Mod9 Max DPS THF Build (WF Frenzied Berserker)

[cforce]

Numbers are extremely far off from Cforces numbers -a good reason to use 60 seconds:
unhasted: 25 - 20 seconds, ,x 3 = 75
hasted 31 x3 = 93
Cforce: Unhasted: 81, Hasted: 97

I made an identical comment over in my attack speed thread, but to make sure I'm covering my bases, I'll repeat here -- 81/min base for THF is the older jjflannigan rates; personally, I saw more like 79, but nevertheless...

The problem with counting attacks is it has a *big* swing on margin of error. Consider that you can count 20 attacks over an interval where anywhere between 19.0001 and 20.9999 swing animations actually elapsed, and you have a +/-1 error. Add into that that the sequence timing itself is uneven, and you can have another error of +1 or so. So, when you're talking about a count of 25 and 31, you're really talking about a count of 23-26 and 29-32 normalized attacks -- which *could* be evidence of anything between a 12% and 40% increase...it tells you very little. As Shade alludes to, going for 60 secs is a bit better -- going for 2 to 3 minutes is better, still, and can probably get the error down to a few percentage points.

For what it's worth, I tried modelling this build with Yargore/A_O's DPS calc and my speed numbers, and it's "in the clump" with the other top-tier 100%-Fort DPS builds I've tried modeling:

<edit: removed these numbers and reposted a couple posts down, with link to my work>

All sorts of other situational bits are in play, but the bottom line is: these builds are all within 10% of each other, and are all 20%+ ahead of a lot of melee builds vs. fortification. They're all good, but none will be crowned "The King", since none is head-and-shoulders above the others.

[Monkey_Archer]

Numbers are extremely far off from Cforces numbers -a good reason to use 60 seconds:
unhasted: 25 - 20 seconds, ,x 3 = 75
hasted 31 x3 = 93
Cforce: Unhasted: 81, Hasted: 97

They are not far off at all. 25 attacks unhasted is for approximately 18.8 seconds as the activation time of the boost was included. 25/18.8 * 60 seconds = 79.78 (assuming activation time is 1.2 seconds)

31/18.8*60 = 98.9

This is pretty close to the 81 attacks posted... and actually agrees with cforce's comment above about seeing "more like 79"

[Monkey_Archer]

As Shade alludes to, going for 60 secs is a bit better -- going for 2 to 3 minutes is better, still, and can probably get the error down to a few percentage points.

I agree that doing minute long or longer tests are definately more accurate. But a boost does not last that long. Doing a minute long test, while activating 2 boosts, then trying to calculate and subtract the exact activation time, then factoring this in will most likely lead to bigger errors then a simple 18.8 second test.

[cforce]

I agree that doing minute long or longer tests are definately more accurate. But a boost does not last that long. Doing a minute long test, while activating 2 boosts, then trying to calculate and subtract the exact activation time, then factoring this in will most likely lead to bigger errors then a simple 18.8 second test.

Yep -- which is why I recorded things in game -- so I could see exactly how long each *swing* was taking. Probably worth moving this over to the attack speed thread if we want to consider further testing methodology discussion, and let this thread get back on track.

I've also amended my previous results. M_A caught an error in the DPS calc spreadsheet, which was under-counting twitch-THF attacks by about 4/minute. I've edited my previous post. While I know Shade doesn't care for DPS calcs, for those of us who do -- the pure FB 20 *does* look like it ends up on top in unboosted 100% fort, and seems to beat out everything except The Shredder when boosts are taken into account:

With full boosts (1 every 30 secs) vs 100% fort:
The Hammer: 360/sec
The Archon: 368/sec
Shade's Barb: 384/sec
The Shredder: 394/sec

Steady state, no boosts, 100% fort:
The Hammer: 317/sec
The Archon: 332/sec
The Shredder: 359/sec
Shade's Barb: 384/sec

Work is here: http://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?k...uS2Z4LUE&hl=en -- please check my work! Note that I didn't use Yargore/A_O's "Extra Critical Multiplier". Guys, if you're still reading, I'm not sure it's taking Burst into account correctly, as a crit range/multiplier of 6/2 with +2 crit multiplier on 19 and 20 should give the same result as 8/2, but does not? I've used 8/2 for Shade's Barb.

[Shade]

with +2 crit multiplier on 19 and 20 should give the same result as 8/2, but does not? I've used 8/2 for Shade's Barb.

Frenzy Berserker gives +3 crit multiplier, not +2.

[cforce]

Frenzy Berserker gives +3 crit multiplier, not +2.

Really? From the release notes:

"Barbarian Frenzied Berserker III
While raging, increases the critical multiplier of all weapons you use by an additional 1 when you roll a natural 19 or 20, bringing the total bonus to 2."

