Starsman

[ QUOTE ]

In theory, this is all balanced by there being no "end of mission" reward in terms of XP/Influence/Prestige. In practice...not so much.

[/ QUOTE ]

Don't forget that patrol xp bonuses don't work inside MA arcs, although the Dev Choices destroy both penalties.

[ QUOTE ]

So, that ends up being a net DPS of ~40.79. That'd take roughly 11.5 minutes to kill an AV. Of course, that's impossible using small reds, since you'd only have room for 5 minutes worth. So, over the course of 5 minutes, my calculations say I could bring an AV down to roughly 57% health.

Since these calculations are for a lvl50 non resisting AV, I chose Romulus (no resistance at all).

Results (lots of screenshots for the interim)
Screenshot 1 - Start of the test
Screenshot 2
Screenshot 3
Screenshot 4
Screenshot 5
Screenshot 6
Screenshot 7
Screenshot 8
Screenshot 9
Screenshot 10 - End of the test

I don't think I'd consider my understanding of the formula in practical applications to be suspect.

[/ QUOTE ]

That is simply beautiful.

[ QUOTE ]

While I appreciate the work that Starsman has done, his analysis "showed" that Energy Melee's single-target damage output was only slightly reduced by the changes to ET and EP. Once the changes had been implemented on live, those of us who had truly high-damage EM tankers with lots of recharge, multiple procs in EP, etc., could see that this was nonsense.

(Yet confoundingly, people insist to this day that we're lying; that the nerfs only reduced DPS by a small margin, and so on--citing Starsman's charts as "proof" of their point.)

[/ QUOTE ]

NOnonononono... My first analysis did show this, but my first analysis was wrong and I openly noted this. Not to mention at the time of the first analysis the Energy Punch nerf was an unintentionally stealth one. I no longer keep the old EM in my charts to compare, but the change was step indeed. The combined impact of those to changes was huge for the set, but the set was already doing huge damage.

I have been rather vocal about my disappointment with EM after that nerf. I also have noted several times that EP's cast time change was a bigger nerf for EM than Energy Transfer, although ET was also a considerable nerf, specially for high recharge builds. It still is a top contender for the ST damage spot, but given it horrid AoE performance and self imposed damage, I think it's not where it should be. If it is meant to inflict damage on itself, it should be also be ahead of the curve in nearly all cases.

As for procs and other external build options, I would really love to include them as options but Google Docs does not really give me the tools to go that far. I have been working sloooowly on another project that should make many happy on this, but given my limited time allocation lately, it may not be ready anytime soon. For the time being, I build the charts as reference point for casual builds, not extremely optimized ones (other than moderately high recharge) and I have noted this plenty of times.

As for AoE comparisons: I weight radius. I test them in game. I have one of each primary tanker set but Ice Melee and stone at high enough level to test their AoEs. (EM is on a brute but it counts for those comparisons.) I can very easily and realistically fit 10 foes within 8ft Whirling attacks. Foot Stomp makes it slightly easier but not able to do nothing I cant do easily with ET. I seen enough videos of people saturating Invincibility without effort (8ft radius too) to know this is not just me.

That being told, in my recent Dominator analysis I skeweed my AoE radius modifier to try to force 10ft attacks under 15ft attacks and 8ft attacks under 10ft. Result is something you may be more happy with. I'm currently working on a way more pumped up version that includes endurance efficiency and a more dynamic damage buff casting that will be able to accurately account for billion stacked rage if needed. It's almost ready and may be out today or tomorrow.

That version will also be less time dependent (so far I been averaging what fits within a 60s window, the new version is more perpetual) which will change the discrepancy between sets on it's own but not by an insane amount.

