=̶ ̶7̶5̶*̶5̶0̶%̶=̶3̶7̶.̶5̶ ̶p̶e̶d̶ ̶
̶l̶r̶-̶3̶5̶ ̶m̶a̶r̶k̶u̶p̶ ̶d̶e̶p̶r̶e̶c̶a̶t̶i̶o̶n̶ ̶=̶ ̶(̶m̶a̶r̶k̶u̶p̶ ̶c̶o̶s̶t̶ ̶)̶/̶t̶o̶t̶a̶l̶ ̶u̶s̶e̶s̶ ̶ ̶
̶w̶i̶t̶h̶ ̶t̶o̶t̶a̶l̶ ̶u̶s̶e̶s̶ ̶a̶t̶ ̶5̶9̶1̶5̶ ̶i̶ ̶c̶a̶n̶ ̶s̶p̶r̶e̶a̶d̶ ̶t̶h̶a̶t̶ ̶3̶7̶.̶5̶ ̶p̶e̶d̶ ̶o̶v̶e̶r̶ ̶t̶h̶e̶ ̶5̶9̶1̶5̶ ̶s̶h̶o̶t̶s̶ ̶o̶r̶ ̶3̶7̶.̶5̶/̶5̶9̶1̶5̶
̶a̶d̶d̶i̶t̶i̶o̶n̶a̶l̶ ̶d̶e̶p̶r̶e̶c̶a̶t̶i̶o̶n̶ ̶p̶e̶r̶ ̶s̶h̶o̶t̶ ̶=̶~̶.̶0̶0̶6̶3̶4̶
̶t̶r̶u̶e̶ ̶c̶o̶s̶t̶ ̶=̶ ̶b̶a̶s̶e̶ ̶+̶ ̶m̶a̶r̶k̶u̶p̶ ̶d̶e̶p̶r̶e̶c̶a̶t̶i̶o̶n̶=̶ ̶1̶6̶.̶3̶9̶+̶ ̶3̶7̶.̶5̶/̶5̶9̶1̶5̶=̶~̶1̶6̶.̶4̶ ̶r̶o̶u̶n̶d̶e̶d̶ ̶u̶p̶
̶r̶d̶i̶ ̶b̶e̶t̶a̶ ̶b̶a̶s̶e̶ ̶c̶o̶s̶t̶ ̶=̶ ̶7̶.̶0̶2̶
̶r̶d̶i̶ ̶b̶e̶t̶a̶ ̶m̶a̶r̶k̶u̶p̶ ̶c̶o̶s̶t̶ ̶=̶9̶9̶0̶0̶%̶*̶2̶=̶1̶9̶8̶
̶r̶d̶i̶ ̶b̶e̶t̶a̶ ̶m̶a̶r̶k̶u̶p̶ ̶d̶e̶p̶r̶e̶c̶a̶t̶i̶o̶n̶ ̶=̶ ̶m̶a̶r̶k̶u̶p̶ ̶c̶o̶s̶t̶/̶ ̶t̶o̶t̶a̶l̶ ̶u̶s̶e̶s̶
̶w̶i̶t̶h̶ ̶t̶o̶t̶a̶l̶ ̶u̶s̶e̶s̶ ̶a̶t̶ ̶9̶7̶0̶0̶ ̶i̶ ̶c̶a̶n̶ ̶s̶p̶r̶e̶a̶d̶ ̶t̶h̶a̶t̶ ̶1̶9̶8̶ ̶p̶e̶d̶ ̶o̶v̶e̶r̶ ̶t̶h̶e̶ ̶9̶7̶0̶0̶ ̶s̶h̶o̶t̶s̶
̶a̶d̶d̶i̶t̶i̶o̶n̶a̶l̶ ̶d̶e̶p̶r̶e̶c̶a̶t̶i̶o̶n̶ ̶c̶o̶s̶t̶ ̶ ̶p̶e̶r̶ ̶s̶h̶o̶t̶ ̶=̶~̶.̶0̶2̶0̶4̶1̶2̶3̶
̶t̶r̶u̶e̶ ̶c̶o̶s̶t̶=̶ ̶b̶a̶s̶e̶+̶ ̶m̶a̶r̶k̶u̶p̶ ̶d̶e̶p̶r̶e̶c̶a̶t̶i̶o̶n̶ ̶=̶7̶.̶0̶2̶+̶.̶0̶2̶0̶4̶1̶2̶3̶=̶7̶.̶0̶4̶0̶4̶1̶2̶3̶
̶t̶o̶t̶a̶l̶ ̶c̶o̶s̶t̶ ̶s̶h̶o̶u̶l̶d̶ ̶t̶h̶e̶r̶e̶f̶o̶r̶e̶ ̶b̶e̶ ̶=̶1̶6̶.̶4̶+̶7̶.̶0̶4̶0̶4̶1̶2̶3̶=̶~̶2̶3̶.̶4̶4̶0̶4̶

̶a̶d̶d̶ ̶a̶n̶ ̶r̶d̶i̶ ̶b̶e̶t̶a̶ ̶o̶n̶ ̶t̶h̶e̶ ̶l̶r̶-̶3̶5̶ ̶a̶n̶d̶ ̶t̶h̶e̶ ̶d̶p̶p̶ ̶g̶o̶e̶s̶ ̶d̶o̶w̶n̶ ̶a̶c̶c̶o̶r̶d̶i̶n̶g̶ ̶t̶o̶ ̶t̶h̶e̶ ̶v̶2̶ ̶c̶o̶m̶p̶a̶r̶i̶s̶o̶n̶ ̶b̶u̶t̶ ̶w̶h̶e̶n̶ ̶d̶e̶p̶r̶e̶c̶a̶t̶i̶o̶n̶ ̶i̶s̶ ̶f̶a̶c̶t̶o̶r̶e̶d̶ ̶i̶n̶ ̶i̶t̶ ̶s̶h̶o̶u̶l̶d̶ ̶g̶o̶ ̶u̶p̶ ̶u̶n̶l̶e̶s̶s̶ ̶m̶y̶ ̶n̶u̶m̶b̶e̶r̶s̶ ̶a̶r̶e̶ ̶f̶a̶r̶ ̶o̶f̶f̶


forgot to factor from ped to pec total cost would be .0204123*100 +.00634*100 +7.02+16.39=26.08523
which is closer to the v2 comparison but my numbers are still different by a few hundredth of a pec
i think the errors now are simply rounding errors,im using alot more places and rounding down when it doesnt give a whole number .

with the 97% factored and rounding down im getting 2.770907
while the v2 comparison is giving 2.77947