New DPS chart

[Aaxeyu]

Somebody tested it . . . http://forums.ddo.com/showpost.php?p...1&postcount=36

This is how it looks like without the tempest I attackspeed:

[k1ngp1n]

This is how it looks like without the tempest I attackspeed:

That looks a lot more like the current state of rangers...

[grodon9999]

That looks about right. Is that an easy variable to change in the calc or did you make a universal change to the "if-then-else" stuff?

Monster is still up there.

[grodon9999]

That looks a lot more like the current state of rangers...

Which is why we need a boost dammit! Exploiter will be a little higher with the rogue level.

These number actually "look" right judging from what I see, who pulls aggro, who kills faster, etc . . .

[Aaxeyu]

That looks about right. Is that an easy variable to change in the calc or did you make a universal change to the "if-then-else" stuff?

Monster is still up there.

You can just delete row 160 and it's fixed.

[k1ngp1n]

Which is why we need a boost dammit!

Oh yeah, fully agreed.

My 'main' so to speak is an elf 18 ranger/2 fighter with scimitars. She's essentially the build Turbine is saying not to play.

[Xithos]

That looks a lot more like the current state of rangers...

Im not sure if the underlying assumption is that the Ranger build hits on a 2 but that is definitely not going to be the case on a Half-Orc Ranger maxing out the power attack enhancement line on specific unbuffed and undestructed monsters. Rangers are definitely UP and need some love IMO in comparison to Fighters, Barbarians, and Monks who are dominating the epic scene.

Nice work on putting some numbers together and including a visual representation that does not hurt my eyes. +1 to Aaxeyu.

[Kamo]

Why would a Twitching THF barb be out dps'd by one that isnt twitching?

[grodon9999]

Im not sure if the underlying assumption is that the Ranger build hits on a 2 but that is definitely not going to be the case on a Half-Orc Ranger maxing out the power attack enhancement line on specific unbuffed and undestructed monsters. Rangers are definitely UP and need some love IMO in comparison to Fighters, Barbarians, and Monks who are dominating the epic scene.

I think it's safe to assume though, my human hits nearly everything on a 2 and he's not max-STR. The additional PA penalties can be accounted for by the additional STR.

Nice work on putting some numbers together and including a visual representation that does not hurt my eyes. +1 to Aaxeyu.

Yes, thank you.

[grodon9999]

Why would a Twitching THF barb be out dps'd by one that isnt twitching?

Glancing-blows I assume? Can't download the calc at work.

[Chai]

I thought you didn't believe in Spreadsheets?

I believe the spreadsheets are the theory. Bantering in theory only is where the hilarity ensues because I like to back up theory with application to prove or disprove it. This information is all nice to have, but when faced with an applicable example, we see how many variables there actually are in a situational game like DnD that remain unaccounted for.

For example, given a static HP value, you could as an absolute calculate how long it should take to kill Harry on elite with 8 TWF fighters, and then calculate how long it should take for the same number of THF barbarians. Subtract the lower value from the higher value, and and you could put some real significance to how much actual in game impact these build decisions have, on paper. Divide by 8 and you now have a time differential for how much "better" it is to be a cookie cutter kensai than it is to be a cookie cutter barbarian in that fight, heh.

Then, run the encounter twice on video, once with a 8 barbarians and again with 7 barbarians and one kensai in the mix. Knowing the "on paper" time differential between how much faster it is for the 8 kensai to complete, compared to the time the 8 barbs completed, we can divide that number by 8 to show how much faster the encounter should complete subtracting one barb and adding one kensai, right?

I see ALOT of effort put into learning attack speeds and calculating DPS, both on paper and with actual testing. I would be interested in seeing if the application of this holds solid to the theory and calculations behind it, and what the % variances are in application -vs- spreadsheet. V already provides this data in the attack speed analysis. I am wondering if those % would come close to matching up to the % in the application tests like the example I outlined, or if there are too many unaccounted for variables in the mix of actual play that get tossed out due to lack of any solid method to account for them on paper.

It shows the difference of all the DPS builds to be so close I don't know why we bother arguing with each other

Exactly!!!

But not a DPS thread goes by where someone isnt bantering about showing your numbers or what you say has no relevance.

[stoolcannon]

Couple of points.