I listen to the complaints people have about my charts, some I don't find that valid but still consider them. I just am limited on what I can do with the tools at hand. The good side is: I'm becoming a pro at Google Docs loopholes. Procs are out of the question, though, because they have to be something that can be added/removed by the viewer or I'd have to do 100 versions of each power set with different builds. Again: that's a goal for another project but I myself would not hold my breath.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Whether or not any powers ever get alternate animations has nothing to do with luck. I've never personally been against the idea of having alternate power animations, quite the opposite. We've simply lacked the tech to do that and the time to create said animations.

[/ QUOTE ]

Funny how you say that in past tense. It's almost as if your subconcious was screaming that you now have the tech and the time and that we may see this in I16 along with color customization.

[/ QUOTE ]

Now you're just baiting.

Some say you're a master of it.



[/ QUOTE ]

I'm merely an apprentice.

[ QUOTE ]

Whether or not any powers ever get alternate animations has nothing to do with luck. I've never personally been against the idea of having alternate power animations, quite the opposite. We've simply lacked the tech to do that and the time to create said animations.

[/ QUOTE ]

Funny how you say that in past tense. It's almost as if your subconcious was screaming that you now have the tech and the time and that we may see this in I16 along with color customization.

[ QUOTE ]
Starsman, thanks for replying, as I read your answer in another thread it looks like you're using automated means to generate dynamic attack chains.

I don't believe this is the right approach for something as complicated as attack chains, with so many parameters there's too much room for user error if a program does most of the work, and to me it explains the discrepancy between your numbers and the other analysis I've seen or ingame experience I've had.

[/ QUOTE ]

The thing is that Dynamic Attack Chains are not actual attack chains, but instead simply attack prioritazon. It's something many players do and I find it's not only the most effective way to approach DPS but also the one that requires the less planning.

Attack chains tend to require some one to sit down, figure out what attacks to chain in what order and stick to that order. Usually people will either set their hotkeys in the order of the pattern or will make a macro that changes to the next attack in the list so they just use one hotkey for this.

The dynamic attack chain (that again, is not really a chain) is mostly about selecting the amount of powers you need to sustain fluid attack chain and place them on slots 1,2,3,4, etc in order of best DPA.

You can either setup a macro that will attempt to cast 1, then attempt 2, then attempt 3, or you would manually keep focused and see when a power recharge and pick whatever power is recharged from left to right.

This is the approach my charts simulate, I have plans of something bigger but bigger means time consuming and right now I don't have the time.

Perm Buff is for things like Rage, that are ongoing.

Temp buff is for things like Build Up.

I do some math to do averaging where the perm buff has the average value while Temp buff has the permanent value. This makes the Build Up table possible within the same document.

As for Dark Melee, I did some internal calculations specific for that set, I may have to review them, though, just in case. The way it behaves I had to multiply it separately.

Again, been a while since I did that revision and been working on some other stuff so I now can't remember 100% off the top of my head.

[ QUOTE ]

Except that, presumably, that multi-target number is factoring in AoE's against 10 targets when really what we're saying is that the Tank is doing single-target damage but happens to have gathered 9 other mobs around them to boost damage.

[/ QUOTE ]

And how often are so many around an AV for long enough to make a difference?

[ QUOTE ]
I don't think it took into account much recharge, or even perfect attack chains. I think he set it up to use the biggest damage attack and work down untill things recharged.

[/ QUOTE ]

I actually use dynamic attack chain generation where the best DPA attack that is recharged is activated. The issue with static chains is that they don't always work, many things mess them up and they are rarely truthfully sustainable and sometimes counter productive. I seen people keep using the same attack chain even when they are speed boosted or AMd, they end up wasting the recharge buffs. Dynamically picking the best DPA attack would automatically make you take advantage of those things.

Internally, my list just creates a list of prioritized attacks needed to sustain gapless attacking with this method and the predetermined recharge levels.


[ QUOTE ]
I don't remember if it uncluded the new energy mele, but I know it had the new mace.

