Shield + 1h a viable option?

[Astria]

a newb zerker question here but....is the dps ( and hence aggro ) significantly hampered by using an assault axe ( or any decent dmg 1h ) + shield?I'm talking rare/imbued for both.Naturally I would expect a 2h to = higher dps, and probably dual-wield because of higher proc rates due to 2 weapons....but since from what i've read, you should basically stay in offensive 99% of the time if possible, wouldn't it make sense to use a 1h/shield combo while in offensive?or is the benefit to using a shield ( including stats & the shield bash line which imo rocks ) simply not enough to justify using anything other than DW?could be that i'm assuming the wrong things about damage ratings tho....It is my understanding that a good way to tell what is better - regardless of stats/abilities, was to look at the damage rating of a weapon...if say, the damage rating of 2 DW weapons is greater than a 2h, I would do greater dps with the DW's, and vice-versa...likewise, if the damage rating of a 1h is equal to that of 2 DW's or 1 2H ( which i think all rare imbueds are ), then isn't it basically the same thing, just graphically it looks different?I'm sure that there are people on both sides, just wondering if i'm crippling myself from the get go by using a 1h + shield the majority of the time...

[infernus006]

<div></div>i always use a 1h and sheild while tanking along with the defense stance and i have very little trouble keeping aggro in most situations.  and when i do...well thats what IG and rescue are for. <div></div><p>Message Edited by infernus006 on <span class=date_text>12-05-2005</span> <span class=time_text>05:44 PM</span>

[Astria]

<div></div>thx for the reply infernus! good to hear at least that a 1h + shield is fairly standard...from what i've read, everyone either uses DW or 2H exclusively...I realize that much of it is just preference, hell i'd prefer to use a 2h or DW myself...it's just that shield/1h combo seemed like the best choice ( mostly because i only had enough money left for them, and not enough to also snag some DW's / a 2H lol ).. i have imbued pants AND shield - so my question is, dose that mean since the 2 separate buffs show up, that i have 2 x 5% chance to proc feedback? or do they cancel eachother out? ( meaning it displays the icon for feedback twice, but really i still only have 1 x 5% chance to proc )  that was one of my reasons really.... I don't plan to be in my 20s for long, so i'm inclined to not spend money on any new gear until 30, at which point i will source out some DW's i think, if only for the potential increased proc rate....does that apply to Fury as well? or does it all even out in the end just like weapon delays / proc rates? <div></div><p>Message Edited by Astriaal on <span class=date_text>12-06-2005</span> <span class=time_text>08:11 AM</span>

[infernus006]

 as far as i know the sanguine buffs from your sheild and leggings should both proc separately from each other on their own, so it is two separate buffs even though they are the same thing. <div></div>

[RaunII]

<P>from a ton of parses and experiments this is what i came up with: Shield+1 hander for tanking. Dual wield for damage dealer when in groups(works well because not only does the dual wield do more damage when the mob isnt attacking you, but also, if the main tank drops all you have to do is double click the shield in your bag and you are set). 2 hander when soloing(this one is kinda confusing, but it seems a 2 hander does more damage when you are getting ripped on by mobs in the parses i did.same goes for if you are tanking for a group and dont need a shield. the only way it works out on paper it seems is that you have a weapon with a delay of 2.5 seconds that does more damage when you hit a combat art or when you land a hit in between parry and getting slapped. the duel wield i always seem to be ducking too much to make two one second or less delay weapons more effective than one big hit).</P> <P> </P> <P>so, the answer is, i would get yourself a shield and one hander,i would also buy a 2 hander as well for when you solo, and it will work just fine for dealing damage in groups too. if you have alot of cash, treat yourself to a set of duel wields, and you will be all set then <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></P>

[Baeel]

I've not been playing as long as most people here but I may have a little insight to help your decision.  I'm a lvl 28 zerker and have a set of each (shield+1h, 2h, and DW).  I mainly use dual wield + fury for increased chance at procs from fury (had it proc up to 5 times in a row so far).  The 2 handers usually are more dps because you can click your CA's inbetween your swings BUT it's a lot more work to pull out that dps because you have to pay full attention and make sure to click your CA's as soon as your dmg hits from your swing to maximize dps.  I mainly duo with my g/f and have yet to tank for a full group because we quest a lot.  I am holding on the 1h and shield though for a situation like that as the added AC and use of shield bash for agro is great.  And unless you're roleplaying your zerker where you feel like you gotta be bad [expletive haxx0red by Raijinn] to the bone no worry about AC tank then you'll be taking a lot less dmg with defensive stance and shield than you would with DW and offensive.  <div></div>

[Zhonata]

<DIV>2 handed weapons are hands down the best weapon for Zerkers.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Dual wield require a long uninterrupted fight to by pass the 2 handed dps. In order to do that you have to forgo your ca's and thus lose damage, but save mana. Our open wounds is pretty much useless with the Dual wield, it is ment to be done with a 2handed weapon.You do not get reposisted as much tho which is definatly and upside. I would definatly use this on a raid use dual wield till it is almost dead then switch to 2handed and toast your ca's, but for the normal group 2 handed is the way to go.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>They have suposidly up the proc rate on the Dual wields which i havnt really noticed a difrence in I still do a heck of alot mroe damge with my 2 hand weapon.</DIV>

[danceswnymphs]

<DIV>I am in complete agreement with Raun, a 1h and shield for tanking, 2h for solo....my tests came out the same and even tho i had heard good things about dw its all hype that i have seen...maybe good for scouts</DIV>

[RaunII]

<DIV>nah, its all in how you use the DW...solo, not as good. but, if you have a mobs back to you and you are just the damage dealer in a group, you will consistently do more damage. its not hype.</DIV> <DIV>what is hype is that they are the best weapon set up in the game. that is a load of garbage. there is no best weapon set up in the game for every circumstance.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>if you dont end up tanking alot(i.e. have a friend that either has better gear or a better character or just plain loves tanking more than you, or does less dps that you i.e. gaurdian) then i would say invest in some DW on top of a one hander and two hander. if you ussually solo and sometimes group and tank, skip the DW, not worth the money. its only good when you arent the main target.</DIV>

[spammy]

<DIV>im always using dual weilds while tanking. if theres a guardian around the same lvl as me in the group, ill let them tank. reason i like tanking with dual weilds in a high DPS group is because i like to chain pull and keep my power usage with the rest of the group. if im using my dual weilds, i can do less combat arts, spend more mana on taunts, and just let the auto attack on for a little ( our CA's burn through power alot more than i noticed with my assassin) since cobalt dual weilds now get 10 damage rating points over the 2H.</DIV>

[infernus006]

i was one of the people who said that i would never bother with dw's, only use a 1h and sheild for tanking and 2h for more dps.  that's what i've been doing all along.  well i went ahead and got me a couple of imbued cobalt crecent axes just for the heck of it...now i have better stats and a slightly higher attack rating with them than i do with my imbued cobalt executioner's axe... <div></div>

[Memmoch]

I'm almost always a tank when I log in my zerker, and these are the set-ups I use including stances. 1.  Yellow and below mobs not named= DW and offensive stance, if I'm grouping with a weak healer I first switch to 1h/board+offensive stance.  That usually does the trick 2.  Orange and up or named mobs= DW+Defensive stance, 1h/board+offensive stance or 1h/board+defensive stance.  Depending on how tough the mob is hitting me for or if I need to add that extra stun(from shield bash) dictates on how I set myself up. 3.   Hard hitting/epic encounters= 1h/board+defensive stance.  Most fights we can hold decent aggro (long as the DPS machines don't go overboard) but with this combo you WILL be using your rescue and IG more than in the other situations.  Expect it and plan for it. I havn't bothered to get me a 2h yet, though I used to use the 2hed where now I use the DW's (just more personal choice for flavor more than anything).  I can tell you that my normal running group consists of me, lvl 60 berserker, lvl 60 troub, lvl 60 assasian, lvl 58 wizard, lvl 57 templar, and either a warlock/guardian/mystic/templar/warden/pally (mostly whoever happens to be lfg in my guild) and only when I'm in my 1h/board+defensive stance do I have to constantly spam my taunts(all of them regardless of the encounter) and still everynow and then (at least once a night) have to pop my rescue IG.  Hope this helps <div></div>

[bmcd]

I think a huge factor in this is how good are the type of weapons you are using.  If you have a legenday sword and board for you level and only normal dropped or crafted it should allways out dps the other two options.  No hard proof here just an obsevation from my fighting.  And it has appeared to me the same goes for the other types of weapons 2h or dw, what ever my best weapons are for my level seem to out dps the other ones.  So I try to allways use my best ones as I have not yet been able to get a full set of legendary weapons for my level.  Hoping once I am in the 50's this will change.

[Astria]

Well i'm speaking from a full rare point of view....i harvest a ridiculous amount of time and as such i have several rares, so i am set up until 60 for legendary crafted gear....i do still use the 1h + shield for tanking in groups, tho i do solo probably 90% of the time due to time constraints =/ and as such probably will keep the shield + 1h for group duty but use either dw / 2h for solo....interesting about the 2H tho - really more dps?....i figured 2 dw's with a damage rating combined that is greater than a 2h would = more dps overall.....but i didn't take into account ripostes etc....hrmmm....i did finally got 2 more steels, so now am DW'ing handaxes for the moment ( love the look, and being a zerker flailing around with 2 handaxes is wicked ><img src="/smilies/283a16da79f3aa23fe1025c96295f04f.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> )....i'm 26, so not much point now in getting a 2H but i think i will get one for 30-39 tho....a halberd definitely, i would prefer a bardiche, but i haven't seen a bardiche in game beyond the iron one for sale from the merch in Graystone lol - am i crazy or is there simply no bardiche recipe for weaponsmiths?....ideally i will have all sets, and this will happen for every tier i go up from now on....but i take it there isn't any conclusive proof whether dw > 2h or vice-versa....in which case, i'll just go for whatever i feel like using that day <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /><p>Message Edited by Astriaal on <span class=date_text>12-14-2005</span> <span class=time_text>04:18 PM</span>

[Tudd]

<span><blockquote><hr>Astriaal wrote:Well i'm speaking from a full rare point of view....i harvest a ridiculous amount of time and as such i have several rares, so i am set up until 60 for legendary crafted gear....i do still use the 1h + shield for tanking in groups, tho i do solo probably 90% of the time due to time constraints =/ and as such probably will keep the shield + 1h for group duty but use either dw / 2h for solo....interesting about the 2H tho - really more dps?....i figured 2 dw's with a damage rating combined that is greater than a 2h would = more dps overall.....but i didn't take into account ripostes etc....hrmmm....i did finally got 2 more steels, so now am DW'ing handaxes for the moment ( love the look, and being a zerker flailing around with 2 handaxes is wicked ><img src="/smilies/283a16da79f3aa23fe1025c96295f04f.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> )....i'm 26, so not much point now in getting a 2H but i think i will get one for 30-39 tho....a halberd definitely, i would prefer a bardiche, but i haven't seen a bardiche in game beyond the iron one for sale from the merch in Graystone lol - am i crazy or is there simply no bardiche recipe for weaponsmiths?....ideally i will have all sets, and this will happen for every tier i go up from now on....but i take it there isn't any conclusive proof whether dw > 2h or vice-versa....in which case, i'll just go for whatever i feel like using that day <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /><p>Message Edited by Astriaal on <span class="date_text">12-14-2005</span> <span class="time_text">04:18 PM</span></p><hr></blockquote>A high delay two hander will outdamage a DW set up in most situations that you will be in. Believe it or not, my T5 RGF still outparses my DW setup of T6 Fabled whip (47.7 rating I think) and my T6 Legendary Spatha. Common sense would tell you that this T6  DW setup should easily outdamage the RGF, but in fact it does not. I've got tons of parses, because I didn't believe it myself at first. This is mostly due to how the proc rates are calculated. They brought DW proc'ing up, but it still isn't at the level of two handers. Offensive stance with a high delay 2 hander also generates huge aggro. You simply have to experience it yourself to know what I'm speaking of.</span><div></div>

[-Aonein-]

<DIV> <P>This is true to a point Tuddar.</P> <P>You really have to take into consideration about the speed of the dual weilds you are parsing. With Berserkers fasters does not always mean better and from my parsing its acually worse because of auto attack damage loss during CA casting which a Berserker revolves around pretty heavy CA usage.</P> <P>So if you are weilding a whip for example which is classed as Slashing damage your attack delay is like 1.2 seconds, now working of that for a proc ratio then yes its going to be worse then your RGF but only when it comes to proc ratio not pure auto attack damage output IF you dont use many CA's, but this wont work for a Berserker cause he needs to be using his CA's to do at least moderate damage.</P> <P>Now if your like me and use a set of Leafblades that have a 2.1 delay attack speed, your going to be maximizing your proc potential while also maximizing your auto attack damage from not missing many combat rounds due to CA usage. The 2.1 attack speed on a set of dual weilds is far superiour to a RGF, reason for this is because you have the calculation of 2.1 delay per weapon, where with the RGF you have one weapon at 3.8.</P></DIV>

[Astria]

so, basically if i want to maximize my proc potential AND auto-attack damage, i should DW Leafblades until the cows come home? or is that only the case in T6?