Release notes are wrong?

[Dark-Star]

While in Death Frenzy you get an additional x1 crit.

[Absolute-Omniscience]

Really? From the release notes:

"Barbarian Frenzied Berserker III
While raging, increases the critical multiplier of all weapons you use by an additional 1 when you roll a natural 19 or 20, bringing the total bonus to 2."

Release notes are wrong?

Intentional or not, it would appear they added another +1 multiplier when in death frenzy.

As can be read in the compendium.

[Strakeln]

Oh my god.

That's like a mini-Christmas.

I had not picked up on the fact that Death Frenzy tosses another x1 onto the multiplier.

Wow... just... wow.

Now I really gotta get my barb up to level.

[Monkey_Archer]

Yep -- which is why I recorded things in game -- so I could see exactly how long each *swing* was taking. Probably worth moving this over to the attack speed thread if we want to consider further testing methodology discussion, and let this thread get back on track.

This makes alot of sense now...
A minute long test is fairly accurate, possibly at about +/- 1 swing
a 20 second test multiplied by 3 probably has about a +/- 3 swing accuracy...
Yet, you are testing things on a swing by swing basis? where even a 0.1 second mistake can result in +/- 10 swings over a minute?

While im sure you have all the proper audio (or other) equipment running to make this as accurate as possible, in game any slow down of the game (connection lag / graphics lag / audio lag / "dps lag") can slow down the sound effects as well as individual swing animations (ever hear yourself swinging long after harry is dead?). But, over time, these possible delays on individual swings even out. This is why i think counting swings over a set period of time is more accurate, because regardless of graphics lag, server lag or other factors the end count is almost always the same.

I've also amended my previous results. M_A caught an error in the DPS calc spreadsheet, which was under-counting twitch-THF attacks by about 4/minute. I've edited my previous post. While I know Shade doesn't care for DPS calcs, for those of us who do -- the pure FB 20 *does* look like it ends up on top in unboosted 100% fort, and seems to beat out everything except The Shredder when boosts are taken into account:

With full boosts (1 every 30 secs) vs 100% fort:
The Hammer: 360/sec
The Archon: 368/sec
Shade's Barb: 384/sec
The Shredder: 394/sec

Steady state, no boosts, 100% fort:
The Hammer: 317/sec
The Archon: 332/sec
The Shredder: 359/sec
Shade's Barb: 384/sec

Work is here: http://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?k...uS2Z4LUE&hl=en -- please check my work! Note that I didn't use Yargore/A_O's "Extra Critical Multiplier". Guys, if you're still reading, I'm not sure it's taking Burst into account correctly, as a crit range/multiplier of 6/2 with +2 crit multiplier on 19 and 20 should give the same result as 8/2, but does not? I've used 8/2 for Shade's Barb.

6/2 +2 multiplier is not the same as 8/2.
A +2 multiplier over 19-20 resuts in the equivalent of 4 additional attacks, and 4 attacks worth of seeker damage, 4 extra dice worth of burst damage.
8/2 results in only 2 additional attacks, 4 additional attacks worth of seeker damage, 2 extra worth of burst damage (for elemental burst... alignment burst is completely different).

With a +3 19-20 multiplier for FB 3, the most accurate way to calculate a falchion is 6/3. as both result in 6 extra attack, 6 attacks worht of seeker, and 6 dice worth of burst damage (both elemental, and alignment)

BTW, why do you have 314 extra damage for a crit 20? was that a typo or intentional for how the spreadsheet functions?

[cforce]

This makes alot of sense now...
A minute long test is fairly accurate, possibly at about +/- 1 swing
a 20 second test multiplied by 3 probably has about a +/- 3 swing accuracy...
Yet, you are testing things on a swing by swing basis? where even a 0.1 second mistake can result in +/- 10 swings over a minute?

While im sure you have all the proper audio (or other) equipment running to make this as accurate as possible, in game any slow down of the game (connection lag / graphics lag / audio lag / "dps lag") can slow down the sound effects as well as individual swing animations (ever hear yourself swinging long after harry is dead?). But, over time, these possible delays on individual swings even out. This is why i think counting swings over a set period of time is more accurate, because regardless of graphics lag, server lag or other factors the end count is almost always the same.

Right -- which was why I did it over full intervals with multiple iterations, and got average swing speed results. Again, I'm pretty confident with my methodology, but I'd suggest you read the whole thread -- let's continue this discussion over there?

6/2 +2 multiplier is not the same as 8/2.
A +2 multiplier over 19-20 resuts in the equivalent of 4 additional attacks, and 4 attacks worth of seeker damage, 4 extra dice worth of burst damage.
8/2 results in only 2 additional attacks, 4 additional attacks worth of seeker damage, 2 extra worth of burst damage (for elemental burst... alignment burst is completely different).

