New DPS chart

[Consumer]

How does 18barb/2 fighter twf fare against monster and blitz? Was curious since that appears to be another popular variant.

Scratch that saw the 18/1/1 consumer posted close enough

18/2 is at 602.24 using the same rules as the chart I posted. The 18/1/1 is at 596.82 without SA so you're gaining just under 6 DPS for Fighter Str I.

So for the last level of Barb your choice is:

5.42 DPS from Strength
or
20.27 DPS from Sneak Attack

Against 50% fort you're still gaining more DPS from SA, however at 100% you gain no benefit from SA.



This of course also relies on you avoiding agro and as this build is the highest DPS build (without threat reduction) you wont be benefiting from it all of the time. The sneak attack will provide more damage against autocrit targets (6.5 average vs the 4 from str with picks). With the 18/2 you also get an extra feat and can include the barb past life or another feat to increase DPS (OTWF or other).

[Goldeneye]

Any chance of getting a 4th "scenario"?

1. 0% Fort (Trash)
2. 50% Fort/DR (Boss)
3. 100% Fort (Portal/Undead)
4. Auto-Crit: Epic

I'd be interesting in the dps comparisons of classes vs. held mobs in epics.

[Razcar]

I can't download the calc until I get home . . . but did you put the clawset . . . with it's hate amplification . . . on a rogue?

Think it equals itself out since all the builds have Tharnes for extra +8 damage while the non-rogues have no real way of lowering aggro, and will thus often loose the +8.

[stoolcannon]

Well, I appreciate your putting in these thoughts. But, it is a far cry from "lots of things." I mean, let's be honest, it is two things and you need a caveat to it as well.

We could list every type of undead and include every type of construct -- and that would be an impressive list. But, DPS discussions really are about end bosses. As we have seen thus far, that list is dramatically smaller -- and, in the one example provided melee DPS is noted as not being the main tactic. Against non-boss undead the drop off in DPS is mostly irrelevant -- certainly not an argument in favor of some other build.

And, I'm not sure that too many people have really worked very hard on the second part of your list. This thread isn't really the place for the discussion, but....

I am assuming that in the calculations the rogue is a max STR half-orc with no other stats really being important. How squishy is that half-orc if combined with min DEX to qualify TWF and remaining points in CON?

IMO that is something worth considerable discussion over in the rogue forum.

FWIW, changes to opportunist calculations are needed before we get too far into the discussion. Instead of the original assumption of 40%/90% we need the numbers run at 45%/90%. We also need to see the impact of removing SA against 100% fort.

compared to a 900hp barb or fighter very squishy.

A good example is my 18\2 Palo monk. I take almost no spell damage and have 530hp. Granted I'm only just starting to work on his ac but the other night in TOD the main tank went down and i ended up with aggro. I lasted about 1 minute because i don't have the ho to deal with his massive melee hits. Anyone with under 700hp should not attempt tanking him regardless of saves or ac. Anything under 400hp and your in danger of dropping. Considering most rogues sit around 400-450 to start its not safe.

I can't even begin to count the number of rogues I've seen drop in shroud part 4 or 5.

Having sub500 hp would make it very hard on a healer due to the potential inability to scroll heal and keep them out of the danger zone.


Again a well built and well played rogue should do well in almost any situation but there are many times that another case is a better choice.

i think a couple of rogues in any given raid is great though.

[eonfreon]

compared to a 900hp barb or fighter very squishy.

LOL. 900 hp Fighter? How many Toughness Feats is that? 10? Would have to be even more then that.

[SEMPER]

compared to a 900hp barb or fighter very squishy.

A good example is my 18\2 Palo monk. I take almost no spell damage and have 530hp. Granted I'm only just starting to work on his ac but the other night in TOD the main tank went down and i ended up with aggro. I lasted about 1 minute because i don't have the ho to deal with his massive melee hits. Anyone with under 700hp should not attempt tanking him regardless of saves or ac. Anything under 400hp and your in danger of dropping. Considering most rogues sit around 400-450 to start its not safe.

I can't even begin to count the number of rogues I've seen drop in shroud part 4 or 5.

Having sub500 hp would make it very hard on a healer due to the potential inability to scroll heal and keep them out of the danger zone.


Again a well built and well played rogue should do well in almost any situation but there are many times that another case is a better choice.

i think a couple of rogues in any given raid is great though.

540 hps is what my Ranger/Paly/Monk has for now and 85 ac and he tanks horoth and all of the other raid bosses on a regular basis np , so depending on your palys ac to me that was about the only thing going against you not surviving , imho that build you have is a nice hate tank and will be with a few minor items and weapons that maybe you just dont have yet and its not his melee hits you have to worry about its his discentegrate

As for rogues tanking / i have seen it done many times both ac wise and just pure dps/hp wise , just most don't think about it and as you say laugh at the notion of it , but to me that is whats so funny about it honestly who cares as long as its a smooth run and you get a completion but the funny part to me is when my halfing ranger holds agro from those 900 hps barbs and fighters that wanted to tank and then are told i am

[oweieie]

A good example is my 18\2 Palo monk. I take almost no spell damage and have 530hp. Granted I'm only just starting to work on his ac but the other night in TOD the main tank went down and i ended up with aggro. I lasted about 1 minute because i don't have the ho to deal with his massive melee hits. Anyone with under 700hp should not attempt tanking him regardless of saves or ac. Anything under 400hp and your in danger of dropping. Considering most rogues sit around 400-450 to start its not safe.

Had sub 500 HP ranger with 80ish AC tank ToD no problem. Clerics don't even use SP on him.

