Futility of radical WW theories.

[rikstaker1]

Popular ideas dictate popular behaviour. The world was flat if historic popular opinion was to be believed.

Looks like I stepped on some toes here.

On the testings:

The difference between people like darius who carried out their tests to seek & establish relationship between hits/ias/range & those who try & prove their own predetermined idea lies in the intention & necessity.

Intenion of people like (darius & co): To establish the relationships between variables,seek out a common mathemetical & scientific understanding of workings,which are varifiable.Now they weren't trying to prove or disprove any predetermined idea they had.They were trying to establish something.

Intention of these neo-Darius wannabees:To try & prove something which isn't there,by stretching the test environment the idea of which has little benefit in gameplay.Remember this, they aren't seeking to establish anything,they do have a predtermined idea that they are testing.The testing limits are pushed perhaps unintentionally,the compromise ends up being relevancy & perhaps accuracy of the results & implications in actual gameplay.

Stone Crusher..

In case u didn't notice in ur urge to unleash your flames,I was talking about ww weapons.So those that accept the idea of wias doesn't matter,are free to pick that up.I was asking for low range weapons not non-lwbp weapons.BTW stonecrusher is both.

No, but others can confirm it: http://www.lurkerlounge.com/forums/index.php?act=ST&f=8&t=834&linear=1&st=0

Sure they can,I know at the back of my mind its true,I am unwilling to talk about it since it will do its share of guiding new players to the wrong path & away from the basics.

You would do well to understand a scientific method of testing. Fundamental to this is a controlled environment. The tests I performed and documented in a thread (quite some time ago) had a controlled environment. The results did not vary.

Now that u have mentioned pvp below,Do any of your tagets cast blizzard & tele out? if we are talking pvm-how many are these targets? Do they move half fast atleast or move at all? You tried arming them with manaburn?Whatever it may be, those conditions will never resemble actual gameplay.

Actually, disassembly of the game code will provide a more accurate picture of FACTS: http://www.lurkerlounge.com/forums/index.php?act=ST&f=8&t=834&linear=1&st=0
This is the definition of analysis..

Is that your opinion?,I said IMO,didnt notice that huh?

Your "guide", which I am now extremely wary of allowing people to read due to your total ignorance for scientific evaluation and preference for hearsay and folk law, will supposedly contain PVP information as it pertains to WW. You have said little of WW in a PVP environment (single target) in this thread, and instead have focused soley on groups of monsters. I hope that you do not carry this focus into the PVP section of this "guide" as the use of the skill is entirely, completely different...

I said very little about pvp,as I never felt the need,caz these theories have no place at all of acceptance in dueling.One has to use a range 3 or more lwbp weapon & all use it.Question repeat: Do your "single targets" cast blizzrd & tele out? or use whirlwind?

What surprises me most about your post is that you are unwilling to even consider the possibilities (in some cases, proven facts) that what you currently understand is perhaps not quite completely accurate:.

If you don't care that something is true.. or false for that matter.. why are you so concerned with writing information on the subject matter? And indeed is someone so apathetic even a suitable author?:.

Been there before.Everyone understood the motive of my post,I said it clearly above too,

originally posted by rikstaker:

before going any further-
I titled the thread Futility or pointlessness not Falsehood-Just trying to address the lack of viable benefits of these alternate theories & the aggravating effect its having on the popularity of the skill.I am not trying to force it into anyone's mouth. My idea was to question the point not the accuracy,since to me atleast, it always takes precedence.

but that somehow got conveniently "edited" in your flame but alas.....and Sir,who are you? Do I work for you?

Please do not write a PVP section, you clearly do not understand WW in a PVP environment. Furthermore, your opinion on DOD indicates that you are unwilling to suggest any WW style besides that which you employ. Perhaps this provides insight as to why you "dont care if its true" (reference to 4/8 frame hit checks.).

Do I need to testify?,Said it above already. I based the thread on pvm & sticked to it since the popularity of these theories in actual dueling is 0.The whirling techs will never deliver the same results in pvp & pvm.those theories dont suggest DOD, they are saying wias doesn't matter & using DOD will exploit that.

