Higher delay more procs?

[Sturmx]

I've had someone argue'n with me for a little bit about how higher delay means more procs.. and I dont get it .. lower delay means more hits.. which should mean more procs.. Anyone else have any ideas about this? Does higher delay mean more procs, and if so... why?<div></div>

[Cornbread Muffin]

<div></div><div>The proc formula:     <font color="#ff6600">(delay/3.0)*advertised proc rate</font></div><div><font color="#ff6600"></font> </div><div><font color="#ff6600"><font color="#ffffff">Actual proc rate of a 1.5 delay imbued weapon:</font>     (1.5/3.0)*5% = 3.5%</font></div><div><font color="#ff6600"><font color="#ffffff">Actual proc rate of a 3.8 delay imbued weapon:</font>     (3.8/3.0)*5% = 6.3%</font></div><div><font color="#ff6600"></font> </div><div><font color="#ffffff">In effect, all weapon delays are equivalent. In the example above, you will receive approximately 1 proc per minute of combat with each weapon. Where lower delay weapons actually derive their advantage is in your ability to equip two low delay weapons via dual wield and achieve 2x the number of procs. Where higher delay weapons gained their advantage is that they would proc off of CAs, and so you could use the proc percentage of your 3.8 delay weapon to achieve a number of procs off of your fast casting CAs.</font></div><div> </div><div>In the past, slow 2H weapons would allow you to proc more off of CAs (though as demonstrated above you would still proc less over 2 low-delay weapons when auto-attacking) and also to be riposted less. Since they have normalized ripostes as well, there really is no advantage to using a slow weapon that I can see.</div><p>Message Edited by Cornbread Muffin on <span class="date_text">02-20-2006</span><span class="time_text">11:31 PM</span></p>

[Raidi Sovin'faile]

<div></div><div></div><p>Your formula is correct, but you are wrong about when proc's occur.</p><p>A few live updates ago, they changed it so you only proc off the main hand. Many a scout was ticked off about how poisons would only proc on mainhand while they dualwield.</p><p>Second, the main reason why slower weapons were absolutely key for some folks DPS (*cough* rangers *cough*) was exactly because their delay was used on your fast casting CAs. Also, CAs with multiple attacks in them could proc off each one! Our 8x hit could potentially proc 8 times!</p><p>2handers (and other slow weapons like bows) are taking a massive hit in the upcoming fix, though.</p><p>It will now be that CAs will use their own cast time to determine rate of procs, as well as only proc'ing on the first hit of the ability (that 8x hit will only proc once, no matter how many extra hits you land).</p><p>Yeah... you thought it was bad before, try a 0.5s cast time vs a 5% proc rate. And honestly, we can't even really complain because it's so obviously a fix... it shouldn't have worked that way to begin with (it made some combos way too good.. like bows and poisons, etc).*shudder* You feel that? A hundred thousand ranger voices just cried out, and were suddenly silenced... boy, the jedi are really gonna feel this one.</p><p>And thus... dual wielding and 2handers will be completely equal in terms of damage and procing!</p><p>Wait... no they <strong>won't</strong>! Dual wield yeilds more stats! So why ever use two handed again? Oh that's right... we have AAs that REQUIRE it...Huzzah for creating artificial interest! Note that there's no single line of AAs that specifically call for dual wield (only one <strong>allows</strong> for it, and it's not all that hot)... *grumble*</p><p>Message Edited by Raidi Sovin'faile on <span class="date_text">02-21-2006</span><span class="time_text">02:37 AM</span></p>

[Sirlutt]

