WW: Total # of Attacks on 4/4 vs. 4/6 claw set-up

[BIGeyedBUG]

Quite a few people have carried out tests including myself

The convincing test is the one mcm did. Clicky. I hope you're planning to credit him in your guide.

I'm asking about this on the AB tech forum anyway. Ruvanal, Myrdinn and others still stop by from time to time. Also there are several people I trust there who can do mod tests. No reflection on mcm--he sounds credible. I just don't know him.

I'm sure WW has to be able to hit twice in the same frame. Otherwise Claw/Shield WW Asns would dominate Claw/Claw ones.

That's not good evidence on its own since c/c gives other advantages. WB, +skills, more life, and variety of mods are some of the ones that come to mind.

 

[Speederländer]

That's not good evidence on its own since c/c gives other advantages. WB, +skills, more life, and variety of mods are some of the ones that come to mind.

Those considerations are balanced on the other side though as well, namely a claw-shield will have more block, faster block rate (IIRC), better attack rating due to higher dex, etc.

The big divider really comes down to number of possible attacks.

 

[BIGeyedBUG]

Those considerations are balanced on the other side though as well, namely a claw-shield will have more block, faster block rate (IIRC), better attack rating due to higher dex, etc.

The big divider really comes down to number of possible attacks.

I understand what you're saying, but making conclusions on a specific game mechanic based on the behavior of players is nutters. There are too many other factors involved. It's a nice place from which to start asking questions, and a poor place from which to answer them. The only thing for that is testing.

 

[Speederländer]

I understand what you're saying, but making conclusions on a specific game mechanic based on the behavior of players is nutters. There are too many other factors involved. It's a nice place from which to start asking questions, and a poor place from which to answer them. The only thing for that is testing.

Yup, I agree.

 

[rikstaker1]

The convincing test is the one mcm did. Clicky. I hope you're planning to credit him in your guide.

Our rivalry is quite famous I reckon,The recent more credible tests were carried out by taz & he arrived at a relevant & accurate conclusion & he did not compare dualwield vs 2handers in terms of dmg,his conclusion was 100% more attacks than singlewielding.Moreover atleast he understands that a check on the 4th & 8th frame doesnt mean wias dont matter.

- One 200-201 damage range 1 weapon reaching -35 ww breakpoint held in one hand.
- Two 200-201 damage range 1 weapons reaching -35 ww breakpoint dual weilded.
- One 200-201 damage range 5 two handed weapon reaching -60 ww breakpoint.

Damage with level 7 ww is 198-199 listed

Ten "8 frame" WW attacks were made for each weapon setup and the results recorded. The length of the WW was controled by myself and confirmed by the number of audible hits "smack smack" this being always TWO for an 8 frame attack.

Damage dealt to the meat bag:
1 handed range 1 weapon: 68, 68, 68, 68, 68, 68, 68, 68, 68, 68
2 handed range 5 weapon: 68, 68, 68, 68, 68, 68, 68, 68, 34, 68
Dual weild 1 handed range 1 weapons: 102, 102, 102, 102, 102, 102, 102, 102, 102, 102

Regarding the 34 for the 2 hander, I can only assume this was a miss due to 5% chance of missing (95% cap on chance to hit.)

He concluded in the first 8 frames:

To reiterate, this is on a SINGLE pvp opponent. I believe these results speak for themselves, with the dual weilding consistently doing 50% more damage by virtue of the fact that both weapons attack on the 8th frame..

Suggest you read this as well.I applied actual weapon dmg numbers to taz's results & it is evidence enough that its only from frame 16 that dualwield gives you more dmg than 2handers.You can also find further above in the thread mcm,stating the 100% more dmg possibility.

I understand we need to mod weapons to deal consistent dmg,but based on the 100% more dmg or 50% in 8 frames derived with dualwielding modded weapons you cant conclude dualwield gives you 100% more dmg or 50% more in 8 frames in-game,thats what mcm did & hence my differences with him.Which range 1 or even range 3 1hander lwbp weapon does the same dmg as range 5 2hander?.If you dont factor the higher dmg of 2handers in your tests you shouldnt conclude dualwield gives you 100% more dmg or 50% more dmg in 8frames,attacks yes but not dmg.Taz did it right but our hero didnt.As for getting him in credits-I doubt that will happen.