Anyone willing to volunteer to test it in BVB with a non-lwbp weapon?

I was talking about pvm.dod isn't all that effective in pvm.I am not the only one saying that.But,I dont complain since I am the target here.

Sure DOD (provided its with a lwbp weapon) is a good tactic to use in BVB since shorter the whirls,the less time u are vulnerable should the whirl be off target.That automatically means more control & fewer & shorter mis-directed whirls.

Did I just testify? damn....

So which is it? You aren't going to compare results in a mathematical way or via code behaviour discovery, or you are going to "rub it and analyse it deeply" and apply logic? With your disregard for proving a constituent fact through tangible evidence such as game code, your logic is based entirely on opinion and is thus flawed.

Here's an anecdote for you. I made a barb with dual masteries: Polearm, and Axe. I did this because I wanted to use both a big dmg 2 handed weapon, and two axes (ebotd zerk, beast zerk) in a PVP environment. My experience indicates that the ebotd zerk/beast zerk combination is far superior to an ebotd gpa. How can this be? Your own experience indicates that range 5 is superior to range 3. The GPA listed damage is far superior. Would you care to explain why this is the case? .

As for the first para,I am unwilling to do it over & over again,just because its put to me in different ways.

Re your anecdote:Sir, I would care to explain if you care to point me to a place where I mentioned dualwielding. With due respect to your credibility, apparently you have confused dualwielding & range 3 as being the same.Did I compare the effectiveness of dualwielding & long range?

Yours faithfully

rIK
-----------------------

It's ok, I don't expect you to. In fact I'm trying to point out the trap you are falling into when you neglect a controlled environment. Of course there are many variables I did not control in the above description, and why should you believe me? I didn't back up my anecdote with a list of proven, citable facts, or any metrics whatsoever. I have provided no PROOF to my opinion. You will need to do this if your guide is to be believed by those of us who are not gullible enough to be convinced by another's opinion alone.

My intention is to warn others of the trap they would fall into if they stop playing & keep following such tests & findings.

Dont ask of me what wasn't asked of others.Besides I am writing a guide not a report.You dont seem awfully pleased with the idea for some reason,though its your prerogative.

Besides I'll be more than willing to make a million corrections when things are pointed out, alternate stuff is suggested-I am at the mercy of all vets whom I respect. I know its hard for some to accept my opinion judging by the post count. But fame was never my intention. Just trying to clear ww's name & get more people to play.

No offense to you mcm. From where you see it,I might be wrong,but from where I see it you are.But that alone shouldn't be used as an excuse to flame each other. I never meant to offend anyone personally with this thread,this is the umpteenth time I am saying it.But again it will be sweet if the feeling is mutual.If I am questioned just for the sake of letting off some steam or the lack of further scope for argument driving one to such meaningless quote game,wont bode well with me either.

rIK

puma-great work.check out the new link

edit-work underway.

 

[rikstaker1]

*Before I begin: I have always said range 3 is fine with me with the exceptions of ik, ribcracker, windhammer*

So don’t misinterpret it by saying that for me range 5>range 3 and I’ll take a long range weapon over dual range 3 weapons.
------------------------------------------------------

I’ll come straight to the point now, since I am sure you won’t. You never revealed anywhere about how you perceive range & ias. Apparently it was a just flame post, judging from the sheer lack of your own views.

If you are testing/preaching the alternate theories,why don’t you practice it? Any answer?

In your anecdote, I see mention of gpa & zerks both of which are range 3(+) and lwbp, Are there any in which you went off to duel barbs & casters with stone crushers or botd thundermauls,even warpikes?

If there are, make no mistake, it will deserve a mention in the guide just to please you. :thumbsup:

rIK

 

[mstrnicegui]

Actually, disassembly of the game code will provide a more accurate picture of FACTS: http://www.lurkerlounge.com/forums/index.php?act=ST&f=8&t=834&linear=1&st=0
This is the definition of analysis.

