once and for all question answering

I made this thread to answer questions which cut the Monster Hunter community into half for once and for all.


My first question is: do the healthpoints of monsters vary in multyplayer? I mean, if i go in with two players does the monster have less life as if i would go in with 4 players?

Hmm... I'll test that out later if i can! i have the hp display hack and now have access to ad-hoc party.

Sadly, can't test with you. different regions blah blah blah.

that would be great! thanks.

I was told that gathering hall monsters had the same health whether you were online or not, which makes sense as the reason you'd go online is to try and make the battle a little easier. Also, this also explains why the GH monsters are tougher than Elder monsters - to still give a hunting party of 4 a decent enough challenge, while elder quests are obviously easier as they're designed entirely for solo play.

I had a question but it was about mhp3rd, which seems to have different formulas...

Might work for mhfu though, just won;t help me out in mhp3rd.

So, here goes: Which may be considered more powerful at equal sharpness and atp, dual swords or sns? In terms of damage only, whatever you use as an example (it can be one attack or the main combo for each).

Tie breaker would obviously be SNS' shielding ability, as well as the item usage without totally putting your weapon away.

DannyLee94 wrote:

I was told that gathering hall monsters had the same health whether you were online or not, which makes sense as the reason you'd go online is to try and make the battle a little easier. Also, this also explains why the GH monsters are tougher than Elder monsters - to still give a hunting party of 4 a decent enough challenge, while elder quests are obviously easier as they're designed entirely for solo play.

I know that. but there are rumors, that the quests get harder the more people join. I also don't belive this but some friends of mine told me and I heard/read it at some other place too.

Deridor wrote:

I had a question but it was about mhp3rd, which seems to have different formulas...

Might work for mhfu though, just won;t help me out in mhp3rd.

So, here goes: Which may be considered more powerful at equal sharpness and atp, dual swords or sns? In terms of damage only, whatever you use as an example (it can be one attack or the main combo for each).

Tie breaker would obviously be SNS' shielding ability, as well as the item usage without totally putting your weapon away.

I can't tell how much they changed the formulars and the general system of SnS in p3rd but in general if you stay in demonise-mode DS are allways better(but forget raw dmg, go for elements). but you should just use which makes the most fun for you.

I agree with Tom, don't really focus on raw power with the one-handed weapons. Duel Swords are better for dealing elemental damage and SnS are far and away the best for dealing status attacks such as poison, para and sleep - which makes the SnS a good choice for hunting parties.

Of course if the elemental/status damage between the SnS and DS are relatively indifferent, by all means go for the raw dmg weapon or affinity. On that note though the DS are obviously the better damage dealers so don't totally discredit them for the disadvanatges of less raw/losing a shield.

DannyLee94 wrote:

I agree with Tom, don't really focus on raw power with the one-handed weapons. Duel Swords are better for dealing elemental damage and SnS are far and away the best for dealing status attacks such as poison, para and sleep - which makes the SnS a good choice for hunting parties.

Of course if the elemental/status damage between the SnS and DS are relatively indifferent, by all means go for the raw dmg weapon or affinity. On that note though the DS are obviously the better damage dealers so don't totally discredit them for the disadvanatges of less raw/losing a shield.

ds have .075% of shown elem value........... Same with SnS on some attacks. Raw is the way to go for ds on marathons. SnS is just garbage all around damage wise. If you're hunting solo any weapons aimed for status is already useless.



edit: on original post. Guild hall monsters have the same health regardless of the amount of players.

haruno wrote:

on original post. Guild hall monsters have the same health regardless of the amount of players.

I thought this was the case myself, any proof of this though?

I'm thinking that the same hp is true. Partially because it seems weird that they'd have more hp for just one person (compared to village) instead of staying the same until more players are there.

Heres some horrible evidence:

-First time playing ad-hoc, we did dual tigrex and akantor. both were finished in under about 5 minutes (when i usually spend 15+ minutes fighting aka with juggernaut) (2 hr6 players, me (hr8), and an hr 9). (funny note, we split up for the tigrex quest, two for each tiggy, and managed to beat both at virtually the same time).

Also, testing it wouldn't be very effective, as monster size affects their hp, so that adds in error.

HP and size are random.
Size does not effect HP.
Elderdragons have a fixed amount of HP.

Deridor wrote:

I'm thinking that the same hp is true. Partially because it seems weird that they'd have more hp for just one person (compared to village) instead of staying the same until more players are there.

Heres some horrible evidence:

-First time playing ad-hoc, we did dual tigrex and akantor. both were finished in under about 5 minutes (when i usually spend 15+ minutes fighting aka with juggernaut) (2 hr6 players, me (hr8), and an hr 9). (funny note, we split up for the tigrex quest, two for each tiggy, and managed to beat both at virtually the same time).

that also was my thought. but some friends of mine just won't beliefe me.

[quote="DannyLee94"]

haruno wrote:

DannyLee94 wrote:

on original post. Guild hall monsters have the same health regardless of the amount of players.

I thought this was the case myself, any proof of this though?

haruno doesnt need proof... hes always right

Deridor wrote:

I'm thinking that the same hp is true. Partially because it seems weird that they'd have more hp for just one person (compared to village) instead of staying the same until more players are there.

Heres some horrible evidence:

-First time playing ad-hoc, we did dual tigrex and akantor. both were finished in under about 5 minutes (when i usually spend 15+ minutes fighting aka with juggernaut) (2 hr6 players, me (hr8), and an hr 9). (funny note, we split up for the tigrex quest, two for each tiggy, and managed to beat both at virtually the same time).

Also, testing it wouldn't be very effective, as monster size affects their hp, so that adds in error.

Sorry but I'm not sure of the point your making. Are you saying that if you solo a monster in the GH it will have the same HP as if you were to fight it with 3 other hunters? If so, I agree with you.

However, I thought that (unlike size) HP was fixed depending on the type of quest. But, I would much rather believe that Lucas was right when he said HP was random, as it would feel more natural and realistic - since some monsters of the same species will obviously have different levels of resilience.