[Tudd]

<span><blockquote><hr>-Aonein- wrote:<div> <p>This is true to a point Tuddar.</p> <p>You really have to take into consideration about the speed of the dual weilds you are parsing. With Berserkers fasters does not always mean better and from my parsing its acually worse because of auto attack damage loss during CA casting which a Berserker revolves around pretty heavy CA usage.</p> <p>So if you are weilding a whip for example which is classed as Slashing damage your attack delay is like 1.2 seconds, now working of that for a proc ratio then yes its going to be worse then your RGF but only when it comes to proc ratio not pure auto attack damage output IF you dont use many CA's, but this wont work for a Berserker cause he needs to be using his CA's to do at least moderate damage.</p> <p>Now if your like me and use a set of Leafblades that have a 2.1 delay attack speed, your going to be maximizing your proc potential while also maximizing your auto attack damage from not missing many combat rounds due to CA usage. The 2.1 attack speed on a set of dual weilds is far superiour to a RGF, reason for this is because you have the calculation of 2.1 delay per weapon, where with the RGF you have one weapon at 3.8.</p></div><hr></blockquote>Yes, slower delay weapons are better for Berserkers or just about any class. Whether that be DW, 1h, or 2h. And yes, my T6 Fabled/Legendary DW combo will do more auto-attack DPS if I'm not using any CA's. However, I'll have to strongly disagree with you about the 2.1 dual wields being far superior to the RGF. In fact, I'm sure some independent parses would confirm that the RGF still outdamages a pair of 2.1 Leafs, especially in multi-mob encounters. I'll explain why. With a 2.1 delay, you are going to miss more auto-attack damage because you have to factor in haste. Even with 33% haste which is easily attainable with just a FBSS and self haste you are looking at a 1.6 second swing time. When you start to get into swing times this low, you will interrupt your auto-attack more often. With 33% haste the RGF is swinging every 2.5 seconds, much more forgiving then 1.6 seconds in regards to getting CA's in. Even with 100% haste, the RGF's swing time is 1.9 seconds compared to 1.05 seconds for the 2.1 delay weapons. The more haste you have, the more auto-attack damage your going to miss with CA's. Because we as humans have a limited reaction time, the higher the delay the better your chance of timing your CA's between your auto-attack swings. Second, the RGF has a 12% proc rate, compared to the leafs which have a 5% proc rate. This is a huge difference when calculating the chances your weapon will proc on a CA. The "old" formula for proc rate was this: </span>(Weapon Delay / 3.0 Delay ) * Proc Percentage. This formula mathematically balanced all weapons in such a way that if you only did auto-attack all weapons with the same proc percentage would, on average, proc the same number of times over a given time period. However, each swing regardless of whether it's a CA or auto-attack receives that chance. That is why high delay 2h were (and probably still are) so superior to everything else. Because you can get in more CA's and miss less auto-attacks with high delay weapons, 2h weapons do more damage. Lower delay weapons actually cause a double whammy effect; not only do you miss more auto-attacks, but your CA's have a lower chance to proc your weapon as well. <span>Also, Unbridled Fury seems to be receiving a modifier also, although at this point I've yet to do the necessary testing and parsing to see if the modification is using the same proc rate calculation as weapons, although I highly suspect it is. It's 10% chance to fire but my parses I'm seeing it at around 12-15%.</span> Given the above formula, on any given hit whether it be auto-attack or CA(some CA's can land multiple hits), my chance to proc on that hit with the RGF equipped is 15.2% Given the above formula, on any given hit whether it be auto-attack or CA(some CA's can land multiple hits), my chance to proc on that hit with the Leaf equipped is 3.5% Remember, Offending Stance is an attack. Which means it also has a chance to cause your weapon to proc on a successful hit. Which again benefits from the higher proc chances. Put it all together, and a high delay 2h weapon came out in most situations at least a good 20-30% better damage (sometimes more) between comparable DW and 2h setups. And I'm betting that there's still a pretty decent difference even after their modification to the proc rate. I've yet to see a 2h out of DoF with the delay of the RGF, and there is probably a reason for that.<div></div>

[Tudd]

<span><blockquote><hr>Astriaal wrote:so, basically if i want to maximize my proc potential AND auto-attack damage, i should DW Leafblades until the cows come home? or is that only the case in T6?<hr></blockquote>Probably only for T6. The previous tiers had high delay 2h, but I've not seen any in DoF. However, I will tell you that the RGF still holds up very solidly in T6 content if you can get one. It won't be able to hit T6 epics for the most part, but against most named and any trash it still rocks them hard.</span><div></div>

[-Aonein-]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Tuddar wrote:<BR><SPAN><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> -Aonein- wrote:<BR> <DIV> <P>This is true to a point Tuddar.</P> <P>You really have to take into consideration about the speed of the dual weilds you are parsing. With Berserkers fasters does not always mean better and from my parsing its acually worse because of auto attack damage loss during CA casting which a Berserker revolves around pretty heavy CA usage.</P> <P>So if you are weilding a whip for example which is classed as Slashing damage your attack delay is like 1.2 seconds, now working of that for a proc ratio then yes its going to be worse then your RGF but only when it comes to proc ratio not pure auto attack damage output IF you dont use many CA's, but this wont work for a Berserker cause he needs to be using his CA's to do at least moderate damage.</P> <P>Now if your like me and use a set of Leafblades that have a 2.1 delay attack speed, your going to be maximizing your proc potential while also maximizing your auto attack damage from not missing many combat rounds due to CA usage. The 2.1 attack speed on a set of dual weilds is far superiour to a RGF, reason for this is because you have the calculation of 2.1 delay per weapon, where with the RGF you have one weapon at 3.8.</P></DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>Yes, slower delay weapons are better for Berserkers or just about any class. Whether that be DW, 1h, or 2h. And yes, my T6 Fabled/Legendary DW combo will do more auto-attack DPS if I'm not using any CA's.<BR><BR>However, I'll have to strongly disagree with you about the 2.1 dual wields being far superior to the RGF. In fact, I'm sure some independent parses would confirm that the RGF still outdamages a pair of 2.1 Leafs, especially in multi-mob encounters. I'll explain why.<BR><BR>With a 2.1 delay, you are going to miss more auto-attack damage because you have to factor in haste. Even with 33% haste which is easily attainable with just a FBSS and self haste you are looking at a 1.6 second swing time. When you start to get into swing times this low, you will interrupt your auto-attack more often. With 33% haste the RGF is swinging every 2.5 seconds, much more forgiving then 1.6 seconds in regards to getting CA's in. Even with 100% haste, the RGF's swing time is 1.9 seconds compared to 1.05 seconds for the 2.1 delay weapons. The more haste you have, the more auto-attack damage your going to miss with CA's. Because we as humans have a limited reaction time, the higher the delay the better your chance of timing your CA's between your auto-attack swings.<BR><BR>Second, the RGF has a 12% proc rate, compared to the leafs which have a 5% proc rate. This is a huge difference when calculating the chances your weapon will proc on a CA.<BR><BR>The "old" formula for proc rate was this:<BR><BR></SPAN>(Weapon Delay / 3.0 Delay ) * Proc Percentage.<BR><BR>This formula mathematically balanced all weapons in such a way that if you only did auto-attack all weapons with the same proc percentage would, on average, proc the same number of times over a given time period. However, each swing regardless of whether it's a CA or auto-attack receives that chance. That is why high delay 2h were (and probably still are) so superior to everything else. Because you can get in more CA's and miss less auto-attacks with high delay weapons, 2h weapons do more damage. Lower delay weapons actually cause a double whammy effect; not only do you miss more auto-attacks, but your CA's have a lower chance to proc your weapon as well.<BR><BR><SPAN>Also, Unbridled Fury seems to be receiving a modifier also, although at this point I've yet to do the necessary testing and parsing to see if the modification is using the same proc rate calculation as weapons, although I highly suspect it is. It's 10% chance to fire but my parses I'm seeing it at around 12-15%.</SPAN><BR><BR>Given the above formula, on any given hit whether it be auto-attack or CA(some CA's can land multiple hits), my chance to proc on that hit with the RGF equipped is 15.2%<BR>Given the above formula, on any given hit whether it be auto-attack or CA(some CA's can land multiple hits), my chance to proc on that hit with the Leaf equipped is 3.5%<BR><BR>Remember, Offending Stance is an attack. Which means it also has a chance to cause your weapon to proc on a successful hit. Which again benefits from the higher proc chances.<BR><BR>Put it all together, and a high delay 2h weapon came out in most situations at least a good 20-30% better damage (sometimes more) between comparable DW and 2h setups. And I'm betting that there's still a pretty decent difference even after their modification to the proc rate.<BR><BR>I've yet to see a 2h out of DoF with the delay of the RGF, and there is probably a reason for that. <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>Yes it all looks great in theroy but i can assure you and alot of people thats not 100% true on how it works out in practical.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Dont forget your Dual Weilding as well, so the proc ratio isnt 3.5% on dual weild setup leafblades and nor does it work out like that in the game ethier, that calculation doesnt or i should say even work correctly and im 100% sure that its not even how they determine the proc rate now , because there is no way my Leafblades are working out to be a 3.5% chance to proc. Also dont forget that Unbridled Fury our Offensive Stance was nerfed and only effects 3 mobs within a encounter now, but the point here is that i can assure you that calculation isnt how they work out the new proc ratios anymore, especially if only Dual Weild weapons got a increase to Chance to Prco percentages and 2 handers didnt.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Ive ran the tests using a RGF and the difference is minimal at best using a high delay dual weild set up, the difference is 1 - 2%, which is why that calculation is nothing now, its old and i doubt they even use it themselves anymore.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Trust me, when you are outdamaging a 2 hand weilding Berserker ( With a RGF as well ) in a raid both speced for damage and he plus the entire raid is asking you questions on how you are doing it with Dual Weilds, you know something isnt right.....:smileywink:</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Now all i need to top it all off now is a set of Underworld Legplates. 33% extra DPS...../drool.</DIV>

[Tudd]

Lol, your post is wrong on so many levels, I'm not even going to bother pointing out all the errors. Let me just leave you with this little tidbit: there's a difference between proc ratio and the number of times you proc. <div></div>

[Tudd]

