Damage bonus?

wiouxev

Dalayan Beginner
Quick inquiry, why do weapons not have damage bonuses and what are the reasonings for it being removed?

Were mobs revamped to have less HP to make this adjustment evenly spread?

Are lower delay weapons pretty much obsolete, end game?
 
Damage bonus was a bogus stopgap from Live to try and jury rig a fix for their own problematic damage calculations. There is no such problem here, so damage bonus doesn't really exist here, either.
 
Weapons are normalized when it comes to aggro or anything else. Ratio is pretty much all that matters.
 
Were mobs revamped

I quoted the three words I found significant about your post. You're still new and levelling up in the Newport area, so the level of customization on the server may still be lost on you.

Rather than think of "damage bonuses must have been removed at some point", consider embracing the "they never existed here because damage calculation and aggro generation formulas were written from scratch here". Add in a sprinkling of "we can come up with a better solution than the Damage Bonus band-aid" that is the essence of Cless's post, and you'll better appreciate the beauty of the "this isn't Live" mantra.
 
And 45/90 will hit harder when you riposte with it AND you will take less damage from damage shields, clearly the best choice.
 
No way, you need the extra number of hits when attacking through enrage!

(the opposite of true)
 
I would take the fast weapon.

Over a quick fight, misses (missed dmg) in the short-term comparing to a 90 delay weapon, would mean more dmg overall with the faster delay weapon IMO.

For example:

Hit for 10
Hit for 10
Hit for 10
Hit for 10
Miss

Vs:

Miss
 
But obviously the difference in dmg would get smaller in smaller the longer the fight took place.
 
I would take the fast weapon.

Over a quick fight, misses (missed dmg) in the short-term comparing to a 90 delay weapon, would mean more dmg overall with the faster delay weapon IMO.

For example:

Hit for 10
Hit for 10
Hit for 10
Hit for 10
Miss

Vs:

Miss

It's a good thing that the mathematical calculations used to determine damage per second are not subject to your opinions.

Your graph is pretty inaccurate.
 
Nah he does have a point. If you had a big 2hander that only swung every 10 seconds, and the mobs you were killing took 18 seconds to die, you'd be doing lower DPS than faster weapons of the same ratio.

On longer fights, or when you happen to get a swing in right before the mob died, it would work fine.
 
Nah he does have a point. If you had a big 2hander that only swung every 10 seconds, and the mobs you were killing took 18 seconds to die, you'd be doing lower DPS than faster weapons of the same ratio.

On longer fights, or when you happen to get a swing in right before the mob died, it would work fine.

Except for the fact that mobs don't just die after a certain amount of time. The rate at which they die is directly related to how much damage you, your group, and/or your raid is doing, and the amount of melee damage you, your group, or your raid produces is directly proportional to their weapon ratios sans procs etc.

Further, if you're killing mobs that have substantially low health compared to the amount of damage you're doing, they're generally low enough level that you wouldn't miss very much anyway.

I'm not aware of any on tier mobs with low enough hp to warrant the use of a faster weapon vs a better ratio. Basically, if a mob can withstand more than ~1-3 rounds of damage, a better ratio will always be more beneficial. If you're hunting mobs that can't withstand more than 1-3 rounds of combat, it doesn't really matter which weapon you use anyway; stop slaying green cons.
 
Last edited:
another factor to consider is that a higher damage weapon will have a lower chance of dmg being mitigated to 0.
 
and the amount of melee damage you, your group, or your raid produces is directly proportional to their weapon ratios sans procs etc.

Listen here buddy. (hehe JK couldnt resist)

I can still apply my theory to that. In the short term, faster delay weapons are better than substantially slower weapons when factoring in misses.

And I very loosely use the word 'theory' because I would say its a pretty mathematically sound deduction.
 
But I think, in the end, I answered my own question with this thread :) Thanks guys hehe.

Better ratio is 9 times out of 10 going to be the best weapon to use, unless the delay is substantially large. However, over longer fights, it may be better to use that longer delay weapon, becuase the differences over time of missed damage will be negligible.
 