1. The chart would be more useful if you didn't stack the DPS measurements. As it is you can't compare the different scenarios visually except the bottom scenario. Goes against the purpose of using a chart.

2. While I do find the numbers interesting I'm not a huge fan of these types of DPS comparisons.

First of all they don't take into account any sort of fortification nor do they take into account longer stretches where a lot of haste boosts/power surges and other shorter duration attack boosts run dry.

They just end up misleading people into thinking certain classes just can't compete and then we end up with 1,000 cookie cutter builds.

I do very much appreciate the hard work and effort you put into it though and despite my opinions will still return and check the numbers again next time. (And rage because despite the fact that barbs have no ac, beat themselves to death and can't use clickies they still aren't at the top of the list).

[Aaxeyu]

Why would a Twitching THF barb be out dps'd by one that isnt twitching?

Because of glancing blows. 60% of your weapon damage + 21 damage from frenzy on 75% of your attacks is quite alot of damage.

[stoolcannon]

Glancing-blows I assume? Can't download the calc at work.

Most definitely glancing blows. Glancing blow damage is significant now and you don't really want to do more than spacebar twitch unless it's against held mobs. Against held mobs twitching is vastly superior.

[grodon9999]

Couple of points.

1. The chart would be more useful if you didn't stack the DPS measurements. As it is you can't compare the different scenarios visually except the bottom scenario. Goes against the purpose of using a chart.

2. While I do find the numbers interesting I'm not a huge fan of these types of DPS comparisons.

First of all they don't take into account any sort of fortification nor do they take into account longer stretches where a lot of haste boosts/power surges and other shorter duration attack boosts run dry.

They just end up misleading people into thinking certain classes just can't compete and then we end up with 1,000 cookie cutter builds.

I do very much appreciate the hard work and effort you put into it though and despite my opinions will still return and check the numbers again next time. (And rage because despite the fact that barbs have no ac, beat themselves to death and can't use clickies they still aren't at the top of the list).

This is calced for a 5 minute fight which is a standard boss beat-down. You can adjust the time to however long you like to see how people are averaging out. You can set the number of haste-boosts used as well to see what a toons damage output would be once they are 'gassed' on hast boosts.

You can set the fort level in the calc. The second numbers is for Devil DR

Face it, you don't like it because it doesn't paint your favorite class in the best light :P

[k1ngp1n]

1. The chart would be more useful if you didn't stack the DPS measurements. As it is you can't compare the different scenarios visually except the bottom scenario. Goes against the purpose of using a chart.

Here is it without being stacked. I just copied the numbers over.



Edit: I typoed on the chart - Ftr 16/Rog 7/x 1 should be Ftr 12/Rog 7/x 1

[Renvar]

The FvS numbers seem off by about 10%. FvS seem to run about 70%-75 of the dps of a pure melee. This chart seems to have them in a 60% range.

I notice the rogue is 30% ahead of the FvS on 100% fort mobs. That indicates that the rogue seems to be getting credit for Haste Boost IV being on constantly. What FvS offensive buffs are factored in? (Divine Favor, Divine Power, Recitation, etc)?

[Soleran]

That looks a lot more like the current state of rangers...

Is the ranger dps using tempest using 100% offhand swings and 5% doublestrikes?

[SEMPER]

Couple of points.

1. The chart would be more useful if you didn't stack the DPS measurements. As it is you can't compare the different scenarios visually except the bottom scenario. Goes against the purpose of using a chart.

2. While I do find the numbers interesting I'm not a huge fan of these types of DPS comparisons.

First of all they don't take into account any sort of fortification nor do they take into account longer stretches where a lot of haste boosts/power surges and other shorter duration attack boosts run dry.

They just end up misleading people into thinking certain classes just can't compete and then we end up with 1,000 cookie cutter builds.

I do very much appreciate the hard work and effort you put into it though and despite my opinions will still return and check the numbers again next time. (And rage because despite the fact that barbs have no ac, beat themselves to death and can't use clickies they still aren't at the top of the list).

The graph shows a difference in DPS against different levels of fortification and please tell me what quest do you run out of haste boots/power surges , when most kensai's have 7 or 8 of them ??

[voodoogroves]

It shows the difference of all the DPS builds to be so close I don't know why we bother arguing with each other

Amen.