<div></div><div></div><div></div>Alright, just got done doing some controlled testing parses. For the parsing tests, I compared two Cobalt Leafblades against an RGF. The mob of choice was Shrouded Pounder in SS, Lvl48 heroic. Mob was chosen due to decent amount of HP and the fact it's grey to a Lvl60, which means nearly 100% hit rate. For the purposes of testing, I killed 5 times with each setup. Haste was FBSS in Infuriate Adept3. I understand that 5 samples is not a large enough sampling pool to be conclusive off from, but large enough to be able to get a decent calculation off from. Conclusion of the parses: The Leafblade came out with a 3.5% proc rate, EXACTLY what I predicted. The RGF came out with a 20% proc rate. Fury proc'd close to the my predicted rate, meaning Fury's proc rate probably is indeed using the same calculation as weapon proc rates, or something very similar. Total number of procs Leafs: 14 Total number of procs RGF: 41 Total number of hits Leaf: 404 Total number of hits RGF: 205 Leaf proc rate: 14/404 = 3.5% RGF proc rate: 41/205 = 20% Furious assault hits Leaf: 24 Furious assault hits RGF: 32 Fury proc rate, Leaf: 24/404 = 6% Fury proc rate, RGF: 32/205 = 15.6% DPS was virtually identical and too close to call it one way or the other. So despite some folk's assertions, everything I said was dead on affirmed with parses. The proc rates were right at where I said they would be, and the Leaf's weren't superior to the RGF in DPS. In fact, the two set ups produced nearly identical DPS. Unfortunately these boards don't allow any complex HTML formatting, unfortunately, so here is the data in a CSV format if people want to copy the data and analyze it themselves. You can highlight the data, copy it to your clipboard and then paste it into notepad and save it as a *.csv file. Leaf parses: Attack,Start,End,Duration,Damage,Dmg %,DPS,Hits,Misses,Hit %,Max,Min,Avg You,,,,,,,,,,,, pierce,8:59:47,9:00:42,0:00:55,6547,41.26,119.04,5 3,0,100,197,59,123.53 Amputate,8:59:47,9:00:40,0:00:53,1722,10.85,32.49, 4,0,100,136,68,95.67 Unyielding Battering,8:59:49,9:00:35,0:00:46,990,6.24,21.52,3 ,0,100,372,287,330 Frenzied Blows,8:59:51,8:59:51,0:00:01,695,4.38,695,3,0,100 ,286,180,231.67 No Quarter,8:59:53,9:00:21,0:00:28,368,2.32,13.14,2,0 ,100,257,111,184 Furious Assault,8:59:53,9:00:32,0:00:39,649,4.09,16.64,3,0 ,100,240,188,216.33 Breach,8:59:56,9:00:38,0:00:42,625,3.94,14.88,3,0, 100,302,151,208.33 Counterattack,8:59:58,9:00:37,0:00:39,1624,10.24,4 1.64,6,0,100,322,218,270.67 Wallop,8:59:58,9:00:41,0:00:43,940,5.92,21.86,4,0, 100,268,171,235 Slay,9:00:01,9:00:01,0:00:01,510,3.21,510,1,0,100, 510,510,510 Provoking Counterattack,9:00:09,9:00:27,0:00:18,674,4.25,37. 44,3,0,100,274,178,224.67 Gleaming Strike,9:00:12,9:00:34,0:00:22,522,3.29,23.73,2,0, 100,271,251,261 ,,,,,,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,, pierce,9:01:08,9:01:55,0:00:47,5852,37.07,124.51,4 6,0,100,198,56,127.22 Amputate,9:01:08,9:01:55,0:00:47,1587,10.05,33.77, 4,0,100,116,57,93.35 Furious Assault,9:01:08,9:01:48,0:00:40,1481,9.38,37.02,6, 0,100,287,224,246.83 Unyielding Battering,9:01:10,9:01:55,0:00:45,971,6.15,21.58,3 ,0,100,356,262,323.67 No Quarter,9:01:13,9:01:42,0:00:29,558,3.53,19.24,2,0 ,100,284,274,279 Frenzied Blows,9:01:15,9:01:15,0:00:01,679,4.3,679,3,0,100, 246,187,226.33 Counterattack,9:01:15,9:01:46,0:00:31,1556,9.86,50 .19,6,0,100,315,215,259.33 Breach,9:01:17,9:01:39,0:00:22,591,3.74,26.86,2,0, 100,305,286,295.5 Wallop,9:01:20,9:01:44,0:00:24,651,4.12,27.13,3,0, 100,244,174,217 Slay,9:01:22,9:01:22,0:00:01,775,4.91,775,1,0,100, 775,775,775 Gleaming Strike,9:01:28,9:01:55,0:00:27,620,3.93,22.96,2,0, 100,350,270,310 Provoking Counterattack,9:01:30,9:01:36,0:00:06,465,2.95,77. 5,2,0,100,268,197,232.5 ,,,,,,,,,,,, pierce,9:02:45,9:03:38,0:00:53,6588,41.59,124.3,51 ,0,100,203,55,129.18 Amputate,9:02:44,9:03:38,0:00:54,1789,11.29,33.13, 4,0,100,138,96,99.39 Furious Assault,9:02:45,9:03:32,0:00:47,782,4.94,16.64,3,0 ,100,296,194,260.67 Unyielding Battering,9:02:47,9:03:37,0:00:50,1014,6.4,20.28,3 ,0,100,411,275,338 Gleaming Strike,9:02:48,9:03:38,0:00:50,458,2.89,9.16,2,0,1 00,259,199,229 Frenzied Blows,9:02:50,9:02:50,0:00:01,788,4.97,788,3,0,100 ,329,190,262.67 Provoking Counterattack,9:02:52,9:03:12,0:00:20,454,2.87,22. 7,2,0,100,258,196,227 Counterattack,9:02:52,9:03:38,0:00:46,1446,9.13,31 .43,6,0,100,261,203,241 No Quarter,9:02:53,9:03:21,0:00:28,459,2.9,16.39,2,0, 100,268,191,229.5 Breach,9:02:56,9:03:16,0:00:20,544,3.43,27.2,2,0,1 00,361,183,272 Wallop,9:02:58,9:03:25,0:00:27,717,4.53,26.56,3,0, 100,284,149,239 Slay,9:03:01,9:03:01,0:00:01,801,5.06,801,1,0,100, 801,801,801 ,,,,,,,,,,,, pierce,9:04:56,9:05:48,0:00:52,7083,44.76,136.21,5 2,0,100,192,61,136.21 Amputate,9:04:55,9:05:46,0:00:51,1747,11.04,34.25, 4,0,100,127,67,97.06 Unyielding Battering,9:04:57,9:05:46,0:00:49,988,6.24,20.16,3 ,0,100,366,282,329.33 Furious Assault,9:04:57,9:05:07,0:00:10,517,3.27,51.7,2,0, 100,307,210,258.5 Frenzied Blows,9:04:59,9:04:59,0:00:01,755,4.77,755,3,0,100 ,331,209,251.67 Provoking Counterattack,9:05:01,9:05:01,0:00:01,209,1.32,209 ,1,0,100,209,209,209 Counterattack,9:05:01,9:05:33,0:00:32,835,5.28,26. 09,3,0,100,328,228,278.33 No Quarter,9:05:02,9:05:31,0:00:29,332,2.1,11.45,2,0, 100,191,141,166 Gleaming Strike,9:05:03,9:05:36,0:00:33,1553,9.81,47.06,6,0 ,100,303,229,258.83 Breach,9:05:04,9:05:39,0:00:35,664,4.2,18.97,3,0,1 00,274,184,221.33 Wallop,9:05:07,9:05:48,0:00:41,814,5.14,19.85,4,0, 100,280,102,203.5 Slay,9:05:09,9:05:09,0:00:01,328,2.07,328,1,0,100, 328,328,328 ,,,,,,,,,,,, pierce,9:06:18,9:07:06,0:00:48,6564,41.53,136.75,5 4,0,100,199,69,121.56 Amputate,9:06:17,9:07:05,0:00:48,1421,8.99,29.6,4, 0,100,96,79,94.73 Gleaming Strike,9:06:18,9:06:50,0:00:32,533,3.37,16.66,2,0, 100,331,202,266.5 Unyielding Battering,9:06:19,9:06:47,0:00:28,699,4.42,24.96,2 ,0,100,405,294,349.5 Frenzied Blows,9:06:22,9:06:22,0:00:01,849,5.37,849,3,0,100 ,450,152,283 Counterattack,9:06:23,9:07:07,0:00:44,859,5.44,19. 52,3,0,100,296,279,286.33 Breach,9:06:25,9:06:54,0:00:29,767,4.85,26.45,3,0, 100,315,186,255.67 Furious Assault,9:06:26,9:07:01,0:00:35,2434,15.4,69.54,10 ,0,100,298,199,243.4 Wallop,9:06:28,9:06:57,0:00:29,766,4.85,26.41,3,0, 100,278,233,255.33 No Quarter,9:06:30,9:06:30,0:00:01,111,0.7,111,1,0,10 0,111,111,111 Slay,9:06:33,9:06:33,0:00:01,378,2.39,378,1,0,100, 378,378,378 Provoking Counterattack,9:06:43,9:07:07,0:00:24,423,2.68,17. 63,2,0,100,213,210,211.5 ,,,,,,,,,,,, RGF: Attack,Start,End,Duration,Damage,Dmg %,DPS,Hits,Misses,Hit %,Max,Min,Avg You,,,,,,,,,,,, crush,5:50:48,5:51:40,0:00:52,5625,34.86,108.17,18 ,0,100,477,104,312.5 Amputate,5:50:47,5:51:36,0:00:49,1640,10.16,33.47, 4,0,100,100,83,96.47 Unyielding Battering,5:50:50,5:51:35,0:00:45,962,5.96,21.38,3 ,0,100,401,250,320.67 Furious Assault,5:50:50,5:51:38,0:00:48,1310,8.12,27.29,5, 0,100,309,244,262 Ancient Flame,5:50:52,5:51:35,0:00:43,1719,10.65,39.98,9,0 ,100,244,153,191 Counterattack,5:50:52,5:51:38,0:00:46,1387,8.6,30. 15,5,0,100,320,211,277.4 Frenzied Blows,5:50:52,5:50:52,0:00:01,769,4.77,769,3,0,100 ,312,219,256.33 Wallop,5:50:55,5:51:37,0:00:42,721,4.47,17.17,4,0, 100,220,151,180.25 No Quarter,5:50:57,5:51:22,0:00:25,468,2.9,18.72,2,0, 100,242,226,234 Breach,5:50:59,5:51:30,0:00:31,732,4.54,23.61,3,0, 100,333,171,244 Slay,5:51:01,5:51:01,0:00:01,801,4.96,801,1,0,100, 801,801,801 ,,,,,,,,,,,, crush,5:52:11,5:53:02,0:00:51,6568,41.2,128.78,19, 0,100,535,83,345.68 Amputate,5:52:10,5:52:59,0:00:49,1667,10.46,34.02, 4,0,100,126,89,98.06 Ancient Flame,5:52:10,5:52:55,0:00:45,1302,8.17,28.93,7,0, 100,230,154,186 Unyielding Battering,5:52:12,5:53:01,0:00:49,1039,6.52,21.2,3 ,0,100,364,336,346.33 No Quarter,5:52:14,5:52:43,0:00:29,456,2.86,15.72,2,0 ,100,259,197,228 Furious Assault,5:52:14,5:52:59,0:00:45,1860,11.67,41.33,8 ,0,100,271,189,232.5 Frenzied Blows,5:52:16,5:52:16,0:00:01,645,4.05,645,3,0,100 ,223,209,215 Wallop,5:52:19,5:52:57,0:00:38,923,5.79,24.29,4,0, 100,272,155,230.75 Breach,5:52:21,5:52:48,0:00:27,795,4.99,29.44,3,0, 100,355,174,265 Slay,5:52:24,5:52:24,0:00:01,367,2.3,367,1,0,100,3 67,367,367 Counterattack,5:52:57,5:52:57,0:00:01,320,2.01,320 ,1,0,100,320,320,320 ,,,,,,,,,,,, crush,5:53:30,5:54:17,0:00:47,6193,39.32,131.77,16 ,0,100,519,282,387.06 Amputate,5:53:29,5:54:17,0:00:48,1584,10.06,33,4,0 ,100,97,57,93.18 Ancient Flame,5:53:30,5:54:09,0:00:39,1858,11.8,47.64,9,0, 100,237,152,206.44 Unyielding Battering,5:53:31,5:53:55,0:00:24,546,3.47,22.75,2 ,0,100,288,258,273 Frenzied Blows,5:53:33,5:53:33,0:00:01,856,5.43,856,3,0,100 ,450,137,285.33 No Quarter,5:53:35,5:54:00,0:00:25,400,2.54,16,2,0,10 0,288,112,200 Furious Assault,5:53:37,5:54:04,0:00:27,1524,9.68,56.44,6, 0,100,283,217,254 Breach,5:53:38,5:54:16,0:00:38,785,4.98,20.66,4,0, 100,243,152,196.25 Wallop,5:53:40,5:54:09,0:00:29,669,4.25,23.07,3,0, 100,264,162,223 Slay,5:53:43,5:53:43,0:00:01,368,2.34,368,1,0,100, 368,368,368 Provoking Counterattack,5:53:59,5:54:06,0:00:07,429,2.72,61. 29,2,0,100,248,181,214.5 Counterattack,5:54:06,5:54:13,0:00:07,539,3.42,77, 2,0,100,293,246,269.5 ,,,,,,,,,,,, crush,5:57:02,5:57:50,0:00:48,6025,38.18,125.52,19 ,0,100,476,57,317.11 Amputate,5:57:01,5:57:47,0:00:46,1448,9.18,31.48,4 ,0,100,101,96,96.53 Furious Assault,5:57:01,5:57:50,0:00:49,2417,15.32,49.33,1 0,0,100,304,207,241.7 Unyielding Battering,5:57:03,5:57:29,0:00:26,556,3.52,21.38,2 ,0,100,299,257,278 Frenzied Blows,5:57:05,5:57:05,0:00:01,888,5.63,888,3,0,100 ,449,156,296 Ancient Flame,5:57:05,5:57:48,0:00:43,1624,10.29,37.77,8,0 ,100,238,156,203 Slay,5:57:07,5:57:07,0:00:01,281,1.78,281,1,0,100, 281,281,281 Breach,5:57:10,5:57:48,0:00:38,1090,6.91,28.68,4,0 ,100,354,215,272.5 Wallop,5:57:12,5:57:50,0:00:38,699,4.43,18.39,4,0, 100,218,103,174.75 No Quarter,5:57:15,5:57:45,0:00:30,459,2.91,15.3,2,0, 100,252,207,229.5 Counterattack,5:57:16,5:57:16,0:00:01,293,1.86,293 ,1,0,100,293,293,293 ,,,,,,,,,,,, crush,6:00:47,6:01:40,0:00:53,6354,39.97,119.89,20 ,0,100,479,94,317.7 Amputate,6:00:46,6:01:38,0:00:52,1515,9.53,29.13,4 ,0,100,96,51,89.12 Counterattack,6:00:48,6:01:36,0:00:48,1066,6.71,22 .21,4,0,100,294,249,266.5 Ancient Flame,6:00:48,6:01:34,0:00:46,1676,10.54,36.43,8,0 ,100,241,168,209.5 Unyielding Battering,6:00:48,6:01:39,0:00:51,1005,6.32,19.71, 3,0,100,397,295,335 No Quarter,6:00:50,6:01:16,0:00:26,478,3.01,18.38,2,0 ,100,275,203,239 Frenzied Blows,6:00:52,6:00:52,0:00:01,1199,7.54,1199,3,0,1 00,500,315,399.67 Breach,6:00:55,6:01:36,0:00:41,846,5.32,20.63,4,0, 100,268,185,211.5 Wallop,6:00:58,6:01:30,0:00:32,489,3.08,15.28,3,0, 100,213,126,163 Slay,6:01:01,6:01:01,0:00:01,555,3.49,555,1,0,100, 555,555,555 Furious Assault,6:01:01,6:01:14,0:00:13,713,4.49,54.85,3,0 ,100,279,193,237.67 <p>Message Edited by Tuddar on <span class=date_text>12-17-2005</span> <span class=time_text>09:17 PM</span>

[-Aonein-]

<P>Where you Dual Weilding? Ive no idea how you got those numbers Tuddar but i broke out the parser for the first time in a month or so and decided to show you that you are completely wrong, not sure if its the program your using or what, but reguardless your numbers are seriously out of whack.</P> <P>First test i did was 5 mobs just like you with the use of CA's :</P> <P><IMG src="http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a148/Taemek/5mobswithCAs.jpg"></P> <P> </P> <P>2nd test i did was with no CA's what so ever and the result was :</P> <P><IMG src="http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a148/Taemek/5mobswithoutCAs.jpg"></P> <P> </P> <P>Now ive no clue how exactally you produced your numbers, but mobs i used for this example where all <STRONG>^^^</STRONG> con mobs and had around 15 - 16k HP each.</P> <P>As you can see im not really sure how or what you did to get your numbers, but i can get it close to 9 - 10% proc rate just like Unbridled Fury states it is with a 10% proc rate. I cant seem to find my RGF, ive no clue whats going on there currently waiting on a petition about it but i may just go get a guild group together and kill eggnog for one and do the same tests with a RGF. One thing i think you are misunderstanding with that " old " calculation is that when they upgraded Dual Weild proc ratios they would of had to come up with a " new " formula making the " old " one obselete or there would of been no upgrade to begin with.</P> <P>Im not a mathimatition and i have no idea how one would go about working out the new formula but maybe some of the smarter Berserkers out there could help here, Pin, Sokolov?</P> <P>EDIT - Sorry about the size of the pics, ive got no where to upload them and Photobucket.com was my only choice, but here is a more basic view per fight that you can link to the pics.</P> <P><STRONG><U>5 mobs with CA's</U> :</STRONG></P> <OL> <LI>64 swings</LI> <UL> <LI>6 Furious Assaults</LI> <LI>4 Gleaming Strikes</LI></UL> <LI>66 swings</LI> <UL> <LI>6 Furious Assaults</LI> <LI>3 Gleaming Strikes</LI></UL> <LI>71 swings</LI> <UL> <LI>9 Furious Assaults</LI> <LI>2 Gleaming Strikes</LI></UL> <LI>59 swings</LI> <UL> <LI>7 Furious Assaults</LI> <LI>5 Gleaming Strikes</LI></UL> <LI>77 swings</LI> <UL> <LI>1 Furious Assault</LI> <LI>2 Gleaming Strikes</LI></UL></OL> <P><STRONG><U>5 mobs without CA's</U></STRONG> <STRONG>:</STRONG></P> <OL> <LI>109 swings</LI> <UL> <LI>7 Furious Assaults</LI> <LI>4 Gleaming Strikes</LI></UL> <LI>208 swings</LI> <UL> <LI>17 Furious Assaults</LI> <LI>8 Gleaming Strikes</LI></UL> <LI>95 swings</LI> <UL> <LI>10 Furious Assaults</LI> <LI>5 Gleaming Strikes</LI></UL> <LI>91 swings</LI> <UL> <LI>13 Furious Assaults</LI> <LI>4 Gleaming Strikes</LI></UL> <LI>99 swings</LI> <UL> <LI>11 Furious Assaults</LI> <LI>3 Gleaming Strikes</LI></UL></OL><p>Message Edited by -Aonein- on <span class=date_text>12-18-2005</span> <span class=time_text>06:19 PM</span>

[Tudd]