Let me first state, my main is a ranger, but this reduction was needed.  I just dont think it needed to be reduced this much.Rangers dont have a choice of speeds for bows, all of them are either 6.5 or 7.0 for long bows.. and rangers dont use much else.  In fact for a T6 ranger 95% of them will use an imbued ironwood long bow, and not for its speed.  For its range and stats.  Others will use a Fabled bow, but similar stats and speed.Anyhow.. i put together a really quick and dirty test based off some of my ranger numbers.  we have an offensive proc as part of our ofensive stance.  Its pretty much always on, Rangers rarely use our defensive stance.  It has a 30% chance to proc about 350 damage.  Thats 30% proc, when combined with a 7.0 speed weapon is actually 70% real world chance to proc.  Combine that with a poison that has 25% (real world 58%) and can be chain proc'd by the offensive stance and you can quite often see this --> CA Damage - poison proc- offensive proc- poison proc.  The poisons i use are generallt 450 per hit (75 per tic after that).so anyhow.. you can see that because of that offensive stance, it makes up over 60% of our damage.check this out -- <a target="_blank" href="http://www.zate.org/nerf/">http://www.zate.org/nerf/</a>That shows the difference with 1 CA, done 5 times in the damages generated.  Its not a real world test, its not calculating DPS because i set no time, but the % proc rates, the damage and the CA casting time are all real.  Its not even taking into account the multi hit CA's that now will proc only once.Its a clear indication of just how much of a nerf this really is to rangers.<div></div>

[Raidi Sovin'faile]

<div></div><div></div><p>It really shows how much ranger's DPS was relying on a seriously broken mechanic.</p><p>Truly, I think that now that they've fixed that, they should go over the ranger's damage again and rescale it to fit the tier of damage they should be in (tier 1), taking into account the lower proc of poisons.</p><p>I've always been for rangers being tier 1 damage. As long as that tier wasn't all by themselves, and instead included the assassin, warlock and wizard.</p><p>Message Edited by Raidi Sovin'faile on <span class="date_text">02-21-2006</span><span class="time_text">07:36 AM</span></p>

[Sirlutt]

I agree... problem is i think they fixed the wrong mechanic <img src="/smilies/9d71f0541cff0a302a0309c5079e8dee.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />the real issue is our offensive proc being able to proc poison, and the % of procs on both of them.I think i will update it rightnow with a third hypothetical version of the changes I would have made.<div></div>

[Sturmx]

Hmm, all this ranger talk confuses me <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />. So if I use say..two 1.2 delay fists... would I proc more than if I would use two 2.0 delay cestii's? <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /><div></div>

[Sirlutt]

old system the 2.0's would proc more.1.2/3*5 = 2%2.0/3*5 = 3.33 %not a huge diff, but still.With the new changes, that will work for auto attack, but now your CA's that have a chance to proc will use the casting time.  So its completely different.  Also CA's that hit more than once (dont know the name but my bruiser has thatone with like 10 hits) .. will only proc once.<div></div>

[Jeris Nefz]

<div></div>I guess the thing I am frustrated most about this "bug fix" is that it is not an actual fix.  It just changes who it benefits.  If it is a broken mechanic, fine.  Make it so it doesn't benefit one particular class more than another; otherwise, you are back in the same boat.  If you go by cast times, you take all the procs that melee classes would have got and give them to the casters.  Casters have much higher casting times than melee classes (.5-1.5sec vs. 1-7 secs).  So in effect all they really have done is take away most of the procs that melee'ers with multiple attacks (rangers, bruisers, etc) would have had and gave them to the mages some healers.  Sony hasn't fixed anything,   It just shows that they didn't really "fix" rangers LU 13, it was an oops that they let slide.  Maybe I am oversimplifying this, but how hard is it to have multi attack CA's only proc the amount of attacks that they are supposed to (ie 100 hand slap not proccing every time when only one left)?  Can I expect rangers, bruisers, or whoever uses multi attacks to be DPS compensated for the missing procs?  Will they up the damage?  I guess only time will tell, but I am not holding my breath for a quick fix. 

[Cornbread Muffin]

<div></div><p>Raidi,</p><p>My example only covered imbued weapon procs, which still function off of both hands. Regardless, what you said is correct - imbued procs give you 2x the opportunity to proc if you dual wield, however applied procs are equivalent regardless of the weapon.</p><p> </p><p>Jeris,</p><p>Switching proc advantage to casters isn't too bad because there are fewer caster procs. Also, they are already penalized by using a ton of time to cast the spell so the balance is maintained. The issue with the bow procs was the speed of the CAs triggering with the percentage of the bow speed. Even if they get a 100% proc rate on a 7 second spell, they are still limited to that one proc every 7 seconds.</p>

[Jeris Nefz]

<div></div><blockquote><hr>Cornbread Muffin wrote:<div></div><p>Jeris,</p><p>Switching proc advantage to casters isn't too bad because there are fewer caster procs. Also, they are already penalized by using a ton of time to cast the spell so the balance is maintained. The issue with the bow procs was the speed of the CAs triggering with the percentage of the bow speed. Even if they get a 100% proc rate on a 7 second spell, they are still limited to that one proc every 7 seconds.</p><hr></blockquote>My problem is not giving them the proc, honestly. My problem is that this was not included in their "expected dps" when they were balancing.  If it were, you would have seen a lot more procs from the skirt wearers.  So in essence, they are getting "free dps" at the expense of other classes.  So their T1 (sorcerors) damage gets higher at the expense of the melee'ers.  There needs to be something to account for that.  That is all I am saying.  I am not calling for nerfs.  If they are trying to balance the tier for damage, any added damage must be at the expense of something else... or you have to raise everyone in the tier.  Mainly rangers, but other classes such as brawlers, had procs worked into their damage to make their damage what it was supposed to be (though reading some of the dev's comments recently has me wondering about that).  Without the procs, will brawlers still be in tier 3 or rangers be in tier 1?  Yes tweaking needs to happen.  I am just concerned on how long it will take.  I don't want to wait until the next expansion to be looked at.  With the release of KoS, they will be more concerned about zones crashing than tweaking dps for one or two classes.  /shrug  If it's not enjoyable playing my ranger or brawler, I guess I will either don a dress or find something else to do with my time until this does get worked out. 

[Dahlrek]

<div></div><span><span><blockquote><hr>Cornbread Muffin wrote:<div></div><div></div><font color="#ffffff">Where lower delay weapons actually derive their advantage is in your ability to equip two low delay weapons via dual wield and achieve 2x the number of procs.</font><hr></blockquote>Actually, at release DW weapons had a built-in 0.5 multiplier to their proc rate, so autoattack procs per time was completely normalized.  I read in some patch notes while I wasn't playing that they increased that value, but since I've been using 2Hers I don't know what it increased to.  Guess I'll have to figure it out now, unless someone has links to parses showing the new factor.</span><blockquote><hr>Raidi Sovin'faile wrote:<div></div><div></div><p>Wait... no they <strong>won't</strong>! Dual wield yeilds more stats! So why ever use two handed again? Oh that's right... we have AAs that REQUIRE it...</p><hr></blockquote>DW also has better auto attack damage now.  And we only have one AA that requires a 2h, so relax.</span><div></div>

[Cornbread Muffin]

<div></div><blockquote><hr>Dahlrek wrote:<div></div><span><span><blockquote><hr>Cornbread Muffin wrote:<div></div><div></div><font color="#ffffff">Where lower delay weapons actually derive their advantage is in your ability to equip two low delay weapons via dual wield and achieve 2x the number of procs.</font><hr></blockquote>Actually, at release DW weapons had a built-in 0.5 multiplier to their proc rate, so autoattack procs per time was completely normalized.  I read in some patch notes while I wasn't playing that they increased that value, but since I've been using 2Hers I don't know what it increased to.  Guess I'll have to figure it out now, unless someone has links to parses showing the new factor.</span></span><div></div><hr></blockquote>Ahh, I didn't know that. It makes the most sense that they would do that, though. I guess I would have to parse to be sure, but to be honest I don't care enough. :smileyvery-happy:

[Raidi Sovin'faile]

<p><font color="#ffff00">Raidi,</font></p><p><font color="#ffff00">My example only covered imbued weapon procs, which still function off of both hands. Regardless, what you said is correct - imbued procs give you 2x the opportunity to proc if you dual wield, however applied procs are equivalent regardless of the weapon.</font></p><div> </div><div>Ah, yes.. when you say "2x the procs" I'm thinking on all things, not just imbues...</div><div> </div><div>That is true.. one more thing dual wield has over two handers. I wouldn't be surprised to see a change roll down about how two handers will do double the damage on procs, or proc at double the rate.</div>

[Vorham]

<div></div><p>the mechanic needed to be fixed, aye</p><p>but our proc % chance that was balanced around the "broken" mechanic around DoF release needs to be fixed now</p><p>10% chance, modified by .5sec cast timers is a joke if were supposed to be keeping up with Monks and their haste</p>