Actually, facts (like statistics) without a frame of reference are anything you want them to be. You disassemble the game code to find out that when dual wielding 2 lwbp weapons it hits at 2fpa, which is 2 times as often as single-lwbp ww. From this you might think that dual wielding is way better than not. Everyone was excited about dual wielding as being godly. It wasn't until people actually tested it, did they find out it wasn't as much as it was cracked up to be. Sure you hit more often than single wielding, but there are so many other factors that it turned out to be just another cool thing.

 

[mcm]

The difference between people like darius who carried out their tests to seek & establish relationship between hits/ias/range & those who try & prove their own predetermined idea lies in the intention & necessity.

I'm truly sorry that you don't realise why people want to know exactly what effect WIAS and range have. Let me spell it out for you: To provide a criteria set for selecting a weapon. Take the idea that weapon IAS does not matter for the first 8 frames of a WW for instance. If a player is willing to use a WW style that leverages this, they have a new set of weapons available to them: Those weapons that do not make the last WIAS WW BP. Now, in addition to this a play style involving the DOD (which you have already expressed your indifference towards) is very effective against casters in a PVP environment. DOD revolves around short whirls (no pun intended..) in fact, whirls around 8 frames in length. With a better understanding of the internal mechanics of this game comes a greater ability to select equipment to suit a particular scenario of play. To say that the internal mechanics don't matter, is utterly ridiculous. This is software, it behaves in a mechanical fashion. It is not a sentient being.

Intention of these neo-Darius wannabees:To try & prove something which isn't there,by stretching the test environment the idea of which has little benefit in gameplay.Remember this, they aren't seeking to establish anything,they do have a predtermined idea that they are testing.The testing limits are pushed perhaps unintentionally,the compromise ends up being relevancy & perhaps accuracy of the results & implications in actual gameplay.

This "predetermined idea" you speak of? Its called a HYPOTHESIS. Let's look that big word up for your benefit:

hy·poth·e·sis ( P ) Pronunciation Key (h-pth-ss)
n. pl. hy·poth·e·ses (-sz)
1. A tentative explanation for an observation, phenomenon, or scientific problem that can be tested by further investigation.
2. Something taken to be true for the purpose of argument or investigation; an assumption.
3. The antecedent of a conditional statement.

(emphasis mine)

With regard to "stretching the test environment" and "testing limits are pushed perhaps unintentionally", no, that is exactly what YOU are doing by ignoring a controlled environment and attempting to come up with conclusions as the number of uncontrolled variables in your "test environment" grow and grow. For example, you refer to "the dynamic nature of targets", which is quite true. However what you fail to realise is that this is a variable which must be eliminated for a proper comparison to be made.

In case u didn't notice in ur urge to unleash your flames,I was talking about ww weapons.So those that accept the idea of wias doesn't matter,are free to pick that up.I was asking for low range weapons not non-lwbp weapons.BTW stonecrusher is both.

You gave a criteria of low range. Stone Crusher fits this criteria, as you stated yourself. End of argument.

Sure they can,I know at the back of my mind its true,I am unwilling to talk about it since it will do its share of guiding new players to the wrong path & away from the basics.

When I read this, I just kinda sat here.. stunned. The same way I do when George Bush says something stupid.

Let me get this straight. You know its true, but believe it guides players down the wrong path. Please explain. Really. I'd love to hear how you can possibly rectify such a blatant contradiction.

Now that u have mentioned pvp below,Do any of your tagets cast blizzard & tele out? if we are talking pvm-how many are these targets? Do they move half fast atleast or move at all? You tried arming them with manaburn?Whatever it may be, those conditions will never resemble actual gameplay.

There you go again, throwing more variables into an experiment. Did you not take even one science class in high school?

Actually, disassembly of the game code will provide a more accurate picture of FACTS: http://www.lurkerlounge.com/forums/...4&linear=1&st=0
This is the definition of analysis..

Is that your opinion?,I said IMO,didnt notice that huh?

The difference is that I backed my opinion up with evidence. You have yet to do this ONCE.

Do I need to testify?,Said it above already. I based the thread on pvm & sticked to it since the popularity of these theories in actual dueling is 0.The whirling techs will never deliver the same results in pvp & pvm.those theories dont suggest DOD, they are saying wias doesn't matter & using DOD will exploit that.

(emphasis mine)

Another blatant contradiction. What exactly are you trying to say? You have stated your guide will contain PVP information in this thread, I think that warrants the inclusion of PVP as a topic in this thread.

In your anecdote, I see mention of gpa & zerks both of which are range 3(+) and lwbp, Are there any in which you went off to duel barbs & casters with stone crushers or botd thundermauls,even warpikes?

In fact, yes, indeed I did in an open bnet game with a friend of mine using multiple popular builds, a comparison of ebotd zerk/beast zerk, eth stone crusher/beast caddy, ebotd war tmaul, and ebotd gpa was made. To provide a breif summary, the consistent damage and added damage from stone crusher was favourable versus casters using short whirls, more so than the two handed weapons. Between those, the same story can be told with the tmaul being favourable due to superior damage versus casters employing a typical teleport-whirl & DOD tactic involving short whirls. It is worth pointing out that this tactic versus casters, where the object is to latch onto and stay with a fleeing opponent is not only suitable for low range weapons since "skirting" an opponent is never a reality, but when using the DOD, which is preferred as it maintains close proximity to the target, WIAS can also be neglected by keeping whirls short.

But you wouldn't believe this, because you would rather ignore it such that you can remain planted in your own dilusional world where all that can be known has already been discovered by your heroes Darius and Skitril. So naive.

Actually, facts (like statistics) without a frame of reference are anything you want them to be. You disassemble the game code to find out that when dual wielding 2 lwbp weapons it hits at 2fpa, which is 2 times as often as single-lwbp ww. From this you might think that dual wielding is way better than not. Everyone was excited about dual wielding as being godly. It wasn't until people actually tested it, did they find out it wasn't as much as it was cracked up to be. Sure you hit more often than single wielding, but there are so many other factors that it turned out to be just another cool thing.

Facts are proven truths. They can be applied to a hypothesis to help prove or disprove it. They are not "anything you want them to be" as facts stand on their own and cannot be taken out of context, lest they cease to be considered factual.

Now to address the inaccuracies in your response:

1) Dual weilding does not attack at 2fpa. For two last breakpoint weapons; two attacks, one from each weapon, are possible on every fourth frame following the fourth frame. This is 4 frames per two attacks, which is a major difference in the context of hit recovery and blocking.

2) Dual weilding is better than 2 handed. Period. I don't know why you've buried your head in the sand regarding this one, but here are some things for you to chew on:

- Two weapons provides two potential sources of character affecting bonuses, i.e., stats, life/mana, resistances, auras, skills, magic find, etc. This all amounts to a key capability: FLEXIBLITY.
- Two weapons with WW attack more frequently than one weapon, in fact they attack twice as often for WW frames past the fourth. You make reference to this, but it is unclear that you understand the exact difference between dual and 2 handed use.

Find a 2 handed weapon ww barb that can beat blobs or XE-Revolutions (hell, even my dual weilder ww barb, which is not as proficient as his) and I will HAPPILY capitulate this point to you.

And finally rikstaker, yes, I am flaming you. Say stupid ****, and expect to be rebuffed.

 

[rikstaker1]

*Evade those,you don't have an answer to,misinterpret the rest,pass ugly remarks & believe you made a strong point*

Nice tactic,but I am too old for that.

Since you have spoken about your perception of wias & range,more so on dueling:

"Nice knowing you"

rIK.

 

[Halciet]

And finally rikstaker, yes, I am flaming you.

Which is a violation of Forum Rule #1.

I have had enough of the arguing in this post. I don't want to see it again. Rik, do your testing, release your guide, and then we will all decide its validity. Until then, all of you stop your bickering.