Except for the fact that mobs don't just die after a certain amount of time. The rate at which they die is directly related to how much damage you, your group, and/or your raid is doing, and the amount of melee damage you, your group, or your raid produces is directly proportional to their weapon ratios sans procs etc.

Further, if you're killing mobs that have substantially low health compared to the amount of damage you're doing, they're generally low enough level that you wouldn't miss very much anyway.

I'm not aware of any on tier mobs with low enough hp to warrant the use of a faster weapon vs a better ratio. Basically, if a mob can withstand more than ~1-3 rounds of damage, a better ratio will always be more beneficial. If you're hunting mobs that can't withstand more than 1-3 rounds of combat, it doesn't really matter which weapon you use anyway; stop slaying green cons.

This is an extreme example, but say you're a monk in a High Keep group using Shamgar's Hefty Hammer. Your damage output on floors 1-3 is going to be shit compared to an identical monk using a Spiked Obsidian Greatstaff, or equivalent one handed weapons.

I'm not saying that there are many situations like this, but there are some out there.
 
Listen here buddy. (hehe JK couldnt resist)

I can still apply my theory to that. In the short term, faster delay weapons are better than substantially slower weapons when factoring in misses.

And I very loosely use the word 'theory' because I would say its a pretty mathematically sound deduction.

2 Guys attack a mob, A has a 1/1 weapon, B has a 10000/10000 weapon:

Round 1:
A miss once and hits once, doing a total damage of 5.
B miss once and hits once, doing a total damage of 50000.

Mob falls over dead.
 
Shamgar's Hefty Hammer
MAGIC ITEM] [LORE ITEM] [NO DROP]
Slot: Primary
Skill: 2H Blunt Atk Delay: 97
DMG: 156
Effect: Lash of Chaos (Combat, Instant)
STR: +35 DEX: +20 STA: +20 HP: +235 MANA: +210
SV FIRE: +5 SV DISEASE: +5 SV COLD: +5 SV MAGIC: +5 SV POISON: +5
Stun Resist: +7%
Recommended level of 65.
WT: 4.5 Size: Giant
Class: WAR PAL RNG SHD MNK BST
Race: ALL
Retrieved from "http://wiki.shardsofdalaya.com/index.php/Shamgar%27s_Hefty_Hammer"

Has 1.608247 ratio

vs
Jy'xja's Darting Blade
[MAGIC ITEM] [LORE ITEM] [NO DROP]
Slot: Primary Secondary
Skill: 1H Slashing Atk Delay: 18
DMG: 15
Effect: Lightning Bolt (Combat, Instant)
Skill Mod: Riposte +3
DEX: +25 AGI: +10 HP: +130
WT: 1.1 Size: Medium
Class: WAR PAL RNG SHD BRD ROG
Race: ALL
Retrieved from "http://wiki.shardsofdalaya.com/index.php/Jy%27xja%27s_Darting_Blade"

Has 0.833333 ratio

comparing these 2 weapons that drop from the same tmap:

the Darting blade will get 5 swings off before 1 swing of the hammer.

When the darting blade hits its ho hum (even with crits/crippling hits - Ranger atk)
When the hammer falls, its amazing to see those crits and crippling hits are off the charts!

But comparing the one guys hit hit hit hit hit miss theory, ya I can see that one would think
you are doing more damage but if you are lucky thats about 300 total damage (with the blade)

one hit from the hammer is over (by alot - i saw a 2700 hit once) 300 total damage. Even if you missed once, compare 600 from blade (if you always land a hit) you can see how fast the hammer (better ratio already shines) and that doesnt even take in the fact you get aa's that let you double attack with prime hand (which basically lets you do a double monster swinging hit) :)
 
Konad, to use those 2 weapons as an example-

Let's say a fight lasts 10 seconds. You'll swing once with the Hammer, and 5 times with the Blade+Whatever. You'll do roughly the same amount of damage.

Then there's a fight that lasts 19 seconds. You'll still swing only once with the hammer, but you'll now get ~10 swings of the blade+offhand. You'll do about twice as much damage with the dualwield setup.
 
My argument was more for closer-in-ratio weapons.

Say 1.0 vs 1.2 ratio, and the better ratio weapon is twice as slow. Thats what my argument holds true, i think.
 
Back
Top Bottom