<div></div><div></div><span><blockquote><hr>-Aonein- wrote: <p>Where you Dual Weilding? Ive no idea how you got those numbers Tuddar but i broke out the parser for the first time in a month or so and decided to show you that you are completely wrong, not sure if its the program your using or what, but reguardless your numbers are seriously out of whack.</p> <p>First test i did was 5 mobs just like you with the use of CA's :</p> <p><img src="http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a148/Taemek/5mobswithCAs.jpg"></p> <p>2nd test i did was with no CA's what so ever and the result was :</p> <p><img src="http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a148/Taemek/5mobswithoutCAs.jpg"></p> <p>Now ive no clue how exactally you produced your numbers, but mobs i used for this example where all <strong>^^^</strong> con mobs and had around 15 - 16k HP each.</p> <p>As you can see im not really sure how or what you did to get your numbers, but i can get it close to 9 - 10% proc rate just like Unbridled Fury states it is with a 10% proc rate. I cant seem to find my RGF, ive no clue whats going on there currently waiting on a petition about it but i may just go get a guild group together and kill eggnog for one and do the same tests with a RGF. One thing i think you are misunderstanding with that " old " calculation is that when they upgraded Dual Weild proc ratios they would of had to come up with a " new " formula making the " old " one obselete or there would of been no upgrade to begin with.</p> <p>Im not a mathimatition and i have no idea how one would go about working out the new formula but maybe some of the smarter Berserkers out there could help here, Pin, Sokolov?</p> <p>EDIT - Sorry about the size of the pics, ive got no where to upload them and Photobucket.com was my only choice, but here is a more basic view per fight that you can link to the pics.</p> <p><strong><u>5 mobs with CA's</u> :</strong></p> <ol> <li>64 swings</li> <ul> <li>6 Furious Assaults</li> <li>4 Gleaming Strikes</li></ul> <li>66 swings</li> <ul> <li>6 Furious Assaults</li> <li>3 Gleaming Strikes</li></ul> <li>71 swings</li> <ul> <li>9 Furious Assaults</li> <li>2 Gleaming Strikes</li></ul> <li>59 swings</li> <ul> <li>7 Furious Assaults</li> <li>5 Gleaming Strikes</li></ul> <li>77 swings</li> <ul> <li>1 Furious Assault</li> <li>2 Gleaming Strikes</li></ul></ol> <p><strong><u>5 mobs without CA's</u></strong> <strong>:</strong></p> <ol> <li>109 swings</li> <ul> <li>7 Furious Assaults</li> <li>4 Gleaming Strikes</li></ul> <li>208 swings</li> <ul> <li>17 Furious Assaults</li> <li>8 Gleaming Strikes</li></ul> <li>95 swings</li> <ul> <li>10 Furious Assaults</li> <li>5 Gleaming Strikes</li></ul> <li>91 swings</li> <ul> <li>13 Furious Assaults</li> <li>4 Gleaming Strikes</li></ul> <li>99 swings</li> <ul> <li>11 Furious Assaults</li> <li>3 Gleaming Strikes</li></ul></ol><p>Message Edited by -Aonein- on <span class="date_text">12-18-2005</span> <span class="time_text">06:19 PM</span></p><hr></blockquote>I told you exactly where I ran the tests at and what the mob was that was used for testing. Exactly what is confusing about that? Lvl48 Shrouded Pounders, they are ^^^ Heroic mobs. Exactly the kind of mob you want to parse on. You can find them right by the desert madmen's shrine. Second, what mobs are YOU killing. You didn't specify the name of the mob or mobs. From my data you can see exactly what CA's were used and all the auto-attack damage. You can see the hits and misses for each CA. You can verify my numbers from the data I posted. You posted no raw data. My numbers were output by statalyzer. I can see you are using CombatStats. The problem is, CombatStats doesn't provide much in the way of statistics. Not only that, but CombatStats isn't showing you what you think it is. CombatStats doesn't show you hits or misses, it just shows you how often something was used. So hits and misses are all lumped together by CombatStats. However, misses don't count for the purposes of whether a weapon procs or not. In short, CombatStats is great for spot analysis of your DPS, but not so great for trying to break things down. It simply doesn't have anywhere near the analytical breakdown that statalyzer has. If you are serious about breaking down the numbers, CombatStats is not the tool to do so. Third, <b>you posted numbers that agree with me!!</b> Do the math. Let's assume that you connected 100% of the time, if you were fighting grey heroic mobs like I did in my test. With CA's your recorded number of swings are 64+66+71+59+77 = 337 swings. Of which, you had 16 GS procs. 16/337 = 4.74%. Without CA's, your recorded number of swings are 109+208+95+91+99 = 602 swings. Of which, you had 24 GS procs. 24/602 = 3.9% As far as the number of Fury procs you experienced, I'll be running more parses tomorrow, so I'll see if this was just a run of bad luck on my part, or a run of good luck on yours. I'll be increasing my sample size to 50 for each weapon set, so the numbers should be a little less prone to temporary streaks. </span><span>-<i>Aonein- wrote:</i></span> <span> <i> "</i></span><span><i>One thing i think you are misunderstanding with that " old " calculation is that when they upgraded Dual Weild proc ratios they would of had to come up with a " new " formula making the " old " one obselete or there would of been no upgrade to begin with."</i> I'm not misunderstanding anything. What I am understanding is that the proc rate for dual wield doesn't even come close to a high delay 2 hander. Perhaps what you are misunderstanding is that the old formula caused an extra penalty towards dual wields if you used CA's, and they probably just made a minor adjustment to help with that fact. But it's pretty clear that there was no huge jump in the proc ratio of dual wields, and even your own numbers prove that. As far as the RGF thing, I knew you didn't have one to begin with, because anyone who does or has had one can tell you even without parsing that the proc on the RGF goes off an insane amount. Your claims of only a 1-2% difference immediately told me that you had no idea how often it procs, and you were just making numbers up. Hell, your own parses pretty much agree with me when it comes to weapon proc rate. When you said that there was only a 1-2% difference in procs between the leaf blades and an RGF, I'm sure everyone who owns both sets immediately knew that you were, in fact, making stuff up. And your own parses prove it. </span><div></div><p>P.S. As far as figuring out the new formula, until a Dev comes straight out and tells you what the calculation is, you'll have to hypothesize possible algorithms, then devise different sets of tests to try to isolate each portion of the algorithm, and then see if your algorithm agrees with them statistically over all sets. Which is a lot of parsing to do. </p> <p>To compound this problem, there aren't parsing mobs like there were in EQ, mobs that had millions of HP and didn't fight back, where you could do extensive parses on for long periods of time and get data sets large enough to be statistically valid. Getting those data sets in EQ2 will be very difficult. <span class="time_text"></span></p><p>Message Edited by Tuddar on <span class=date_text>12-18-2005</span> <span class=time_text>02:16 AM</span>

[-Aonein-]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Tuddar wrote:<BR> <SPAN><BR><BR>My numbers were output by statalyzer. I can see you are using CombatStats. The problem is, CombatStats doesn't provide much in the way of statistics. Not only that, but CombatStats isn't showing you what you think it is. CombatStats doesn't show you hits or misses, it just shows you how often something was used. So hits and misses are all lumped together by CombatStats. However, misses don't count for the purposes of whether a weapon procs or not.<BR><BR></SPAN> <P><BR>  <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>HAHAHA, Tuddar Combatstats does everything Statalyzer does, i can give you a full rpint out in CSV or HTML format and i can give you as many screen shots of hits, miss's, blocks, parries, ripostes, hell i can give you the mobs hits miss etc etc, but truth is how many screen shots do you want and i dont have a unlimited amount of web space to upload stuff.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Mobs im testing are the lvl 48 spectres and yes im getting 100% hit ratio with 0 misses.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I got more tests coming for you to endulge yourself with with a range of tests being done with 1.2, 1.5 and im just going to buy a 3.8 delay wep and test that for [expletive haxx0red by Raijinn]s and giggles.</DIV>

[-Aonein-]

<P>Also while i think of it Tuddar, all the data your CSV formatt provides, my screen shots provide the same thing and taking into account that every hit is a 100% hit with no misses etc, one can just average that out, yours just shows that you have succesfully hit every hit 100%, no difference, just yours shows the amount you hit for on the accual hit itself, this in no way changes the amount of procs you do or makes my numbers any different from yours seeing as mine is also 100% hit ratio also.</P>

[Tudd]

<div></div><div></div><span><blockquote><hr>-Aonein- wrote: <blockquote> <hr> Tuddar wrote: <div></div> <div></div><span>My numbers were output by statalyzer. I can see you are using CombatStats. The problem is, CombatStats doesn't provide much in the way of statistics. Not only that, but CombatStats isn't showing you what you think it is. CombatStats doesn't show you hits or misses, it just shows you how often something was used. So hits and misses are all lumped together by CombatStats. However, misses don't count for the purposes of whether a weapon procs or not.</span>  <hr> </blockquote> <div>HAHAHA, Tuddar Combatstats does everything Statalyzer does, i can give you a full rpint out in CSV or HTML format and i can give you as many screen shots of hits, miss's, blocks, parries, ripostes, hell i can give you the mobs hits miss etc etc, but truth is how many screen shots do you want and i dont have a unlimited amount of web space to upload stuff.</div> <div> </div> <div>Mobs im testing are the lvl 48 spectres and yes im getting 100% hit ratio with 0 misses.</div> <div> </div> <div>I got more tests coming for you to endulge yourself with with a range of tests being done with 1.2, 1.5 and im just going to buy a 3.8 delay wep and test that for [expletive haxx0red by Raijinn]s and giggles.</div><hr></blockquote>Lol, dude, you really have no clue. Export out your data in CSV format in CombatStats. You know what it looks like? It looks like this: pkey,owner,battle,name,lowdamage,avgdamage,highdam age,used,total,lastused 1001,1005,1001,"assault",34,69,109,6,418,11/06/2005 18:11:24 1002,1001,1001,"counterattack",199,293,372,340,99649,12/01/2005 18:06:36 1003,1005,1001,"crush",3,50,142,27,1368,11/06/2005 18:11:34 You see misses anywhere in there? No. Damage % of fight? No. Hit %? No. Does CombatStats give total figures for the entire log? No. Can I determine with CombatStats what my hit % was on my CA's from 1 Dec-15 Dec? No. I could go on and on about how much more Statanalyzer does then CombatStats, but it's not worth wasting my time, because you don't even know what CombatStats does. Go ahead, post your screenshots showing misses from CombatStats. Try making it large enough so people can actually see something. This is going to be good. Or better yet, export out your data showing it. Do you even bother to double-check what you post? 3 seconds of work exporting out your data in CombatStats would have shown you that what you have posted about CombatStats is, in fact, not true.</span><div></div><p><span class="time_text"> </span></p><p>Message Edited by Tuddar on <span class=date_text>12-18-2005</span> <span class=time_text>09:25 AM</span>

[Tudd]

I've PM'd you an address, username, and password you can use to upload images to. Feel free to upload your images there. You can then link your images here with an address like this: http://216.119.80.244/Aonein/5mobswithCAs.jpg Make sure to save your screenshots large enough so they are readable. You've got tons of file space, so make them as large as you like. <div></div>

[-Aonein-]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Tuddar wrote:<BR>I've PM'd you an address, username, and password you can use to upload images to. Feel free to upload your images there.<BR><BR>You can then link your images here with an address like this: http://216.119.80.244/Aonein/5mobswithCAs.jpg<BR><BR>Make sure to save your screenshots large enough so they are readable. You've got tons of file space, so make them as large as you like.<BR> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>Tell you what i will do Tuddar, send me another PM with the site where i can download statalyzer and ill do my tests with your program seeing as reguardless what or how i do anything with combat stats you will find something technical about it to not be true when all i want it to do is show you a 100% true value of what the proc ratio really is with a 100% hit ratio and i did just that, have you looked into why your proc ratio was so low on your dual weild test? I dont even believe you tested it and just did a random number test using your own numbers so that it fell your way.</P> <P>When you have a 100% succes rate of all hits connecting it doesnt matter what program you use as long as it tells you how many swings and how many procs, providing you have connected 100%.</P>

[Tudd]

<div></div><div></div><span><blockquote><hr>-Aonein- wrote: <blockquote> <hr> Tuddar wrote:I've PM'd you an address, username, and password you can use to upload images to. Feel free to upload your images there.You can then link your images here with an address like this: http://216.119.80.244/Aonein/5mobswithCAs.jpgMake sure to save your screenshots large enough so they are readable. You've got tons of file space, so make them as large as you like. <hr> </blockquote> <p>Tell you what i will do Tuddar, send me another PM with the site where i can download statalyzer and ill do my tests with your program seeing as reguardless what or how i do anything with combat stats you will find something technical about it to not be true when all i want it to do is show you a 100% true value of what the proc ratio really is with a 100% hit ratio and i did just that, have you looked into why your proc ratio was so low on your dual weild test? I dont even believe you tested it and just did a random number test using your own numbers so that it fell your way.</p> <p>When you have a 100% succes rate of all hits connecting it doesnt matter what program you use as long as it tells you how many swings and how many procs, providing you have connected 100%.</p> <hr></blockquote>Exactly what are you not comprehending? YOUR OWN PARSES CAME UP WITH NUMBERS VIRTUALLY IDENTICAL TO MINE. Jesus, how much more clear do you have to get? You were the one saying that CombatStats does everything Statalyzer does, and now your asking me for a link to the download? So exactly how did you make the claim, and I quote you: </span><span><i>"HAHAHA, Tuddar Combatstats does everything Statalyzer does, i can give you a full rpint out in CSV or HTML format and i can give you as many screen shots of hits, miss's, blocks, parries, ripostes, hell i can give you the mobs hits miss etc etc, but truth is how many screen shots do you want and i dont have a unlimited amount of web space to upload stuff</i>." This is like the third time you've claimed something and didn't know what the hell your talking about. Your just making [expletive haxx0red by Raijinn] up as you go along.</span><span>  You say CombatStats does something, and then I point out that it does no such thing. You say it does everything that Statalyzer does, yet you don't even have Statalyzer to know the difference. After all this, you have the nuts to accuse *me* of making stuff up. Dude, you are one class act. At this point I'm just humoring you, because your already beyond credibility. You can get statalyzer at </span><span class="postbody"><font color="#ffffff"><a href="http://www.thescoutssanctuary.com/parser/statalyzerbeta062.zip" target="_blank">http://www.thescoutssanctuary.com/parser/statalyzerbeta062.zip</a></font> Last, but not least, and as promised, here are the numbers from 50 kills with each weapon set. Again, Lvl48 ^^^ Shrouded Pounders in SS: LEAFS: Proc ratio: 3.4594096% Fury ratio: 7.1494465% RGF: Proc ratio: 16.183% Fury ratio: 11.7106% Notice that the leaf's proc ratio on both GS and Fury is exactly what I had predicted, and very closely matches my first set of parses. Interestingly, GS has a 5% proc rate and Fury has a stated 10%. Now notice that in the results above, GS procs exactly half as much as Fury. In other words, the parsed ratios EXACTLY match what you would predict. Fury proc'd twice as much as GS, which makes sense since Fury has a base 10% and GS has a base 5%. This also lends further credence to the theory that Fury is using the same proc formula as weapon procs do. The procs on the RGF are very close to the predicted rate. Fury is .5% lower in this parse then expected, and Ancient Flame about 1% higher. Not a huge difference between parse and prediction. You can download the parses for these figures at http://216.119.80.244/parses/parses.zip. These are actually EQ2 log files, not extracts of any parsing program. So you can see exactly what happened, and you can verify my results with the logs directly. I supposed next you'll accuse me of randomly generating the 14,500 lines of logs that it took to generate these figures.</span><div></div><p>Message Edited by Tuddar on <span class=date_text>12-18-2005</span> <span class=time_text>06:30 PM</span>