[/ QUOTE ]

It is. It is still high with build up spamming but nowhere near as high as it should be in my opinion given it's poor AoE performance and lack of utility and self imposed damage. Although then again, stunning may be considered enough counterweight by Castle, /shrugh

[ QUOTE ]
He'll prolly be along soon to link it, was some good work.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's on my sig, and the poster already knows about my charts, i think he is looking for predefined attack chains.

Darminiam, note that these numbers are the performance of the sets on the raw. Foes you face can variate and change things around but as you noted I noted it . there are AVs that are actually strong against dark, or energy so it all depends what AV you want to solo. Better than guessing is to multiply the values by the resistance and then resort the list by the modified values.

Example:
Foe w/20% resist
Score * .8 = ScoreAgainstFoe

If I gave an already modified score, how would you know what foe I measured against and how to adapt it after a different foe, after all?

[ QUOTE ]

Factoring that in I'm guessing Dark Melee stacks up a lot better on groups and also gains a ground on single-targets when it's possible to grab adds.

[/ QUOTE ]

The list I posted was only for single target, if you want to see DM while surrounded you can look at my charts on my sig's link, they go into a bit more detail.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
2.14 Stone Melee
1.98 War Mace
1.97 Energy Melee
1.94 Super Strength
1.90 Battle Axe
1.87 Dark Melee
1.84 Fiery Melee
1.75 Dual Blades

[/ QUOTE ]

No offense to your work (as you've obviously put some time into this), but frankly, I'd have to see the complete methodology to believe this. These numbers don't tell me anything and don't match any detailed analysis I've ever seen or made myself.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's basically the same as Arcanaville's Peak DR (think thats how she called it) with an implementation twist that help me do quick automated changes and priority modifiers plus averaged build up (not sure if she used to do that.)

Trying to find her guide now but cant seem to find it.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I have not tested it myself as I don't find AV soloing a rewarding experience (their HP+Regen/Reward ratio sucks) but I have heard of even Ice Melee users soloing AVs with the right build.

Now, as to what set can potentially dish the most ST damage? With high levels of recharge (150% that can be a mix of slotting and global) my calculator ranks them:

2.14 Stone Melee
1.98 War Mace
1.97 Energy Melee
1.94 Super Strength
1.90 Battle Axe
1.87 Dark Melee
1.84 Fiery Melee
1.75 Dual Blades

Note that this is raw damage, and some sets may achieve this via bonuses like DoT or mitigate their endurance in other ways, like Energy Transfer making the endurance efficiency better and end efficiency will be important for AV soloing.

[/ QUOTE ]

What are theses numbers based on: dmg/sec? dmg/attack? dmg/attack chain? dmg/60 sec? What happends when that raw damage hits resistances? Like when fighting Pratorean Statesman, or Lord Recluse?

[/ QUOTE ]

Although the numbers may loosly represent optimized dynamic attack chains, (where higher dpa attacks are prioritized) they are just meant to compare who is capable of doing more damage with the best attacks available for the set. Some sets require just 3 powers for a full attack chain, while others may require 5 or even 6. It's very dependant of the set and may also be a huge factor as it determines investment. Although I keep track of how many powers are needed I didnt list this here because there are so many other things that then I'd feel forced to list making the simple "who can dish more st damage" a way too complex thing.

As for resistances, I leave that in the air. You will have to just assume if the foe is resistant to only one damage type you may as well lower all sets that purely depend on that damage by about that amount in the list.

[ QUOTE ]
Is that before or after damage buffs are included? Reason I ask is that the highest on your list (Stone Melee) comes out to ~95.20 DPS.

[/ QUOTE ]

I dont consider those number direct DPS, more like relative scores, but they keep in mind averaging of buffs and 95% damage slotting.

I never intended these charts as a means of seeing who can kill what uber content, but as a relative measure to compare one set to another.

[ QUOTE ]

I'd have to see that to believe it. Ice Melee only has a single attack that has a slotted DPA higher than an AV's regen rate (FT - ~122 DPA).

[/ QUOTE ]

Not seen it, only heard. May had been taking advantage of specific AV weaknesses, and ancillary powers may be involved.

I just realized I missed Ice melee on that list I posted... sows at 1.35 on my charts if anyone cares.

I have not tested it myself as I don't find AV soloing a rewarding experience (their HP+Regen/Reward ratio sucks) but I have heard of even Ice Melee users soloing AVs with the right build.

Now, as to what set can potentially dish the most ST damage? With high levels of recharge (150% that can be a mix of slotting and global) my calculator ranks them:

2.14 Stone Melee
1.98 War Mace
1.97 Energy Melee
1.94 Super Strength
1.90 Battle Axe
1.87 Dark Melee
1.84 Fiery Melee
1.75 Dual Blades

Note that this is raw damage, and some sets may achieve this via bonuses like DoT or mitigate their endurance in other ways, like Energy Transfer making the endurance efficiency better and end efficiency will be important for AV soloing.

[ QUOTE ]

This thread is specifically about DPS high enough to kill AVs, there's no way KO Blow won't be enhanced for recharge. If you're trying to cover DPS for all circumstances (such as with your calculator), it makes sense, but that's not what's being discussed.

[/ QUOTE ]

I know, my point is that to get an average dps value you cant go with a 10s chain and and then average that value because once you go out to fight that AV, you will find the average only holds true if the full attack was repeatable back to back.

If KOB was slotted so that it was not ready within 10 seconds (for this example) then the average you got from a 10s sample was wrongly skewed upwards.

Do the same analysis with 25 seconds and you get a more accurate sample to average your DPS from.

[ QUOTE ]
(and I did say the longer the sample the better in those cases)

[/ QUOTE ]

What I'm trying to note is that there are some samples that are too short to hold any true value. 10s is one such extremely short sample.

10s may be too short, specially when looking at tanks, due to recharges. How would KOB, a 25s recharge power, look like in a 10s average?

Then pop in a 20 s average where unenhanced KOB will still only be used once.

That's why I feel the distinction had to be made. Even if the chain was static you cant repeat it without forcing either pauses or using filler attacks.

[ QUOTE ]
If so, then you'd you'd be incorrect. The period of time DPS is calculated over could be a complete 5s chain, or a complete 10s chain, or a dynamic chain over the course of 20 minutes. All you need to do is add up total damage dealt and divide by time.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sort off. The shorter the time window, though, the more skewed the value will be to the high end, though. In order to get the most accurate value its best to use a very large time window. I use 60 seconds. At that point changes seem to just affect nearly tie-ups.

You may not notice it but there are two subtleties to it all:

1) 1.5 to 0.83 is a world of difference.
2) Energy is mostly ranged attacks that do 10.5% less damage than melee attacks.

As for Total Focus, it's 3.3 second cast time! That is snipe slow!

[ QUOTE ]

At a glace it looks like /eng is the new /elec with thumping attacks and elec is fast and zippy. Not sure how I'd feel if I specifically rolled elec for its dpa and wasn't concerned with the longer recharges.

[/ QUOTE ]

The thing is Elec will now hit harder than it hit before unless you were perma dom.

Other than that, there is also the thing that Elec has extremely fast animations, and these were the ones that made Elec extreme damage, not the high recharge. Making Energy high recharge didnt turn it into "The New Elec" because it has rather slow animations that perpetually prevent it from being "The New Elec"

Don't take me wrong, that was an amazing grill we had on friday with a load of Heinekens and some amazing Megruli Khachapuri (wife and friends are Georgian) eaten on saturday and sunday!

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I appreciate your candor, but at the same time, I'm not being a time thief as I'm done work... are you? j/k, but seriously.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, I woke at 3am or so and was unable to go back to sleep -- a formula I was working on yesterday had "issues" and I figured out why and could not go back to sleep until I fixed it. So, I came in *REALLY* early. Now, I'm just killing time waiting for traffic to die down so I can go home and pass out.

Not all community types are "mouthpieces" -- and fortunately, we here at Paragon don't really have any like that. But, as I've said, I've worked with them before and it isn't pleasant.

[/ QUOTE ]

Had a similar thing happen to me this past week. Only to me it was Thursday afternoon. Friday had guests, code never left my head. Saturday went to visit wife friends in KY, code never left head. Get home Sunday, go toilet, and guess I pooped out the solution. At that point I was barely able to sleep thinking on getting to work next morning and implement that fix... only I had to go to the doctor first....

Grin of satisfaction when it worked without a single error once I sat down at the computer, though!

[ QUOTE ]
Posted this earlier as an explanation for my statement. It's ok if you didn't read it, most people only read the last page of a thread anyway.

[/ QUOTE ]

I read it, also read how you contradict yourself saying you know the definition, then saying "In the spirit of keeping words having meaning" as if the meaning was NOT that.

Off course, you also try to shield behind "jargon" and how the proper use of the word should only be the one accepted by "popular jargon" despite that being entirely the opposite of "the spirit of keeping words having meaning".

Never-mind that in common jargon computer Bugs have been simply "something is wrong" that encompasses even more than you already are arguing against in the first place.

[ QUOTE ]

In the spirit of keeping words having meaning I would have called it an oversight, but I realize PR isn't what we'd call a strong point for PS. If you want to call everything in sight a bug and an exploit that is your choice.

[/ QUOTE ]

A bug is the common term used to describe an error, flaw, mistake, failure, or fault in a computer program that prevents it from behaving as intended.

There is NO NEGATIVE CONNOTATION on the term bug other than one directed to the developers. NO ONE BUT THE DEVS should be offended by something being called a bug.

THAT IS THE MEANING OF THE FRIGGING WORD!!!!

Note that most bugs arise from mistakes and errors made by people in either a program's source code or its design, and a few are caused by compilers producing incorrect code. So even if something was designed to be a way, the result may not be really desired due to oversights in the big scope of things. That, again is a bug.

An Exploit, on the other hand, is a bit different. An Exploit is the process of intentionally taking advantage of a bug. Not that it matters to this since no dev called this an exploit. However, power-leveling via MA using Meow farms was an obvious exploit by all aspects of definition (unintended results due to oversights that people took advantage off.)


PS: No, I could not have toned down the caps, I would use increased font size if the forums allowed me to.

Oh and to reiterate:
Oversight = BUG
Error = BUG
Mistake = BUG
Flaw = BUG
Failure = BUG
Bad Design = BUG
Weak Design = BUG
Etc = BUG

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Dominator's got a pvp only damage buff back in one issue or another. It was definitely over 2 years ago. I looked for the patch notes regarding the difference in damage in pvp vs pve today and the search doesnt go back that far. Before anyone starts crying"bug" please do remeber the extra damge in pvp was added intentionally. That the dev's forgot they implemented that isnt a "bug".It's an understandable oversite and will be corrected.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ya it kind of bothered me that Sunstorm called it a bug as well. They sure love to label things as bugs and exploits even though it was WAI just a few days ago.

It's an oversight that they forgot to adjust for during the dom revamp, there is no bugged code or bugged powers everything is working exactly as designed and implemented.

[/ QUOTE ]

The "bug" is the bonus not being removed before these changes went live. Those responsible have been beaten about the head and shoulders with a wet noodle, repeatedly. Not that that will prevent the same sort of thing from happening in the future, but hey, it was fun!

[/ QUOTE ]


Didn't you get the memo? Bug, Exploit, Overpowered, are all offensive terms. You should stick to the more politically correct term: "balance impaired"


After all, we don't want to offend all the balance impaired players that opted into these handicaps .

EX: We didn't realize the balance impaired PvP changes. They have been changed to be more balance capable yet less fun version, because we hate PvP and Doms.