Not all others. L7, Venom, Phoenix/Frostprey, to name a few from my other thread.
And 1.2/4.8 is the best fit I've found so far, given all the data points.
I don't usually consider not reaching the supposed max damage enough evidence to disprove a formula, unless it's by a wide margin like over 10% of the range (300 damage off, in your case). However, if my equation predicted, say, 3081 for your max damage, that would be valid counterevidence right there. Since a 3083 would be a physically impossible number if the formula was true.
In this case, 3083 is definitely possible, even if it's somewhat unlikely that you didn't hit anything higher. 4.8 is already a pretty tight fit for some of the other data points.
And 1.2/4.8 is the best fit I've found so far, given all the data points.
I don't usually consider not reaching the supposed max damage enough evidence to disprove a formula, unless it's by a wide margin like over 10% of the range (300 damage off, in your case). However, if my equation predicted, say, 3081 for your max damage, that would be valid counterevidence right there. Since a 3083 would be a physically impossible number if the formula was true.
In this case, 3083 is definitely possible, even if it's somewhat unlikely that you didn't hit anything higher. 4.8 is already a pretty tight fit for some of the other data points.