[-Aonein-]

<P>Funny thing is Tuddar Combatstats is a harder program to configure but it can do everything that Statalyzer does, the CSV and XML / HTML formats just look different.</P> <P>Ill post screen shots of both later to explain it for you, and by the way, if you read my first post correctly, the very first one i made here, i pointed out what you have been trying to argue all along.</P>

[Tudd]

<span><blockquote><hr>-Aonein- wrote:<p>Funny thing is Tuddar Combatstats is a harder program to configure but it can do everything that Statalyzer does, the CSV and XML / HTML formats just look different.</p> <p>Ill post screen shots of both later to explain it for you, and by the way, if you read my first post correctly, the very first one i made here, i pointed out what you have been trying to argue all along.</p> <div></div><hr></blockquote>Download Statalyzer, and then you can tell me CombatStats does everything it does. With personal working knowledge of both programs, I can tell you factually that it can not. Like I said, CombatStats is good enough for seeing DPS info, but that's about it. And that's because that is all it was designed for. </span><div></div>

[Tudd]

<div></div><span><blockquote><hr>-Aonein- wrote:<p>Funny thing is Tuddar Combatstats is a harder program to configure but it can do everything that Statalyzer does, the CSV and XML / HTML formats just look different.</p> <p>Ill post screen shots of both later to explain it for you, and by the way, if you read my first post correctly, the very first one i made here, i pointed out what you have been trying to argue all along.</p> <hr></blockquote>Actually, in your first post you said: <i>"</i></span><i>Now if your like me and use a set of Leafblades that have a 2.1 delay attack speed, your going to be maximizing your proc potential while also maximizing your auto attack damage from not missing many combat rounds due to CA usage. The 2.1 attack speed on a set of dual weilds is far superiour to a RGF, reason for this is because you have the calculation of 2.1 delay per weapon, where with the RGF you have one weapon at 3.8." </i>To which I pointed out the flaw in that logic, because for high delay two handers your going to miss less auto-attack damage, your going to proc more then a dual wield combo because of the way procs work in EQ2, and with comparable weapon sets the high delay two hander will flat out own dual wield as far as DPS. That's why a T5 Fabled two hander is doing equal to slightly better DPS then a pair of T6 Legendary. The leafblades will put out more DPS if your not using CA's, such as when your out of power. Again, like I said, there's probably a good reason your not seeing high delay two handers out of DoF. They just have too much of an advantage in everyday gameplay. <div></div><p>Message Edited by Tuddar on <span class=date_text>12-19-2005</span> <span class=time_text>11:20 AM</span>

[-Aonein-]

<P>Accualy Tuddar if you read that post again, i was reguarding to how i play as in how i go about the use of my CA's, for my gameplay style i get the best out of Leafblades because i like to Dual weild meaning like we both agree on, the slower the weapon the less auto attack damage you miss due to long casting timers on certain CA's.</P> <P>Now seeing as the Leafblades are even slower then some 2 handers out there, it makes for a perfect medium when it comes to missing auto attack damage with heavy CA usage, if i was to parse myself using Slashing dual weilds which are for the most part around 1.2 second delay i would notice a huge decrease in auto attack damage, while the swings would be more the damage would be less.</P> <P>I think majority of us already knew that there was going to be no more 3.8 second delay weapons before DoF was released, who knows, they might start making them again in a expasion or two, but one has to ask themselves, what will the Berserker class be like in 1 or 2 expasions? Will they benefit from a extremely slow 2 hander like they do now?</P>

[Tudd]

<span><blockquote><hr>-Aonein- wrote:<p>Accualy Tuddar if you read that post again, i was reguarding to how i play as in how i go about the use of my CA's, for my gameplay style i get the best out of Leafblades because i like to Dual weild meaning like we both agree on, the slower the weapon the less auto attack damage you miss due to long casting timers on certain CA's.</p> <p>Now seeing as the Leafblades are even slower then some 2 handers out there, it makes for a perfect medium when it comes to missing auto attack damage with heavy CA usage, if i was to parse myself using Slashing dual weilds which are for the most part around 1.2 second delay i would notice a huge decrease in auto attack damage, while the swings would be more the damage would be less.</p> <p>I think majority of us already knew that there was going to be no more 3.8 second delay weapons before DoF was released, who knows, they might start making them again in a expasion or two, but one has to ask themselves, what will the Berserker class be like in 1 or 2 expasions? Will they benefit from a extremely slow 2 hander like they do now?</p> <div></div><hr></blockquote>I don't need to re-read your post again. The intent of your post was to say that the Leafs were superior to an RGF. I've shown that's not the case and explained why it's not the case. Last time I'm posting on this thread, as I've made my point and not going to bother arguing with you saying one thing and then later making it out like you meant something else. </span><div></div>

[-Aonein-]

<DIV> <P>No Tuddar your taking what i said out of context and yeah maybe i did exagerate about the proc ratios being 1-2 % difference from a dual weild set of leafblades but i exagerated no more then you did with your parses when you then followed it up with you will run more tests that aggred with mine.......:smileyindifferent:</P> <P>If you read a post more carefully next t ime instead of jumping the gun and i cant remember how many times in how many posts that Berserkers have argued about in over how much difference there is in a heavy CA user and a light CA user and what type of weapon set up they use plays a big part in DPS.</P> <P>Got those screen shots coming too for ya.</P></DIV>

[-Aonein-]

<P>Ok ill start off with saying i couldnt use the site you gave me, wouldnt load up for some reason on my comp so ill stick with photobucket, you can easily download the pics to your own comp if you wish.</P> <P>You asked me if Combatstats can determine what my hit % was on such and such a date etc etc, sure it can, it has a archive folder which you can quite easily flick back through using the date section on the program.</P> <P>First is showing you how Misses, parries, blocks etc are displayed ( keep in mind that this parse is from before the changes to dual weild so take no note of the proc ratios ). Notice i have it set to Detailed Player Statistics, not a summary.</P> <P><IMG src="http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a148/Taemek/ParseData2.jpg"></P> <P>As you can quite clearly see it shows everything Statalyzer does when it comes to miss percent ratios and what not. Second picture shows you how a compliation of CA's are complied during a full session of using Combatstats :</P> <P><IMG src="http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a148/Taemek/Parsedata1.jpg"></P> <DIV>Now the one thing i will admit that i dont like about Combatstats is notice the total hits i did with i think it is piercing, once the number generated hits the thousands, you lose track of what you have really done in the program itself, i havent yet used Statalyzer to produce a number that big as yet, so i dont know if it does the same thing. Pics from here on in are recent.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>But upto this point both programs can supplie and show the exact same data. Next lot of pics :</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><IMG src="http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a148/Taemek/Statalyzer5.jpg">       <IMG src="http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a148/Taemek/Combat5.jpg"></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Here we have two exact same parsed instances that i ran at the exact same time, both displaying the exact same thing, a complilation of the CA's and auto attack damage from the fight. Notice the miss, block, parry etc etc boxs next to the CA's i used plus the 100% hit ratio i maintained across the fight on both programs?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><IMG src="http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a148/Taemek/Combat4.jpg"></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>This picture is a example of where <STRONG><U>IF</U></STRONG> you dont purge the database how you can change the date to redisplay history form days gone by of what your old data was say 2 weeks ago etc etc, or months ago if you wish, but you must not purge the database or obviously you lose all that data, unless you back it up in CSV, XML format which then you can do exactally what you can do with Statalyzer and copy the log file back into the program and see the stats all over again, nothing different here.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><IMG src="http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a148/Taemek/Statalyzer3.jpg">       <IMG src="http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a148/Taemek/Combat3.jpg"></DIV> <DIV><IMG src="http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a148/Taemek/Statalyzer2.jpg">       <IMG src="http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a148/Taemek/Combat2.jpg"></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Now as you can see here that this is probally one feature that combat stats doesnt have and that it doesnt acually tell you what the mob is trying to hit you with if he misses, it just gets compiled into the hit / miss ratio of the mob itself, but none the less, it doesnt really matter in the end because it all registers the same numbers just statalzyer gets a little credit here for being a little more neat.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>As you can see both programs peform the same dutie and purpose, the CSV, XML or HTML reports are more then likely different and id wager you cant use the CSV, XML / HTML files from Combatstats in Statalyzer or visa versa because the programs read them differently or are produced differently depending on how the program is built, you know its a binary thing, coded that way.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I had more pics, like 14 to be honest, but they were just pics i took of Statalyzer and how the front page of Statalyzer was a fight summary and that i didnt like the way you cant reset that without turning off your logfile and ethier deleting that log file OR removing it from the log folder so when you start a new /log it starts fresh instead of picking up where you did /log off and recreating all the statistics all over again, where Combatstats is good for that because you can reset it after each and every fight so you can get a read out of a per fight basis and still have a total compiled session all up. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>EDIT - Im just wondering if you have raw logfile that you have taken from the game itself, the text version of the logfile, can you upload it into Combatstats or Statlyzer to open that logfile and produce the stats it would generate while you had the program running while parsing?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV><p>Message Edited by -Aonein- on <span class=date_text>12-20-2005</span> <span class=time_text>12:16 PM</span>

[Tudd]

<span><blockquote><hr>-Aonein- wrote:<div> <p>No Tuddar your taking what i said out of context and yeah maybe i did exagerate about the proc ratios being 1-2 % difference from a dual weild set of leafblades but i exagerated no more then you did with your parses when you then followed it up with you will run more tests that aggred with mine.......:smileyindifferent:</p> <p>If you read a post more carefully next t ime instead of jumping the gun and i cant remember how many times in how many posts that Berserkers have argued about in over how much difference there is in a heavy CA user and a light CA user and what type of weapon set up they use plays a big part in DPS.</p> <p>Got those screen shots coming too for ya.</p></div><hr></blockquote>Maybe you exaggerated? Dude, you outrighted lied. Then you made posts stating things that were factually erroneous, because you didn't have a clue what you were talking about. Here's some juicy excerpts: <i> "</i></span><i>Dont forget your Dual Weilding as well, so the proc ratio isnt 3.5% on dual weild setup leafblades and nor does it work out like that in the game ethier, that calculation doesnt or i should say even work correctly and im 100% sure that its not even how they determine the proc rate now , because there is no way my Leafblades are working out to be a 3.5% chance to proc." </i><font color="#ff0000">Extensive parses showed the leafs proc'ing at 3.5% ratio, exactly as predicted. <i> <font color="#ffffff">"</font></i></font><i>I've ran the tests using a RGF and the difference is minimal at best using a high delay dual weild set up, the difference is 1 - 2%, which is why that calculation is nothing now, its old and i doubt they even use it themselves anymore." </i><font color="#ff0000">Outright lied since you don't have an RGF, anyone who has ever owned one would know the difference is huge, and the numbers 1-2% difference came straight out of your azz. <i> <font color="#ffffff">"</font></i></font><i> not sure if its the program your using or what, but reguardless your numbers are seriously out of whack."</i><font color="#ff0000"> </font> <font color="#ff0000">Yeah, so out of whack that two seperate parsing sessions produced almost exactly the same results. Again, opened your mouth without actually knowing what you were talking about. <font color="#ffffff">"</font></font>have you looked into why your proc ratio was so low on your dual weild test? I dont even believe you tested it and just did a random number test using your own numbers so that it fell your way." <font color="#ff0000">Pathetic. You accused me of making numbers up, because there can be no other explanation since my numbers didn't match what you thought they should be. </font><span><i>"HAHAHA, Tuddar Combatstats does everything Statalyzer does, i can give you a full rpint out in CSV or HTML format and i can give you as many screen shots of hits, miss's, blocks, parries, ripostes, hell i can give you the mobs hits miss etc etc, but truth is how many screen shots do you want and i dont have a unlimited amount of web space to upload stuff</i>." <font color="#ff0000">You post this, and then admit you don't have Statalyzer. Again, talking straight out your azz, because you really didn't know. <font color="#ffffff">Don't [Removed for Content] on my leg, and then tell me it's raining.</font> </font></span><span> My second set of parses agreed with MY first set of parses. There was nothing to exaggerate, because I posted numbers directly from parses in both posts. So stop trying to make out like I was making things up, because you and everyone else that so desires can look at the data and see that everything came straight out of logs. You can download the logs directly and analyze them yourself. Second, you might as well stop posting screenshots, because no one can see what your talking about because they are too small. Third, the username/password I gave you allows you to FTP. If you don't know how to use FTP, then I can't help you. Lastly, there was nothing taken "out of context". Here's what you said (can't believe I'm having to post this again): <i>"</i></span><i>The 2.1 attack speed on a set of dual weilds is far superiour to a RGF, reason for this is because you have the calculation of 2.1 delay per weapon, where with the RGF you have one weapon at 3.8." </i>Which is complete and utter nonsense. I explained why it's nonsense, and provided the parses to show it's nonsense. <div></div>

[-Aonein-]

