Politics, for better or worse, plays a critical role in health affairs. ![]() ![]() When we say that politics rather than analysis determines policy, we mean that policy is set by the various ways in which people exert control, influence, or power over each other” ( 104). Lindblom sets forth an important distinction: “When we say that policies are decided by analysis, we mean that an investigation of the merits of various possible actions has disclosed reasons for choosing one policy over others. Science can identify solutions to pressing public health problems, but only politics can turn most of those solutions into reality. ![]() Often an even greater struggle emerges when policy makers attempt to put that understanding to work, to translate knowledge into action for our collective well-being. The essence of public health, in the eyes of most researchers and practitioners, is a struggle to understand the causes and consequences of death, disease, and disability. Public health professionals who understand the political dimensions of health policy can conduct more realistic research and evaluation, better anticipate opportunities as well as constraints on governmental action, and design more effective policies and programs. Finally, it reviews the challenges confronting officials and agencies who are responsible for implementing and administering health policies. It then identifies conditions under which larger-scale transformation of health policy can occur, focusing on critical junctures in policy development and the role of policy entrepreneurs in seizing opportunities for innovation. Next, it considers how bounded rationality, fragmented political institutions, resistance from concentrated interests, and fiscal constraints usually lead political leaders to adopt incremental policy changes rather than comprehensive reforms even when faced with serious public health problems. Perceptions regarding the severity of the problem, responsibility for the problem, and affected populations all influence governmental responses. It begins by examining how health problems make it onto the policy agenda. The purpose of this article is to articulate a role for political analysis of public health issues, ranging from injury and disease prevention to health care reform. The common sense approach to this though is, if all of your damage bonus was elemental damage, doubling your damage would at most be 100% increase.▪ Abstract Politics, for better or worse, plays a critical role in health affairs. At most you can only approach but never exceed a 100% increase in damage if you double elemental damage. I am not quite sure what you are trying to tell me is wrong 40% to 80% elemental damage is ~28.5% increase and 80% to 160% is ~44.4% which are the numbers you get when you put it into the formula I gave. Here is a better idea to make it different and pretty awesome: Increase your Strength, Dexterity, Intelligence and Vitality by 25% It does not however change the facts that the ring is not competitive enough but it is going to ruin item and build diversity when it comes to LoD. So the more elemental damage you stack up the greater the benefit. ![]() But if you go from 80% to 160% the increase is +44,4%. So if you say 40% elemental damage is doubled, to 80% the increase is +28,5%. Think of Tal Rasha 4p bonus, the higher resistances you have, the greater the benefit. If you double an additive stat the benefit increases the higher you have stacked the additive stat. with 200% elemental damage it would only be a 130% DPS increase, with a lower amount like 60% it would only be 75% increase. Honestly, like I said before, tripling it would probably be fair. The formula to calculate the % increase is ((2*Elemental % +1)/ (Elemental % + 1)) -1 Even in the near perfect scenario of nearly infinite elemental damage, doubling elemental damage is at best a 100% damage increase.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |