Damage bonus?
- Thread starter wiouxev
- Start date
What the fuck.
First, you can't claim this type of precise, definitive conclusion without showing parses. Simply saying that one weapon will out damage another in any situation still doesn't make it true.
Second, Spiked Obsidian Greatstaff has a better ratio than Shamgar's Hefty Hammer (1.64 vs 1.60, respectively). It is implied that the former will out parse the latter, so your comparison is inherently flawed.
And...
This is still not true.
I don't know where you guys are getting "mob dies in x amount of time" from, but you're misrepresenting how mobs die. Spoilers: they die according to how much damage you're doing, which is always a direct reflection of your weapon ratio sans procs and spells. Disregarding green cons, I challenge you to parse one encounter ever that dies faster with a lower ratio vs a higher ratio weapon.
If you're really that adamant about referencing time, a more accurate depiction of how ratios and damage work would be:
On average, Mob X dies in about 30 seconds if I'm using a 11/13 (1.84) weapon.
vs.
On average, Mob X dies in about 28 seconds if I'm using a 26/30 (1.86) ratio weapon.
Assuming you're not fighting green mobs, I don't know of ANY encounters that die faster than an average 20 seconds unless you're using a huge damage weapon, which is ironically counter productive to your argument.
Last edited:
We're not talking about averages over a long period of time.
im talking about
5/10
vs
20/40
In situations where there may be a lot of misses in combat, 5/10 would be a better choice. Unless you're fighting a really weak mob, where misses aren't an issue.
More hit chances = more dmg if accuracy is lacking
edit: once again, over the SHORT term. Perhaps a long parse averaged out it will get closer in parsed dmg.
im talking about
5/10
vs
20/40
In situations where there may be a lot of misses in combat, 5/10 would be a better choice. Unless you're fighting a really weak mob, where misses aren't an issue.
More hit chances = more dmg if accuracy is lacking
edit: once again, over the SHORT term. Perhaps a long parse averaged out it will get closer in parsed dmg.
Rorne
The sad fish is a reactionary creature; an enemy o
This is all accounted for in two 1handers versus a 2hander. If you think this server has existed for like 6 years and let something that would be a fairly large flaw stand (keep in mind there are a ton of anal retentive players on here) I don't know what to tell you. I mean aside from stop debating this and maybe get to level 2.
I have no idea why I am so attached to this despite it being a lost cause, so I'll offer a swan song.
No, it won't. Your conclusion isn't even accurate in theory. It's a pretty basic concept that is apparently lost on you.
Assuming that your weapon skills are the same for both weapons, your damage will be almost identical with two weapons of equal ratio; your "accuracy" is going to be the exact same. Additionally, even if you have a faster hit rate with the faster weapon (duh), it will be doing congruently less damage... which is where the balance comes from. This is logical.
Instead of continuously arguing the same "SHORT term" moot point, why don't you actually, you know, parse the weapons for yourself? The results might surprise you, but they'll reflect what everyone else in this thread already knows.
.
You shut up.
No, it won't. Your conclusion isn't even accurate in theory. It's a pretty basic concept that is apparently lost on you.
Assuming that your weapon skills are the same for both weapons, your damage will be almost identical with two weapons of equal ratio; your "accuracy" is going to be the exact same. Additionally, even if you have a faster hit rate with the faster weapon (duh), it will be doing congruently less damage... which is where the balance comes from. This is logical.
Instead of continuously arguing the same "SHORT term" moot point, why don't you actually, you know, parse the weapons for yourself? The results might surprise you, but they'll reflect what everyone else in this thread already knows.
.
You shut up.
Last edited:
Dinadass
Dalayan Pious Diety
I'm talking about groups Bud. I know you're not familiar with those, but many players team up with one another quite frequently.
So here, once again, is the situation:
Highkeep (Or anywhere else with relatively low HP mobs)
Group with 4 or so DPS, let's say rogues plus the monk in question.
They all start attacking a mob. Monk swings once with shamgar's hefty hammer. 15 seconds later, the mob dies, before the monk gets a second swing.
Compared to using an identical ratio, faster 2hander, or onehanders that put out the same average DPS, you will do less damage in this situation with shamgar's than with the faster weapons, since there is less time "wasted" while you wait for the delay to expire and swing again.
It's a minor nitpick in a rather meaningless situation, it was just something that got thrown out so I expanded upon it. There will also be similar fights where you will get a second swing with a shamgar's right as the mob dies, which will average out to more total damage than if you had been attacking with much faster weapons.
Sorry you had to go and pop a blood vessel over it or something.
So here, once again, is the situation:
Highkeep (Or anywhere else with relatively low HP mobs)
Group with 4 or so DPS, let's say rogues plus the monk in question.
They all start attacking a mob. Monk swings once with shamgar's hefty hammer. 15 seconds later, the mob dies, before the monk gets a second swing.
Compared to using an identical ratio, faster 2hander, or onehanders that put out the same average DPS, you will do less damage in this situation with shamgar's than with the faster weapons, since there is less time "wasted" while you wait for the delay to expire and swing again.
It's a minor nitpick in a rather meaningless situation, it was just something that got thrown out so I expanded upon it. There will also be similar fights where you will get a second swing with a shamgar's right as the mob dies, which will average out to more total damage than if you had been attacking with much faster weapons.
Sorry you had to go and pop a blood vessel over it or something.
Last edited:
jew_nose_it
Dalayan Master
Kind of similar to how when I kite animals in Remnants I fear/1hs to proc Finishing blow rather than hope for a bow shot to do it.
Thade
DINOSAUR THADE
how do you know, oh wise and all knowing otcho?
jew_nose_it
Dalayan Master
Otcho, you talking about rangers or all classes in general?
Animand
Dalayan Elder
But honestly, I think you're trolling us.
I realize you did all the visualization here to paint a pretty picture, and I'm sure you think you've actually proven your point. I would only like to interject an alternative view of looking at your data to express MY point that you have, in fact, proven the opposite.
When you start auto-attacking with your high-delay 2-hander, it doesn't generally wait a while before you get your first swing in. You get all the benefit of your first set of high damage rolls while the low-delay weapons have also gotten in their first set of lower damage rolls. While you are waiting for your next set of swings with your high-delay weapon, your low-delay weapon is playing catchup with damage. By the time it catches up, you are swinging with your slow weapon again and taking the damage lead. In fact, the faster weapons are always going to be playing catchup.
Restated: If you had a weapon that swings every 10 seconds, then a 3 second fight would be far preferable, as you didn't have to wait the full 10 seconds to get your attack round in. This is because there is less time wasted on waiting for another attack and you benefit from the awesome head start on damage.
If you are fighting multiple mobs at the same time, then your delay will be factored, but the "fight" will easily approach a long enough period (20 seconds) to balance out difference in delay. So discussion of this point has no merit and I'm dropping it now.
In short, you described a situation and then failed completely to determine what its implications were. Instead, you opted to offer your opinion as proof of that same opinion, and passed it off as an argument. Many have disagreed with you and restated a reinterpretation of your scenarios that correct your misunderstanding, but you have rebuffed all attempts at discourse with absolutely nothing to back up your claims. If you still feel that you are correct, please feel free to rebut my ideas personally, as I have clearly stated the bases of my argumentation.
I'm taking the time to explain this because I have had respect for you in past dealings, Susvain. I would not like to have to revise my opinion of you in the negative.
I realize you did all the visualization here to paint a pretty picture, and I'm sure you think you've actually proven your point. I would only like to interject an alternative view of looking at your data to express MY point that you have, in fact, proven the opposite.
When you start auto-attacking with your high-delay 2-hander, it doesn't generally wait a while before you get your first swing in. You get all the benefit of your first set of high damage rolls while the low-delay weapons have also gotten in their first set of lower damage rolls. While you are waiting for your next set of swings with your high-delay weapon, your low-delay weapon is playing catchup with damage. By the time it catches up, you are swinging with your slow weapon again and taking the damage lead. In fact, the faster weapons are always going to be playing catchup.
Restated: If you had a weapon that swings every 10 seconds, then a 3 second fight would be far preferable, as you didn't have to wait the full 10 seconds to get your attack round in. This is because there is less time wasted on waiting for another attack and you benefit from the awesome head start on damage.
If you are fighting multiple mobs at the same time, then your delay will be factored, but the "fight" will easily approach a long enough period (20 seconds) to balance out difference in delay. So discussion of this point has no merit and I'm dropping it now.
In short, you described a situation and then failed completely to determine what its implications were. Instead, you opted to offer your opinion as proof of that same opinion, and passed it off as an argument. Many have disagreed with you and restated a reinterpretation of your scenarios that correct your misunderstanding, but you have rebuffed all attempts at discourse with absolutely nothing to back up your claims. If you still feel that you are correct, please feel free to rebut my ideas personally, as I have clearly stated the bases of my argumentation.
I'm taking the time to explain this because I have had respect for you in past dealings, Susvain. I would not like to have to revise my opinion of you in the negative.
Dinadass
Dalayan Pious Diety
You're right and I'm retarded. I don't know why, but for some reason I was thinking that the point where a slower and a faster weapon would be equal was halfway through the swing timer of the slower weapon. Since weapons swing immediately at the start of combat regardless of delay, that's wrong and you are correct. A faster weapon will never be in a position where it is ahead of the slower weapon, at best it will be equal. This is all in general statistics, obviously on a case by case basis there will be some fights where a faster weapon happens to out perform a slower one due to luck with misses/crits/whatever.
So with a 200 delay weapon and a 100 delay weapon that each do the same total DPS, from seconds 11 to 20, they will have done the same total damage, but from 1 to 10 the slower weapon will win. The longer the fight the less this matters, but yeah it's completely the opposite of what I had posted.
So, insert foot in mouth.
However, I'm 100% positive that you're wrong Jimkoz. All weapons benefit equally from haste. Back in the day there was some speculation that really fast weapons didn't but that was a result of the EQ client only showing weapon swings on 1 second intervals, but there were lots of parses done to demonstrate that even when a weapon drops down to like 5 delay, it will still get as many swings as it's supposed to.
I find it helpful to think of haste in terms of DPS improvement rather than delay reduction. A faster and a slower weapon that each normally do the same DPS, when suddenly given 100% haste, will each be doing 100% more DPS than previous, so still the same as each other.
Last edited:
Jimkoz
Dalayan Adventurer
All I was saying is, the bonus of haste is more "eyeball" noticeable on a really slow weapon over the top of a really faste delay weapon. I know from first hand on my ranger using that 97delay hammer, it seems like FOREVER without a GoE, but with a GoE it seems like a "normal" delay weapon swing.
Yes the correct way to think of haste isnt shaving off delay of the weapon but what you said, the person would have more 77% more dps in the case of GoE.
Yes the correct way to think of haste isnt shaving off delay of the weapon but what you said, the person would have more 77% more dps in the case of GoE.
Animand
Dalayan Elder
Yay, we're on the same page!
I'm pretty sure haste, both spell and worn, are additive, not mulitplicative. So this would only hold if you have no worn haste.
Example: I have 40% worn haste and have Glory of Enthann (77%) haste. I go from 140% attack speed to 217%. This ends up being a 55% increase to my DPS.
I would restate you as:
jew_nose_it
Dalayan Master
I think you'd have to parse all this out. Mathcrafting can be so confusing sometimes.
Also cless, in your first example, what if the 2hander misses the first attack?
Also cless, in your first example, what if the 2hander misses the first attack?
Well delete and reroll ofc, missing is never an acceptable option = )
Everything can be argued better or worse situationally. Can we at least agree on that?
Kedrin
Dalayan Pious Diety
Like omg what if you fight with 2 1hs and you miss every swing, but then you use a 2hs and you hit every swing, and every swing is a triple atk, and all the hits are really crits, and all the crits are really crips. Then you try to use your 1hs again but you drop it and it cuts off a toe.
Tarutao
Staff Emeritus
No, there's really no parsing necessary. What Cless said is so painfully obvious I couldn't bring myself to post in this thread until now. "When you start auto-attacking with your high-delay 2-hander, it doesn't generally wait a while before you get your first swing in" is really the crux point of the entire argument and has gone heretofore ignored.
The likelihood of missing the first attack is equal to the overall fraction of missed attacks and hence equal to the expected fraction of attacks missed by the faster weapon. We must consider not only the first case of "slower weapon misses first attack, has 0% hit rate until second swing" but also the "slower weapon connects on first attack, has 100% hit rate until second swing", and we must consider them unequally based on the expected fraction of attacks missed. This negates the concern.
tl;dr -- slower weapon with same ratio ftw unlike what most of this thread says.