*the fury of a sleep-deprived Hal*

-Hal

 

[TJTG]

(The sad thing is that they are almost 2 different sides of the same coin - one is talking about the use of controlled testing, the other is arguing about how that same controlled testing cannot be applied in game situations, both valid too)

 

[rikstaker1]

**
Hal:"easy rik,easy boy,calmdown"
rIK:"woof" #Hal pats him & pulls out a bloody denim rag from his mouth#
**

:cheesy:
----------------------------
I guess there is some confusion I gotta clear here.

The guide is by no means geared towards suggesting anything new, or changing popular perception. You won't see any performance comparison of 2h/wep-shield/dualwield builds. Neither will u see any criteria comparison of range & dualwield. There are stand alone sections for each criteria & builds. I have framed it well & we believe it will manage to sneak through without suggesting or implying general superiority of either build.

As it remains, the guide stands on two ideologies- 'basics' & 'specialization'.

Testing is over, work is under way already. However since it’s a guide, I hope it is treated like one. For the reasons I mentioned in the first para & the fact that its a guide not a report,I don’t think it needs a validity check.However, we are looking forward to any securitization, corrections, point outs, alternate suggestions for the sake of its betterment. We are working really hard on it, particularly with the weapons grading.

Besides utmost care is being taken so that there isn’t any accidental suggestion or implication that is deemed an indirect attack on anyone or any idea.

I apologize to those concerned, Hal in particular, for the stir this thread has caused.

rIK

 

[Poro]

You can make some tests. For example you can try measure the time needed to clean some areas with barbarians at a same level with a same equipment except weapons and with a same stat. points. These tests can be very time consuming, so you can try just a few options. You can try your barbarian with axe and polearm masteries, or two barbarians: axebarb and polebarb. You can try clean specifical area (with specific weapon) few times (5 is maybe enough) and calculate average value of time needed to (run through) clean area. I don't have some pieces of equipment, I have no enough free time, so I can't do this test (and also it depends of playstyle - so I recommend this test to "pro"-players).
Here are my recommendations:
Test1
Hell 8 pl. game (act 2 might hireling)
you can have these setups: ebotd GPA,
two axes - 2*ebotd, grief+ebotd etc. (You can make table for each of these setups, or at least tables of average time for each of these setups.)
1a) Runs through Throne of destruction (kill minions of destruction is needed - don't use trick with teleport or town portal)
1b) Kill Ball
1c, 1d ,...) Clear some representative areas (some tight for example tunnels, some open area etc.)
Test2
Hell 1 pl. game
Same as test1
etc.

Btw., I made some similar tests (I need some clue how to develop character before I made one. So I'm cheating - but only when I need to make some experiments, tests etc. I deleted these characters, because I hate cheats. :wink3: ) Once I tried test WW vs Frenzy. Frenzy was slower in some (tested) areas, but not too much. It' s much accurate and less difficult method than making theoretical models. Also you can be certain that you are not making "cloud castles" i. e. nice theoretical models that doesn't fit into reality. For example (WW vs Frenzy): WW hits roughly 2.5 times faster than Frenzy, but with frenzy you can w/r faster. So you can say: theoreticaly Frenzy is maybe about 2 times slower. - But in real game it's not that case (, at least at some maps).
So I't good to gather "an empirical data". :wink3:

So I hope that somebody will show results of his/her tests (in form of tables) so we can look at them and try to conclude some recommendations (for examle use 2 axes in this map, but in this map GPA is better, or it's roughly the same - difference between times needed to clean map or run through map is statistically insignificant). We need more statistics.

 

[thing]

I really would consider desynch and monster misplacement to be far more important than moving targets. Every 4 frames a check is made, that's only 0.16 seconds, only the fastest monsters might be able to run away fast enough to cause missed hits. That check btw, searches for targets within a 5 range radius. Go into a mob with a short weapon (range 1) and often chosen targets will be too far away to hit. Range is extremely important then.

that's new. i thought i already knew all there was to ww. does that mean if you whirl through a pack of monsters with a range 3 weapon you're wasting 2/5 of your attacks to range alone? (assuming the game checks targets at range 4-5 as often as targets at range 1-3)