With a +3 19-20 multiplier for FB 3, the most accurate way to calculate a falchion is 6/3. as both result in 6 extra attack, 6 attacks worht of seeker, and 6 dice worth of burst damage (both elemental, and alignment)

Yep, agreed, and updated.

BTW, why do you have 314 extra damage for a crit 20? was that a typo or intentional for how the spreadsheet functions?

I've been picking a middle-of-the-road triple-fire should weapon across the board. ~300 on 5% of hits, plus the Blast damage.

[Monkey_Archer]

Right -- which was why I did it over full intervals with multiple iterations, and got average swing speed results. Again, I'm pretty confident with my methodology, but I'd suggest you read the whole thread -- let's continue this discussion over there?

i guess the only real issue i have is that, regardless of methodology, any method should yeild simlar results (within its own respective margin of error), since we are playing the same game.
I have not been able to do any test (and i have done many) that agrees with such a large extra gain for boosted tempest TWFs.

I've been picking a middle-of-the-road triple-fire should weapon across the board. ~300 on 5% of hits, plus the Blast damage.

my appologies then.. i guess i was assuming a tripple positive weapon or something, since most 100% fort targets are immune to elemental effects.

[cforce]

i guess the only real issue i have is that, regardless of methodology, any method should yeild simlar results (within its own respective margin of error), since we are playing the same game.
I have not been able to do any test (and i have done many) that agrees with such a large extra gain for boosted tempest TWFs.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not going to claim that the formula that I arrived at is perfect -- I'm certain it's not. It's simply the best fit for the results I was seeing on my connection. There's some evidence that boost efficacy actually changes based on connection quality, as well. that being said, truly contradictory data is welcomed -- it only serves to give us a more accurate understanding of what's going on! If you think you have results that don't fit, do me a favor -- go to an isolated instance, turn all your graphics settings to low, and do an audio recording that you can email to me; I'll break it down and see what it says.

Actually, let me amend that -- let's do that a bit later -- I'd like to get my own guys to BAB 19-20 first, so that I have some of my own data as well to compare with. If you're up for it, I'll send you a PM later when I'm revalidating results for Mod 9.

my appologies then.. i guess i was assuming a tripple positive weapon or something, since most 100% fort targets are immune to elemental effects.

Yeah, there are a bunch of different assumptions we could make with that. Rather than pick a specific weapon based on current end-game, I picked a weapon that was 'middle of the road' in damage output to split the difference between, say, a Min II and a Lightning Strike. Feel free to pick any other weapon and see what it does to the numbers.

[D'rin]

Frenzy Berserker gives +3 crit multiplier, not +2.

So the on a great axe you are getting x6 modifier for damage?!?

[Strakeln]

So the on a great axe you are getting x6 modifier for damage?!?

Yeah, I almost poo'd my pants when that became apparent too.

[spifflove]

So the on a great axe you are getting x6 modifier for damage?!?

Then it would be better to use a greatsword for 2 5x crits for every 1 6x greatax crit.

[Strakeln]

Then it would be better to use a greatsword for 2 5x crits for every 1 6x greatax crit.

<Someone please correct me if I'm wrong here>

Spiff, I believe the super-crits (additional x3 on top of normal crit multiplier) only apply on rolls of 19 and 20, so that muddies the waters a bit and makes the optimal weapon less clear. I'm not absolutely certain here because there is (as usual) a big gap between what we've been told, what the toolip/compendium says, and what we've been told by devs.

Another thing I've noticed as of late is that the 2-swing method (swing twice, move, swing twice, move) seems to be slower with a greatsword. I know they supposedly straightened out the variances in THF swing speed, but I think this was done from a "full attack sequence" perspective, and not on a per-swing basis. If the two-swing method is less (or more) effective with a greatsword, the best weapon will be even less obvious.

[Absolute-Omniscience]

Then it would be better to use a greatsword for 2 5x crits for every 1 6x greatax crit.

You forget improved critical.
GA would get 2*6x crits
GS would get 2*5x crits AND 2*2x crits

[QuantumFX]

At this point the compendium descriptions for FB II/FB III/Death Frenzy should be added to Borror0’s list of vague/incorrect listings. None of them mention the natural 19-20 limit.

[RACRGUY]

You forget improved critical.
GA would get 2*6x crits
GS would get 2*5x crits AND 2*2x crits

Wait so now you have it listed both ways, where the frenzy increase benefits the IC (Great axe), and where it doesn't (great sword)

I'm guessing you meant

GA= 1*6x, 1*3x
GS+ 2*5x, 2*2x