Razgriz

 

[rikstaker1]

Onto his long ww tests:

This test was extended to long range WW, again all weapons are at their last breakpoint (4 frame attack checks) starting far from the meat bag to eliminate the 4 and 8 frame attacks, and in this case the dual weilding 1 handed range 1 weapons performed close to 100% greater damage than either the 1 handed single weild or the 2 handed:

I agree that you can achieve 100% more dmg with dualwield or 50% in first 8 frames over single 1handers,but not over 2handers.Thats not possible in-game.His conclusions/interpretation on it can lead novice players astray, who cant spot the obvious flaws in testing conditions.

Razgriz

 

[ilkori]

rikstaker, in mcm's defense, I would like to point this out:

- One 200-201 damage range 1 weapon reaching -35 ww breakpoint held in one hand.
- Two 200-201 damage range 1 weapons reaching -35 ww breakpoint dual weilded.
- One 200-201 damage range 5 two handed weapon reaching -60 ww breakpoint.

You will notice that every single one of his modded weapons had the same damage (single or dual wield), meaning that given his testing parameters the values and important conclusions are correct. Anyone who reads (and tries to understand) his conclusions will see the obvious "flaws" in the interpretation you give his information.

The only bone I have to pick about his testing at this point would be in regards to whether or not his PvP conclusions are worth including with his testing. Being niether an experienced PvP player or hardcore Barbarian player, I honestly don't give a rip, and would rather not see them included.

 

[rikstaker1]

rikstaker, in mcm's defense, I would like to point this out:

- One 200-201 damage range 1 weapon reaching -35 ww breakpoint held in one hand.
- Two 200-201 damage range 1 weapons reaching -35 ww breakpoint dual weilded.
- One 200-201 damage range 5 two handed weapon reaching -60 ww breakpoint.

You will notice that every single one of his modded weapons had the same damage (single or dual wield), meaning that given his testing parameters the values and important conclusions are correct. Anyone who reads (and tries to understand) his conclusions will see the obvious "flaws" in the interpretation you give his information.

The only bone I have to pick about his testing at this point would be in regards to whether or not his PvP conclusions are worth including with his testing. Being niether an experienced PvP player or hardcore Barbarian player, I honestly don't give a rip, and would rather not see them included.

The last paragraph is the most interesting(more like I see the same """flaw""" (bone) you pointed out but I dont give a damn,since I dont play barbs).

mcm's test & my arguments were meant for the barb class & not assns though his dualwield over wep/shiled results are applicable to yours.I was replying to Beb's suggestion of including him in the credits of my guide also for barb class,I cant figure out how that could trigger an irritated response from you.

Actually,your comment on parameter just made my job easier. So you noticed that every single setup had the same damage though strangely you didn’t mention 2handers. Which means that his results & conclusions are true to his test & parameters alone, not in-game. That’s no biggie. The whole point of testing is to determine & better the choices/options in-game.

K an e.g, I am testing 3 engines for their hp or initial acceleration in 0-100 or whatever. One a V6 one a twinV6 & another a V12.What I’d then do- is restrict the power of the V12 to the same hp as a V6,I am not sure why I’d do that & as a result quite understandably the power output of twinV6 setup would be higher. So I’d give a report to the folks high up stating that twinV6 is superior even to the V12.

Check this test-same method but addressing the right question & nothing beyond-how much more often does dualwielding attack over a single 1hweapon against a single target?. Similar everything- but limited to the point & no 2handers in the tests bottom-line: an accurate & true to the game conclusion. Therefore much more easier to accept. All weapons he used were 1handed & modified by minimum dmg jewels.

We cant blatantly ignore the higher damage of 2handers, mcm was better of not using them in the tests or attaching a condition in conclusion, a side note, anything that would highlight & state that even 2handers were modded to do the same dmg & that may not necessarily be true in-game.

We must be careful when we adopt the role of testers to use the right phrases & attach conditions wherever necessary, not everyone’s understanding is as deep as your, mine, or mcm ‘s.

I fully agree to Taz’s decision to not to factor them at all-why? Since the difference between the dmg of 2 & 1handers is relative & varies with case-that’s why I used the results from Taz’s tests & applied in-game weapon stats to explore the actual damage output of dualwield vs 2handers.

I came in peace. :xrollseye

Razgriz

 

[ilkori]

*backs off* Didn't mean to offend. I jumped into the middle of a rivalry without reading the full threads - that was my bad. Thanks for the lesson anyway. My misunderstanding popped out of one phrase that was unclear rather than a full disagreement/hostility. (That, and I posted a bit too late for my sanity last night, so things weren't making as much sense as they should).