<P>LOL nice try Tuddar, i take it you havent downloaded those pics at all to look at them have you? I used a program just like Statalyzer for EQ1, it was identical, did the exact same thing, except it also gave you a pie graph to go with it. I used Statalyzer a long time ago and didnt like it because of reasons i mentioned.</P> <P>Like i stated Tuddar, Combatstats does exactally what Statalyzer does except for one thing which i pointed out.</P> <P>Now as to your parsing Tuddar, your numbers where never correct to begin with or predicted, your numbers changed all the time, and they dont match mine which i have posted screenshots for, you posted false information in your first post, when i called you out about it you tryed to say i had a string of good luck ( total bs ). Then when you did the tests yourself again, they came closer to my results BUT you need to run the test over 50 mobs to screw the variable down to keep it in your predicted range when we all know that running the test over a longer period of time, the percentage values drop due to being spread out over a larger number, so you needed to do this to keep your preditcion in tact, and you most likely already knew that, just look at the parse i posted that has something like over 200,000 damage done with just auto attack, look at the percentage values over that parse session, it clearly shows you how the varible changes due to the parse running over a longer period of time and i can bet you any money i could screw these tests right down to the floor to a 1% proc ratio because of the amount of subjects i run it over. Even less.</P> <P>Lets look here, you posted your numbers over 5 different mobs and this was your total value you came up with while using CA's :</P> <P>Tuddar wrote :</P> <P><EM>Total number of procs Leafs: 14<BR>Total number of procs RGF: 41<BR><BR>Total number of hits Leaf: 404<BR>Total number of hits RGF: 205<BR><BR>Leaf proc rate: 14/404 = 3.5%<BR>RGF proc rate: 41/205 = 20%<BR><BR>Furious assault hits Leaf: 24<BR>Furious assault hits RGF: 32<BR><BR>Fury proc rate, Leaf: 24/404 = 6%<BR>Fury proc rate, RGF: 32/205 = 15.6%</EM></P> <P>Now if you used your brain and copied the pics i posted to your comp and used Windows Picture and Fax Viewer to blow then up, you will clearly see that my pics prove that your numbers are totally ethier randomized OR just theroized or probally both. Pretty easy here ill post the numbers from my screen shots :</P> <P>5 mobs with CA's, same amount of mobs you killed, same level, same con with both getting 100% hit ratio :</P> <UL> <LI>260 Piercing swings</LI> <LI>28 Furious Assault procs</LI> <LI>14 Gleaming Strikes</LI></UL> <P>5 mobs without CA's, same amount of mobs you killed, same level, same con with both getting 100% hit ratio :</P> <UL> <LI>493 Piercing swings</LI> <LI>51 Furious Assault procs</LI> <LI>20 Gleaming Strikes</LI></UL> <P>Screenshots to go with those numbers that show both my CA usage and auto attack damage and like i stated 100% hit ratio, which i didnt show because you couldnt produce these numbers unless you had a 100% hit ratio to begin with.</P> <P>Point being how you got your numbers is total BS and randomized theroy using math to try and back your claim, then when i posted these numbers backed by screen shots, you say i was lucky and say your going to run the tests again over a larger scale which anyone with a brain <STRONG><U>KNOWS</U></STRONG> that the more mobs you engauge the smaller the percentage will be so you then HAD to use a scale of 50 mobs to bring your percentage down to your predicted value where if you did the same test again on a scale of 5 mobs ( like we were from the beginning ), you would get the exact same numbers i would............:smileyindifferent:</P> <P>EDIT - To support this you even helped me yourself with this theroy :</P> <P>Tuudar wrote :</P> <P>You did the test over a 50 mob subject value :</P> <P>LEAFS:<BR><BR>Proc ratio: 3.4594096%<BR>Fury ratio: 7.1494465%<BR><BR>RGF:<BR><BR>Proc ratio: 16.183%<BR>Fury ratio: 11.7106%</P> <P>Compare those numbers with the numbers from the 5 mob test. Your RGF values dropped like i stated and funny thing is, youtr Leaf values stayed the same for weapon proc ( Gleaming Strike ) but acually increased with Fury procs......:smileyindifferent:</P> <P>Do you see the point im trying to make? It took me almost half the amount of swings to produce a little more procs then you did :</P> <UL> <LI>260 swings</LI> <LI>14 Gleaming Strikes</LI> <LI>28 Furious Assaults</LI></UL> <P>Your numbers using the same CA's over the same amount of mobs :</P> <UL> <LI>404 swings</LI> <LI>14 gleaming strikes</LI> <LI>24 Furious Assaults</LI></UL> <P>Now it took me to use NO CA's what so ever to produce a little more then what it took you to produce over 5 mobs using CA's..........:</P> <UL> <LI>493 swings</LI> <LI>51 Furious Assaults</LI> <LI>20 Gleaming Strikes</LI></UL> <P>As you can clearly see your numbers dont hold water, at all then you tryed to call me out on Combatstats not suppling enough data when i didnt show it to minimize space when posting, which i also then backed up my claims about Combatstats doing the same thing about Statalyzer.</P> <P>Im going to rerun all mys tests using Statalyzer AND Combatstats at the same time and post them both here for you to see Tuddar, no point in posting log files or any of the other BS you do because the log files are saved with in the programs themselves, after all it is how they parse the information to begin with. Then ill again put my numbers up against your 50 mob parse, then we will see if im lucky again.</P> <P><BR></P> <p>Message Edited by -Aonein- on <span class=date_text>12-21-2005</span> <span class=time_text>02:38 PM</span>

[Tudd]

<span><blockquote><hr>-Aonein- wrote:<div></div> <p>Ok ill start off with saying i couldnt use the site you gave me, wouldnt load up for some reason on my comp so ill stick with photobucket, you can easily download the pics to your own comp if you wish.</p> <p>You asked me if Combatstats can determine what my hit % was on such and such a date etc etc, sure it can, it has a archive folder which you can quite easily flick back through using the date section on the program.</p> <p>First is showing you how Misses, parries, blocks etc are displayed ( keep in mind that this parse is from before the changes to dual weild so take no note of the proc ratios ). Notice i have it set to Detailed Player Statistics, not a summary. </p> <p><font color="#ff0000">You'll also notice this can only done per fight. Statalyzer can show you this info over a history of fights.</font> </p> <p><img src="http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a148/Taemek/ParseData2.jpg"></p> <p>As you can quite clearly see it shows everything Statalyzer does when it comes to miss percent ratios and what not. Second picture shows you how a compliation of CA's are complied during a full session of using Combatstats : </p> <p><font color="#ff0000">Also notice it doesn't give you your hits/misses and other stats over that session.</font> </p> <p><img src="http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a148/Taemek/Parsedata1.jpg"></p> <div>Now the one thing i will admit that i dont like about Combatstats is notice the total hits i did with i think it is piercing, once the number generated hits the thousands, you lose track of what you have really done in the program itself, i havent yet used Statalyzer to produce a number that big as yet, so i dont know if it does the same thing. Pics from here on in are recent.</div> <div> </div> <div>But upto this point both programs can supplie and show the exact same data. Next lot of pics : <font color="#ff0000">CombatStats can not show you your hits/misses for any particular fight, only the current fight. Which means when trying to come up with statistics across a given sample range, it is worthless, since the Database analysis shows none of this information.</font> </div> <div> </div> <div><img src="http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a148/Taemek/Statalyzer5.jpg">       <img src="http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a148/Taemek/Combat5.jpg"></div> <div> </div> <div>Here we have two exact same parsed instances that i ran at the exact same time, both displaying the exact same thing, a complilation of the CA's and auto attack damage from the fight. Notice the miss, block, parry etc etc boxs next to the CA's i used plus the 100% hit ratio i maintained across the fight on both programs? <font color="#ff0000">Key words: The fight. How many times did you hit/miss during your last ten fights? You can't tell.</font> </div> <div> </div> <div><img src="http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a148/Taemek/Combat4.jpg"></div> <div> </div> <div>This picture is a example of where <strong><u>IF</u></strong> you dont purge the database how you can change the date to redisplay history form days gone by of what your old data was say 2 weeks ago etc etc, or months ago if you wish, but you must not purge the database or obviously you lose all that data, unless you back it up in CSV, XML format which then you can do exactally what you can do with Statalyzer and copy the log file back into the program and see the stats all over again, nothing different here. <font color="#ff0000">You'll also notice in that picture it doesn't tell you any of the statistics for individual fights, it's a summary of DPS for any given day. That's it.</font> </div> <div> </div> <div><img src="http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a148/Taemek/Statalyzer3.jpg">       <img src="http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a148/Taemek/Combat3.jpg"></div> <div><img src="http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a148/Taemek/Statalyzer2.jpg">       <img src="http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a148/Taemek/Combat2.jpg"></div> <div> </div> <div>Now as you can see here that this is probally one feature that combat stats doesnt have and that it doesnt acually tell you what the mob is trying to hit you with if he misses, it just gets compiled into the hit / miss ratio of the mob itself, but none the less, it doesnt really matter in the end because it all registers the same numbers just statalzyer gets a little credit here for being a little more neat.</div> <div> </div> <div>As you can see both programs peform the same dutie and purpose, the CSV, XML or HTML reports are more then likely different and id wager you cant use the CSV, XML / HTML files from Combatstats in Statalyzer or visa versa because the programs read them differently or are produced differently depending on how the program is built, you know its a binary thing, coded that way. <font color="#ff0000">They do not perform the same duty/purpose. Statalyzer can parse any EQ2 log you tell it to. CombatStats can only parse information it recorded when you tell it to start monitoring. CombatStats can only tell you detailed information about the fight that just ended, Statalyzer can tell you detailed information for *every* fight in a log. CombatStats only provides summary DPS information from it's Database Analysis screen.</font> </div> <div> </div> <div>I had more pics, like 14 to be honest, but they were just pics i took of Statalyzer and how the front page of Statalyzer was a fight summary and that i didnt like the way you cant reset that without turning off your logfile and ethier deleting that log file OR removing it from the log folder so when you start a new /log it starts fresh instead of picking up where you did /log off and recreating all the statistics all over again, where Combatstats is good for that because you can reset it after each and every fight so you can get a read out of a per fight basis and still have a total compiled session all up. </div> <div> </div> <div>EDIT - Im just wondering if you have raw logfile that you have taken from the game itself, the text version of the logfile, can you upload it into Combatstats or Statlyzer to open that logfile and produce the stats it would generate while you had the program running while parsing?</div> <div>  <font color="#ff0000">Statalyzer can take any EQ2 log file and open it and parse it. CombatStats can not. Just go to file under Statalyzer and choose open log. CombatStats has to be running and monitoring, and can only show you data it recorded in it's database while monitoring.</font> </div><p>Message Edited by -Aonein- on <span class="date_text">12-20-2005</span> <span class="time_text">12:16 PM</span></p><hr></blockquote></span><div></div>

[Tudd]

<div></div><div></div><div></div><div></div><div></div><div></div><div></div><div></div><span><blockquote><hr>-Aonein- wrote:<div></div> <p>LOL nice try Tuddar, i take it you havent downloaded those pics at all to look at them have you? I used a program just like Statalyzer for EQ1, it was identical, did the exact same thing, except it also gave you a pie graph to go with it. I used Statalyzer a long time ago and didnt like it because of reasons i mentioned. </p> <p><font color="#ff0000">I downloaded them, did you? Download them and then blow them up, as you put it. You won't be able to make out a [expletive haxx0red by Raijinn] thing, and if you had actually done what you asked me to do, you would know that. Second, if you had used Statalyzer before, then you would have known what it was capable of, and how CombatStats can't do the same thing</font>. </p> <p>Like i stated Tuddar, Combatstats does exactally what Statalyzer does except for one thing which i pointed out. </p> <p><font color="#ff0000">It doesn't. CombatStats can only show you detailed statistics from the last fight, that's it.</font> </p> <p>Now as to your parsing Tuddar, your numbers where never correct to begin with or predicted, your numbers changed all the time, and they dont match mine which i have posted screenshots for, you posted false information in your first post, when i called you out about it you tryed to say i had a string of good luck ( total bs ). Then when you did the tests yourself again, they came closer to my results BUT you need to run the test over 50 mobs to screw the variable down to keep it in your predicted range when we all know that running the test over a longer period of time, the percentage values drop due to being spread out over a larger number, so you needed to do this to keep your preditcion in tact, and you most likely already knew that, just look at the parse i posted that has something like over 200,000 damage done with just auto attack, look at the percentage values over that parse session, it clearly shows you how the varible changes due to the parse running over a longer period of time and i can bet you any money i could screw these tests right down to the floor to a 1% proc ratio because of the amount of subjects i run it over. Even less. </p> <p><font color="#ff0000">My numbers were directly out of the logs. Lol, you called me out. Let's look at what I put in my first and second DW posts: </font></p> <p><span><font color="#ff0000"> My first parse was 3.5% GS proc rate </font></span><span><font color="#ff0000">My second parse was 3.5% GSproc rate </font></span></p> <p><span><font color="#ff0000">My first parse was 6% Fury proc rate </font></span><span><font color="#ff0000">My second parse was 7% Fury proc rate </font></span></p> <p><span><font color="#ff0000">Your numbers from your post: </font></span></p> <p><font color="#ff0000"><span> With CA's your recorded number of swings are 64+66+71+59+77 = 337 swings. Of which, you had 16 GS procs. 16/337 = 4.74%. Without CA's, your recorded number of swings are 109+208+95+91+99 = 602 swings. Of which, you had 24 GS procs. 24/602 = 3.9%</span></font></p> <p><font color="#ff0000">Who's numbers were closer then whom's? My second parse is much closer to my first parse then to your parse. </font></p> <p>Lets look here, you posted your numbers over 5 different mobs and this was your total value you came up with while using CA's :</p> <p>Tuddar wrote :</p> <p><em>Total number of procs Leafs: 14Total number of procs RGF: 41Total number of hits Leaf: 404Total number of hits RGF: 205Leaf proc rate: 14/404 = 3.5%RGF proc rate: 41/205 = 20%Furious assault hits Leaf: 24Furious assault hits RGF: 32Fury proc rate, Leaf: 24/404 = 6%Fury proc rate, RGF: 32/205 = 15.6%</em></p> <p>Now if you used your brain and copied the pics i posted to your comp and used Windows Picture and Fax Viewer to blow then up, you will clearly see that my pics prove that your numbers are totally ethier randomized OR just theroized or probally both. Pretty easy here ill post the numbers from my screen shots : </p> <p><font color="#ff0000">Dude, you blow up the pictures, you get a fuzzy picture. You can't see any of the information. Try it yourself. Once again, you don't even verify what your saying.</font> </p> <p>5 mobs with CA's, same amount of mobs you killed, same level, same con with both getting 100% hit ratio :</p> <ul> <li>260 Piercing swings</li> <li>28 Furious Assault procs</li> <li>14 Gleaming Strikes</li></ul> <p>5 mobs without CA's, same amount of mobs you killed, same level, same con with both getting 100% hit ratio :</p> <ul> <li>493 Piercing swings</li> <li>51 Furious Assault procs</li> <li>20 Gleaming Strikes</li></ul> <p>Screenshots to go with those numbers that show both my CA usage and auto attack damage and like i stated 100% hit ratio, which i didnt show because you couldnt produce these numbers unless you had a 100% hit ratio to begin with.</p> <p>Point being how you got your numbers is total BS and randomized theroy using math to try and back your claim, then when i posted these numbers backed by screen shots, you say i was lucky and say your going to run the tests again over a larger scale which anyone with a brain <strong><u>KNOWS</u></strong> that the more mobs you engauge the smaller the percentage will be so you then HAD to use a scale of 50 mobs to bring your percentage down to your predicted value where if you did the same test again on a scale of 5 mobs ( like we were from the beginning ), you would get the exact same numbers i would............:smileyindifferent: </p> <p><font color="#ff0000">My numbers come straight out of logs. The math is simple, not sure why you are having such a hard time grasping the concept. And furthermore, percentages don't get smaller the larger the sample size. What a larger sample size does is remove the fluctuations in the RNG. Lol, the percentage gets smaller the more mobs you fight. You sir, truly don't have a clue. The larger the sample size, the less the RNG is a factor over time. The percentages don't get smaller, they statistically become more valid.</font> </p> <p>EDIT - To support this you even helped me yourself with this theroy :</p> <p>Tuudar wrote :</p> <p>You did the test over a 50 mob subject value :</p> <p>LEAFS:Proc ratio: 3.4594096%Fury ratio: 7.1494465%RGF:Proc ratio: 16.183%Fury ratio: 11.7106%</p> <p>Compare those numbers with the numbers from the 5 mob test. Your RGF values dropped like i stated and funny thing is, youtr Leaf values stayed the same for weapon proc ( Gleaming Strike ) but acually increased with Fury procs......:smileyindifferent: </p> <p><font color="#ff0000">A smaller sample size is going to be more prone to fluctuations in probability. That's why you use a larger sample size, so that the percentages over time are less prone to the fluctuations of the RNG. And as you see, the proc rate for the RGF in the 50 fight sample came closer to the percentage that was predicted, 15.2%. The DW proc rate for Fury became exactly what was predicted, 7%. The RGF values dropping and Fury increasing over the 50 sample rate is because the RNG becomes less of a factor over larger sample sizes and the percentage you see over those large samples should start to approach the true proc ratio.</font> </p> <p>Do you see the point im trying to make? It took me almost half the amount of swings to produce a little more procs then you did : </p> <p><span><font color="#ff0000">The only point you've made is two things. One, the mobs you were fighting had either less HP's or you had more strength while fighting, therefore doing more damage per hit. Two, the RNG is doing it's job. </font></span></p> <ul> <li>260 swings</li> <li>14 Gleaming Strikes</li> <li>28 Furious Assaults</li></ul> <p>Your numbers using the same CA's over the same amount of mobs :</p> <ul> <li>404 swings</li> <li>14 gleaming strikes</li> <li>24 Furious Assaults</li></ul> <p>Now it took me to use NO CA's what so ever to produce a little more then what it took you to produce over 5 mobs using CA's..........: </p> <p><font color="#ff0000">Proc ratio isn't affected at all whether you use CA's or not. The chance to proc on a CA and an auto-attack are exactly the same. The only things CA's do is kill the mobs faster, so you have less swings. The proc ratio will be exactly the same with or without CA's, over a large enough sample size. Again, you've just demonstrated how the RNG can cause large fluctuations over small samples.</font> </p> <ul> <li>493 swings</li> <li>51 Furious Assaults</li> <li>20 Gleaming Strikes</li></ul><font color="#ff0000"> Parse 50 fights, and those differences in percentages caused by the RNG will begin to be minimalized. </font> <p>As you can clearly see your numbers dont hold water, at all then you tryed to call me out on Combatstats not suppling enough data when i didnt show it to minimize space when posting, which i also then backed up my claims about Combatstats doing the same thing about Statalyzer. </p> <p><font color="#ff0000">My numbers are fine, the problem is you don't understand statistical analysis. And as far as backing up your claim, I've already posted to your other thread telling you exactly how CombatStats *can't* do the same thing.</font> </p> <p>Im going to rerun all mys tests using Statalyzer AND Combatstats at the same time and post them both here for you to see Tuddar, no point in posting log files or any of the other BS you do because the log files are saved with in the programs themselves, after all it is how they parse the information to begin with. Then ill again put my numbers up against your 50 mob parse, then we will see if im lucky again.</p> <p><font color="#ff0000">So let me get this straight, if I post data and logs, it's BS. If you post the same information, it's not. </font></p> <p><font color="#ff0000">And once again, you don't know what your talking about. The logs I posted are EQ2 logs. If you want to accuse me of manually editing 14,500 lines of logs to produce numbers, then you are truly grasping at straws. Second, Statalyzer doesn't save any logs "in the programs", it analyzes EQ2 logs directly.</font></p> <div></div><p>Message Edited by -Aonein- on <span class="date_text">12-21-2005</span> <span class="time_text">02:38 PM</span></p><hr></blockquote></span><p>Message Edited by Tuddar on <span class=date_text>12-20-2005</span> <span class=time_text>11:41 PM</span>

[Tudd]

<div></div><div></div><div></div>Here's the 50 fight sample with DW Leafblade and RGF, along with readable screenshots and an explanation of the math, so you can see exactly each little bit of data and the calculation of the final figure. Since my posting of logs is implied to be nothing but BS and some folks can't be bothered to download them and check my figures. Session info, DW parse: <img src="http://216.119.80.244/Aonein/DWParse.bmp"> Ok, calculate the number of hits. 3112+169+158+158+146+245+255+53+40=4336 GS Proc rate: 150/4336=0.03459409594095940959409594095941, or roughly 3.5% Fury Proc rate: 310/4336=0.071494464944649446494464944649446, or roughly 7.1% Session info, RGF parse: <img src="http://216.119.80.244/Aonein/RGFParse.bmp"> Hits: 1137+52+156+165+270+148+240+38+159=2365 Ancient Flame proc rate: 402/2365=0.16997885835095137420718816067653, or roughly 17% Fury Proc rate: 280/2365=0.11839323467230443974630021141649, or roughly 11.8% Predicted proc rate for GS Proc: 3.5% Predicted proc rate for DW Fury Proc: 7% Predicted proc rate for Ancient Flame: 15.2% Predicted proc rate for RGF Fury Proc: 12.7% That's it. Straight numbers. Straight math. If someone wants to argue I somehow edited roughly 14,500 lines of logs (which are available for anyone to download and look at) to make these numbers come out, then you can delude yourself if that will let you sleep better. <div></div><p>Note: I erroneously calculated the proc rate for Ancient Flame prior because I had put in the wrong number for Breach before.<span class="time_text"></span></p><p>FYI Aonein, nothing you've said so far has made any difference in my original premise: That the DW Leafblades are not in fact, far superior to the RGF, and the proc ratio's are far from the 1-2% difference you "exaggerated". </p>The DW Leafblades weighed in at 203 DPS, the RGF 214. DPS wise, practically even.<p>Message Edited by Tuddar on <span class=date_text>12-21-2005</span> <span class=time_text>12:15 AM</span>

[-Aonein-]

<DIV>You lost your argument yet again with this Tuddar :</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Tuddar wrote :</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><SPAN><FONT color=#ff0000><EM>The only point you've made is two things. One, the mobs you were fighting had either less HP's or you had more strength while fighting, therefore doing more damage per hit. Two, the RNG is doing it's job.</EM></FONT></SPAN></DIV> <DIV><SPAN><FONT color=#ff0000></FONT></SPAN> </DIV> <DIV><SPAN><FONT color=#ffffff>How could i do less swings but more procs if the mobs had less HP? How does STR effect my ability to proc over the same amount of mobs you killed? Before you say something dumb like " STR doesnt help your ability to proc it helps you do more damage " then let me help you to better understand this also, How on gods green earth could i do more procs if i was killing the mobs faster due to more STR?</FONT></SPAN></DIV> <DIV><SPAN></SPAN> </DIV> <DIV><SPAN>And you question me about statistic <FONT color=#ffffff>analysis......</FONT></SPAN></DIV>

[Tudd]

<span><blockquote><hr>-Aonein- wrote:<div>You lost your argument yet again with this Tuddar :</div> <div> </div> <div>Tuddar wrote :</div> <div> </div> <div><span><font color="#ff0000"><em>The only point you've made is two things. One, the mobs you were fighting had either less HP's or you had more strength while fighting, therefore doing more damage per hit. Two, the RNG is doing it's job.</em></font></span></div> <div><span><font color="#ff0000"></font></span> </div> <div><span><font color="#ffffff">How could i do less swings but more procs if the mobs had less HP? How does STR effect my ability to proc over the same amount of mobs you killed? Before you say something dumb like " STR doesnt help your ability to proc it helps you do more damage " then let me help you to better understand this also, How on gods green earth could i do more procs if i was killing the mobs faster due to more STR?</font></span></div> <div><span></span> </div> <div><span>And you question me about statistic <font color="#ffffff">analysis......</font></span></div><hr></blockquote>Lol, you just really don't understand, do you? Let's do a little math, and show you how even a small difference in the number of procs can make a large difference in the % when the sample size is small. 14/260 = 5.4% 14/404 = 3.5% 11/260 = 4.2% 17/404 = 4.2% If I had proc'd 3 more times, and you proc'd 3 less, the numbers would be the same. That's why small sample sizes aren't used: A lucky break on the RNG or a dry run will make large differences in %'s when your divisor is small. Do a sample size of 50, then we'll see how your proc rate works out. </span><div></div>

[Tudd]

<SPAN><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Tuddar wrote:<BR><SPAN><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> -Aonein- wrote:<BR> <DIV>You lost your argument yet again with this Tuddar :</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Tuddar wrote :</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><SPAN><FONT color=#ff0000><EM>The only point you've made is two things. One, the mobs you were fighting had either less HP's or you had more strength while fighting, therefore doing more damage per hit. Two, the RNG is doing it's job.</EM></FONT></SPAN></DIV> <DIV><SPAN><FONT color=#ff0000></FONT></SPAN> </DIV> <DIV><SPAN><FONT color=#ffffff>How could i do less swings but more procs if the mobs had less HP? How does STR effect my ability to proc over the same amount of mobs you killed? Before you say something dumb like " STR doesnt help your ability to proc it helps you do more damage " then let me help you to better understand this also, How on gods green earth could i do more procs if i was killing the mobs faster due to more STR?</FONT></SPAN></DIV> <DIV><SPAN></SPAN> </DIV> <DIV><SPAN>And you question me about statistic <FONT color=#ffffff>analysis......</FONT></SPAN></DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>Lol, you just really don't understand, do you?<BR><BR>Let's do a little math, and show you how even a small difference in the number of procs can make a large difference in the % when the sample size is small.<BR><BR>14/260 = 5.4%<BR>14/404 = 3.5%<BR>11/260 = 4.2%<BR>17/404 = 4.2%<BR><BR>If I had proc'd 3 more times, and you proc'd 3 less, the numbers would be the same. That's why small sample sizes aren't used: A lucky break on the RNG or a dry run will make large differences in %'s when your divisor is small.<BR><BR>Do a sample size of 50, then we'll see how your proc rate works out.<BR></SPAN> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>So explain to me this. Why did your test without CA's did it take you almost twice as many swings to produce just 6 more procs? Logically, if you got 14 procs with just 260 swings, then you would have gotten 28 procs with 520 swings. But you didn't. Out of 493 swings, you only got 20 procs. If we go by the proc rate of your test with CA's, you should have gotten 27.<BR><BR>14/260 = 5.4%<BR>20/493 = 4%.<BR><BR>And yes, I do question you about statistical analysis, because if you had even thought about the differences in the numbers between your tests in the very same post, you would have answered your own question instead of asking me.<BR><BR>Again, that's why you use a larger test set, because the answer to my last question (and yours) is the fluctuations in the RNG.<BR></SPAN> <BR>I don't, you don't, no one has any control over the RNG. So the only way to get good numbers is to increase your data set large enough to minimize it's impact on the calculations.<p>Message Edited by Tuddar on <span class=date_text>12-21-2005</span> <span class=time_text>01:20 AM</span>

[-Aonein-]

<P>Tuddar you got to be kidding me man, we arent talking a small difference here, we are talking 144 swings difference from mine to yours, the RNG doesnt effect auto attack speed. Once again, we both had 100% hit ratios, making every single hit a hit takes out any fluctuations that could of exsisted if we were to fight a mob that was 5 levels below us, again, we are showing a 100% true indication of what would happen <STRONG><U>IF</U></STRONG> every fight was had a 100% hit ratio.</P> <P>Why did i do my test without CA's? To prove to you that your first set of numbers was BS, and the only way to get that amount of swings, was to not use any CA's........do you now see the point im trying to make or are you still bent on trying to be right and everyone else is 100% wrong unless they use statalyzer?</P> <P>Like i said, your numbers do not hold water, because of the reasons i pointed out, when you do a test like you also pointed out the numbers stable themselves out and there is less chance of flucuation in spikes etc, your RGF fights show that and i pointed it out but your Dual Weild fights dont show this, your Dual Weild fights show flucation even over a 50 mob test with a 100% hit ratio.</P> <P>Surely you dont expect other people who are reading this to believe that 144 swings is a " small difference " when my fights where averging at around 60 swings to begin with ( When using CA's ) and by the way, if you read my posts correctly i acually stated the mobs i was fighting had around 15 to 16k HP thats 15,000 to 16,000 HP, doing tests on mobs with such a large HP pool takes out any flucation that could of possible exsisted to begin with then it would be like killing a mob with say for example 5,000 HP, still following me now Tuddar?</P> <P>This is why i find your first set of numbers to be false and randomly generated thinking i wasnt so smart, then when i did more tests and this time supplied you screenshots of both CA usage and a session without CA usage you came back with numbers close to mine that were close to your predicted value.</P> <P>A man of your intelligence should know that 144 swings isnt a " small difference ", cant believe you think it is, thats like saying if i did a 1000 mob parse test that 2000 swings is a small difference.</P>

[Tudd]

<div></div><div></div><div></div><div></div><div></div><div></div><div></div><div></div><div></div><div></div><div></div><div></div><span><blockquote><hr>-Aonein- wrote:<p>Tuddar you got to be kidding me man, we arent talking a small difference here, we are talking 144 swings difference from mine to yours, the RNG doesnt effect auto attack speed. Once again, we both had 100% hit ratios, making every single hit a hit takes out any fluctuations that could of exsisted if we were to fight a mob that was 5 levels below us, again, we are showing a 100% true indication of what would happen <strong><u>IF</u></strong> every fight was had a 100% hit ratio.</p> <p>Why did i do my test without CA's? To prove to you that your first set of numbers was BS, and the only way to get that amount of swings, was to not use any CA's........do you now see the point im trying to make or are you still bent on trying to be right and everyone else is 100% wrong unless they use statalyzer?</p> <p>Like i said, your numbers do not hold water, because of the reasons i pointed out, when you do a test like you also pointed out the numbers stable themselves out and there is less chance of flucuation in spikes etc, your RGF fights show that and i pointed it out but your Dual Weild fights dont show this, your Dual Weild fights show flucation even over a 50 mob test with a 100% hit ratio.</p> <p>Surely you dont expect other people who are reading this to believe that 144 swings is a " small difference " when my fights where averging at around 60 swings to begin with ( When using CA's ) and by the way, if you read my posts correctly i acually stated the mobs i was fighting had around 15 to 16k HP thats 15,000 to 16,000 HP, doing tests on mobs with such a large HP pool takes out any flucation that could of possible exsisted to begin with then it would be like killing a mob with say for example 5,000 HP, still following me now Tuddar?</p> <p>This is why i find your first set of numbers to be false and randomly generated thinking i wasnt so smart, then when i did more tests and this time supplied you screenshots of both CA usage and a session without CA usage you came back with numbers close to mine that were close to your predicted value.</p> <p>A man of your intelligence should know that 144 swings isnt a " small difference ", cant believe you think it is, thats like saying if i did a 1000 mob parse test that 2000 swings is a small difference.</p> <div></div><hr></blockquote> I'm about to show you where the difference in the swing amounts come from, and had you paid attention to my screenshots, you would have seen it. I did not use Amputate during the fights. If you look at the screen shots above, you can see it's not there at all. Which means you were probably doing more damage due to the DoT. Before I stopped using it because it was a mess trying to account for the DoT showing as a hit in the logs, I was getting 2.5k of damage out of it. Had I used it, then I would have done higher DPS and therefore produced less swings. Notice my average damage above for pierce was 125 damage. 2500/125 = 20. So if I had used Amputate, I would have had to swing 20 less times. 404/5 = 80 swings per fight. Subtract 20. 60 swings per fight. Make sense now? Now, on to some simpler math. The mobs I fought had 16k HP. I was doing 200 DPS, as I stated before. 404/5 = 81 hits. 81x200 = 16K. Take a look at my 50 fights. 4336 swings out of 50 fights. 4336/50 = 86 swings. The amount of swings on this are a little higher, because two of the mobs ended up having 32K hp instead of 16k. Thanks SOE. I wasn't out to prove my DPS, I was out to prove what the proc rate was. More swings=large sample set and less RNG spikes. It doesn't matter whether the swing is a CA or an auto-attack, the proc rate is the same. You'll have to forgive me if after 50 fights I wasn't banging out the CA's. Tells and the occasional answer in guild chat meant that sometimes I wasn't hitting CA's as often as I could have. It's not like you can put the mob on pause. And for calculating the proc ratio, it doesn't make any difference how many swings it takes to kills a mob, the proc ratio over a large enough sample will mean that you will average the same number of proc in 260 swings as you would get if it took you 520 swings. My numbers come straight out of the logs, and they aren't false. And as you can see above, the difference in swings is pretty easy to understand once you realize I was limiting my CA DPS. Finally, you are concentrating on the wrong things. It doesn't matter how many swings it takes to kill a mob, only how many procs go off and what that proc ratio works out to be. To answer your last remark, on a 1000 mob parse, if you swing 80 times each fights, that's 80000 swings. If you did 2000 more swings, that would be 82000 swings. That would be a 2.5% difference, so yes, it would be small. And to top it off, from a standpoint of determining a proc ratio, wouldn't make a [expletive haxx0red by Raijinn] bit of difference. Or put it in a way you might understand better, a 1000 mob parse would mean you would hit just 2 times more each fight to come up with 2000 more hits.<span> A man of my intelligence would say 2 hits per fight on mobs that have 16K hp isn't a big difference. :smileywink:</span></span><div></div><p>Message Edited by Tuddar on <span class=date_text>12-21-2005</span> <span class=time_text>06:57 AM</span>

[Astria]

wow! look what I started! :pI hate to interrupt you 2, because honestly it is actually pretty interesting, and nice to see the hard #'s....However, I would like to point out that when I initially started this thread, and my subsequent posts, were not referring to me even having an option of getting a 3.8 delay 2-hander....While I understand ( and your guys' posts have proved ) that Dual-Wielding Cobalt Leafblades = nearly identical DPS as the RGF, you aren't taking into account the fact that well, not everyone has access to an RGF...In fact, I can pretty much guarantee I will never have an RGF....but I AM able to mine rare metals from nodes, which means that regardless of what fabled weapons there are out there, I am pretty much limited exclusively to rare crafted weapons - of which, AFAIK, there are none with 3.8 delay or close to that....I hit 30, and got a pristine imbued feysteel halberd just for looks, and a set of pristine imbued feysteel leafblades...the reason I went with leafblades, is actually purely due to this discussion - because despite the discrepancies between an RGF & 2 x Cobalt Leafblades, no one has disputed the fact that if you want to maximize your dps while dual-wielding ( again, assuming that you will never get access to a fabled weapon ) you go with Leafblades period....I had heard this, but your guys' hard facts have convinced me this is the way to go - so for that thanks!

[Doobur]

I am just glad someone actually read it all and put it simple for folks like me. I saw all that crap and decided I wanted to know what it all meant but not bad enough to actually read it all. So Thanks Astriaal

[Tudd]

<span><blockquote><hr>Astriaal wrote:wow! look what I started! :pI hate to interrupt you 2, because honestly it is actually pretty interesting, and nice to see the hard #'s....However, I would like to point out that when I initially started this thread, and my subsequent posts, were not referring to me even having an option of getting a 3.8 delay 2-hander....While I understand ( and your guys' posts have proved ) that Dual-Wielding Cobalt Leafblades = nearly identical DPS as the RGF, you aren't taking into account the fact that well, not everyone has access to an RGF...In fact, I can pretty much guarantee I will never have an RGF....but I AM able to mine rare metals from nodes, which means that regardless of what fabled weapons there are out there, I am pretty much limited exclusively to rare crafted weapons - of which, AFAIK, there are none with 3.8 delay or close to that....I hit 30, and got a pristine imbued feysteel halberd just for looks, and a set of pristine imbued feysteel leafblades...the reason I went with leafblades, is actually purely due to this discussion - because despite the discrepancies between an RGF & 2 x Cobalt Leafblades, no one has disputed the fact that if you want to maximize your dps while dual-wielding ( again, assuming that you will never get access to a fabled weapon ) you go with Leafblades period....I had heard this, but your guys' hard facts have convinced me this is the way to go - so for that thanks!<hr></blockquote>I'm glad you found the information useful. I was making a point to some folks who had asserted that the Leafblades were far superior to the RGF, when the fact of the matter is they aren't. Regardless of whether people have access to the RGF or not, claiming something when it's factually incorrect is something I will speak up about. Regardless of that side conversation, the Leafblades are the best Legendary combo out there for zerkers. Don't be too sure about never getting an RGF. They are down to around 6pp on the broker on my server, and there are normally 4 or 5 of them up for sale. When you hit 50, who knows.</span><div></div>

[khurath]

Just to fill some gaps in my limited knowledge: What is the RGF?

[Pinche Va]

Royal Great Flail.

[-Aonein-]

<P>Tuddar can you please run that 50 mob parse again using the RGF since the recent LU18 changes please man and post the screen shot here of statalyzer.</P> <P>The changes have effected Unbridled Fury pretty badly, we only just had that CA nerfed and now its been hit with another nerf now due to only procing in Primary hand, basically i cant get it over 3.5% over a 50 mob parse, i tests the 50 mob parse with a set of ironwood batons and it got even worse and went down to 2.5%, its pretty ugly, but im just curious if 2 handers changed at all, if you get time can you do that test please man, did Angler with one group other day and no RGF so im locked out for 6 days and before you suggest it, no ive never ever seen a RGF for sale on the broker on Everfrost server.</P> <P>Yes you were correct also, i was concentrating on the wrong things when parsing  and i didnt factor out Amputate which you pointed that out, thank you for pointing those things out.</P>

[Tudd]

<span><blockquote><hr>-Aonein- wrote:<p>Tuddar can you please run that 50 mob parse again using the RGF since the recent LU18 changes please man and post the screen shot here of statalyzer.</p> <p>The changes have effected Unbridled Fury pretty badly, we only just had that CA nerfed and now its been hit with another nerf now due to only procing in Primary hand, basically i cant get it over 3.5% over a 50 mob parse, i tests the 50 mob parse with a set of ironwood batons and it got even worse and went down to 2.5%, its pretty ugly, but im just curious if 2 handers changed at all, if you get time can you do that test please man, did Angler with one group other day and no RGF so im locked out for 6 days and before you suggest it, no ive never ever seen a RGF for sale on the broker on Everfrost server.</p> <p>Yes you were correct also, i was concentrating on the wrong things when parsing  and i didnt factor out Amputate which you pointed that out, thank you for pointing those things out.</p> <div></div><hr></blockquote>I'll take a look.</span><div></div>

[Tudd]

50 fights, RGF parse: <img src="http://216.119.80.244/Aonein/RGFParse2.bmp"> Total hits = 1072+51+153+140+127+237+261+220+51=2312 Ancient Flame Proc rate: 341/2312=0.14749134948096885813148788927336, or 14.7% Fury Proc rate: 266/2312=11.5% Fury proc'd about the same as last time. Ancient Flame took a dip from my last parse, but is actually closer in this parse to the original predicted rate of 15.2%. Tudds <div></div>

[Tudd]

<div></div><div></div><div></div> It's impossible to tell for sure if Fury is proc'ing on the second weapon, because if you only equip a weapon in your secondary (no primary equipped) you will miss 100% of the time. SOE has obviously set things up so that most calculations are done via the primary slot. If secondary worked truly independently of primary, then when I have a weapon equipped only in the secondary I'd still be able to hit. I'll do another set of parses with the leafblades, one with only the primary equipped and then one with both hands equipped. If the rate drops when both are equipped, then that means that something is wrong. Tudds <div></div><p>Message Edited by Tuddar on <span class=date_text>12-22-2005</span> <span class=time_text>03:32 PM</span>

[xandez]

<div></div><div></div><div></div>Hmm so this is the old RGF (a slow 2-hander) is much better than DW:ers (even slow ones, like leafblades) debate Aonein and Tuddar are having here? You got to any conclusions? Im curious, since im always been a 2-hander fan myself and it used to be better than DW:s especially when using lotsa CA:s... Havent tested myself thou (after the supposed upgrade to the DW)I read some of your posts, but i couldnt get a clear picture, thats why i was asking for some summary <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /><font color="#ffcc00">*EDIT*</font><font color="#ffcc00"></font><font color="#ffcc00">hmm just found this on some other post:</font><font color="#ffcc00"></font><font color="#ffcc00"></font><font color="#ffcc00">Aonein says:" In the end it pans out to be the same with no weapon being any more superiour then the other and its all based upon taste. "</font><font color="#ffcc00"></font><font color="#ffcc00"></font><font color="#ffcc00"></font><font color="#ffcc00">I believe that myself too actually... dunno there may be some tweaks towards 2h or DW but in the end im pretty sure they'll even out... even the proccing and other stuff... </font>++Xan<div></div><p>Message Edited by xandez on <span class="date_text">12-27-2005</span> <span class="time_text">12:52 PM</span></p><p>Message Edited by xandez on <span class=date_text>12-27-2005</span> <span class=time_text>01:11 PM</span>

[-Aonein-]

<P>I did some tests after LU18 changes and compairing them too before LU18 changes, if anyone is interested in the changes, check them out <A href="http://eqiiforums.station.sony.com/eq2/board/message?board.id=spells&message.id=1883#M1883" target=_blank><FONT color=#ff3300>here</FONT></A>.</P> <P><A href="http://eqiiforums.station.sony.com/eq2/board/message?board.id=spells&message.id=1883#M1883" target=_blank>http://eqiiforums.station.sony.com/eq2/board/message?board.id=spells&message.id=1883#M1883</A></P>

[Darkka]

<DIV>I use 1h + shield for tanking, and 2 handed for soloing or when I'm not main tank.</DIV>

[Tudd]

<span><blockquote><hr>xandez wrote:<div></div><div></div><div></div>Hmm so this is the old RGF (a slow 2-hander) is much better than DW:ers (even slow ones, like leafblades) debate Aonein and Tuddar are having here? You got to any conclusions? Im curious, since im always been a 2-hander fan myself and it used to be better than DW:s especially when using lotsa CA:s... Havent tested myself thou (after the supposed upgrade to the DW)I read some of your posts, but i couldnt get a clear picture, thats why i was asking for some summary <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /><font color="#ffcc00">*EDIT*</font><font color="#ffcc00"></font><font color="#ffcc00">hmm just found this on some other post:</font><font color="#ffcc00"></font><font color="#ffcc00"></font><font color="#ffcc00">Aonein says:" In the end it pans out to be the same with no weapon being any more superiour then the other and its all based upon taste. "</font><font color="#ffcc00"></font><font color="#ffcc00"></font><font color="#ffcc00"></font><font color="#ffcc00">I believe that myself too actually... dunno there may be some tweaks towards 2h or DW but in the end im pretty sure they'll even out... even the proccing and other stuff... </font>++Xan<div></div><p>Message Edited by xandez on <span class="date_text">12-27-2005</span> <span class="time_text">12:52 PM</span></p><p>Message Edited by xandez on <span class="date_text">12-27-2005</span> <span class="time_text">01:11 PM</span></p><hr></blockquote>Actually, high delay two handers still have a sizeable advantage, all things being equal. In this thread, I showed that a *T5* Fabled 2-hander was comparable to a pair of *T6* Legendary dual wields. SOE's manner of equalizing things was to not make any two handers with delays much higher than DW combo's in DoF. This is the reason I believe we haven't seen any high delay two-handers out of DoF, as I alluded to in the thread.</span><div></div>