"The whole point of testing is to determine & better the choices/options in-game."
In the long run, yes. However, you need to know the mechanics first. After reading the full thread, I think we could have saved a bit of time just getting a link to that. :lol: mcm posted his valid results first, then taz added his. Applying the game scenarios later is great, but factoring in the effects of shield vs no shield and player skill make even that analysis nigh impossible for anything but the most basic duels (i.e. BvB).

Anyway, we didn't want more summaries, we wanted the meat of the discussion. Assassins aren't mindless zombies, and now I can say the same thing for the Barbarian forum as well. In all sincerity, thank you for being willing to share your results with us. The end results don't make as much of a difference to us (except in melee duels), but knowing how it works anyway is a good thing.


And now, it's time for a jig! :jig:

 

[rikstaker1]

However, you need to know the mechanics first.... we wanted the meat of the discussion.

Glad you are getting the idea,hopefully in the future you'd respect the folks who carry out test(zang also),who are just trying to establish the facts(meat) that you are presumably looking for.Just because you dont have the time to test or 'look into' the game code for that purpose doesnt mean you should swat attempts by those who are willing.

Though the first line aplies to me as well,I am just making sure it is done right. :uhhuh:

The 'summaries' that you speak of are ww mechanics/rules from credible sources like Hammerman & RTB.Those are from the game code & from my experience & observation they are true.

Your comment that you dont want more of that is in confirmation with what folks in my place speak about here.You are just taking that extra step to prove them right.

I still stand for peace. :xrollseye

Razgriz

 

[ilkori]

The 'summaries' that you speak of are ww mechanics/rules from credible sources like Hammerman & RTB.

Those names I recognize, yours I didn't. Now I do, but that doesn't change my point of view asof a few days ago. I was just trying to make sure it was done right the same as you were. Respect is another issue, but you can't expect too much if I'm going to play an Assassin. j/k


By the way, have you taken another look at the #hits equation I posted earlier? I think there could be some fine tuning so that it gets accurate results without the disclaimer that there might be one less hit. This is especially in regards to the issue of when the frames are counted from. Is it the 4th frame of the whirlwind regardless of target location, or is it dependant on other factors such as the 5-tile hit check.

Oh yeah, and is a tile the same distance as a yard from other sources? It would be really handy if they were the same, but knowing Blizzard anything is possible.

 

[rikstaker1]

I havent looked at posts in detail,as something else got my attention,I'll check those & post my comment.

Razgriz

 

[rikstaker1]

I havent looked at other posts in detail,as something else got my attention,I'll check those & post my comment.

Razgriz

 

[rikstaker1]

Damn database errors, I couldnt edit my posts,sorry for the double post.

By the way, have you taken another look at the #hits equation I posted earlier? I think there could be some fine tuning so that it gets accurate results without the disclaimer that there might be one less hit. This is especially in regards to the issue of when the frames are counted from. Is it the 4th frame of the whirlwind regardless of target location, or is it dependant on other factors such as the 5-tile hit check.

Oh yeah, and is a tile the same distance as a yard from other sources? It would be really handy if they were the same, but knowing Blizzard anything is possible.

A tile unit (t.u) is 2/3 of a yard.

Why would the 4th frame of ww be regardless of target location? Ww checks for targets in a five tile radius & proceeds to attack them only if the target tile is within weapon range.

I am working on a max hits formula as well,but I am double checking the issues with variable input units from various scraps of info from LL & basin,but I am sure that it still wont be 100% accurate as well.

Razgriz

 

[ilkori]

I guess the reason I was asking about the checking was the difference in testing between the "short" and "long" whirls where the first frame (and maybe more) were purposely skipped.

Anyway, I think the formula I have is accurate, though some unit conversions might be in order since r/w speed is usually given in yards per second. I would assume that weapon range is in tiles since the maximum check distance for WW is 5 tiles.

 

[rikstaker1]

I guess the reason I was asking about the checking was the difference in testing between the "short" and "long" whirls where the first frame (and maybe more) were purposely skipped.

How could you get confused so easily? They were skipped to eliminate the loss of 1hit in the fourth frame when dualwielding,that has no bearing on the necessity of target to be in weapon range for attack at any delay.

I doubt it is safe to assume weapon range is in tiles(I was tempted as well, but I wont do that untill I can back that up with tests)

Thats all from me now,back to my home.Nice knowing you. :xrollseye

Razgriz