[Therigar]

compared to a 900hp barb or fighter very squishy.

I think the real issue here is that few rogues would intentionally hate tank. The bulk of their DPS, and the reason they outperform every other build on 0% & 50% calcs, is because they DON'T have aggro.

So, any comparison when talking DPS that strays off into "well you can't tank Horoth" is pretty silly. First, rogues want max DPS so of course they don't want to be tanking Horoth and second, without the sneak damage their DPS drops so low that they probably shouldn't still be tanking Horoth after the other melees chime in. If they are then the other melees are weak-sauce from the start and need to reroll.

The more relevant discussion is about whether the rogue can survive the melee damage when they suddenly become the aggro target.

Let's be honest. If the boss can be hate or intimi tanked then the rogue should never be pulling the aggro off because of DPS. If that happens the so-called tank really should be flushed and a more capable character rerolled.

So, the only situation that the rogue should ever need worry about is one where the boss's aggression randomly jumps from character to character. Where does that happen?

I know that Harry can be intimitanked in part 4 but that he seems to just have random aggro in part 5. Are there any other bosses where the aggro seems to be random?

Because, if there isn't, then in a group with adequate heals and an effective tank there should never be a situtation where anyone needs to worry about aggro. And, in those cases anything ~500 HP seems adequate if I've read the forums rightly.

[asphodeli]

rogues are DPS, yo.

[Therigar]

Just to put more fuel on this fire concerning rogue DPS. Are we agreed that rogues should have minimum 40% hate reduction going on?

That means the hate they generate is only equal to 60% of the damage they are doing. 646.75 damage then equates to 388.05 unmodified damage for hate purposes. 456.84 drops to 274.10 for hate generation.

Every build listed in the chart generates more hate than the rogue if we take this into account.

That means if the rogue is pulling aggro one of two things is going on: 1) the rogue failed to take threat reduction and deserves whatever happens or 2) that DPS machine doing the hate tank ain't no DPS machine, delete it and reroll.

[grodon9999]

Had sub 500 HP ranger with 80ish AC tank ToD no problem. Clerics don't even use SP on him.

That's very risky, one rolled "1" and it's all over.

[The_Phenx]

Any chance of getting a 4th "scenario"?

1. Auto-Crit: Epic

STR Based HORC TWF Assassin III 20 Rogue using picks.

Nothing will touch it.

That be my Spikey Build I have been working on.

Should be about 400 per hit.

[grodon9999]

Just to put more fuel on this fire concerning rogue DPS. Are we agreed that rogues should have minimum 40% hate reduction going on?

These numbers DO NOT REPRESENT the DPS that 99% of the players out there will be putting out. These are maxed, or closed to maxed, geared toons that are less than 1% of the players joining your shroud/ToD/VoD. If you're a high-DPS rogue odds are you will be in position where you will have to NOT steal aggro from a not-so high DPS barb. Replaced that ESoS with a Mineral II and the barb is only putting out about 400 DPS WITH ALL THE OTHER UBBER-GEAR.

That's why you should have 40% threat reduction.

[PwnHammer40K]

Including Paladins in any linear DPS comparison is folly. You'd have to create further scenarios: Was the target Evil, and/or an Evil Outsider? Was Divine Sacrifice being used as much as possible? Were Exalted Smites being used?

Also, were Divine Favor, Divine Might, Zeal etc constantly on?

EDIT: Ah nevermind, I just read this post later:

Those are all accounted for. Smite regeneration over time is also accounted for.
Divine sacrifice is counted as used every 3 seconds here, but can be easily be changed.

[Therigar]

These numbers DO NOT REPRESENT the DPS that 99% of the players out there will be putting out. These are maxed, or closed to maxed, geared toons that are less than 1% of the players joining your shroud/ToD/VoD. If you're a high-DPS rogue odds are you will be in position where you will have to NOT steal aggro from a not-so high DPS barb. Replaced that ESoS with a Mineral II and the barb is only putting out about 400 DPS WITH ALL THE OTHER UBBER-GEAR.

That's why you should have 40% threat reduction.

Are you still posting? I thought you'd be done when you couldn't come up with the "lots of things" that rogues have trouble at. Stool at least gave us two....

Here's the problem with your logic. If the other characters are weaker geared so is the rogue. So blaming aggro shifting on super-geared rogue over weak-geared tanks is as silly as your previous assertion.

The whole point of DPS calculations is to look at what the tricked out build can do. As I said in other places, if you don't like the parameters then tell us what, fundamentally equivalent, gear you want on the characters.

If everyone is uber geared and the barb is only putting out 400 DPS because he, for some reason, is the only character w/o uber gear then maybe he should just stand off to the side and go RAWRRRRR* a lot.

Not sure I spelled rawrrrr correctly. But, it is a gimp barbarian that you want us to compare things to....

*I'm not even going to try to mimic the semi-orgasmic squeal that comes out of the female barbarians.

[Therigar]

That's very risky, one rolled "1" and it's all over.

Yeah, that probably explains why he mentioned it. You know, after successfully tanking TOD on multiple occassions he just wanted us to know how big his cajones are since he's such a risk taker....

[EustaceTrevelyan]

I'm fairly certain it was corrected in U7, V was right that Tempest I was still giving 10% but I swear I "felt" slower after U7 corrected this.

It was, tested it fixed on lama before that thread noting that it hadn't been fixed was up Ah well, had a bit more of the twilight of tempest I uberness. Now it's a dead splash (New tempest, if yer going that way, is II)

[grodon9999]

Are you still posting? I thought you'd be done when you couldn't come up with the "lots of things" that rogues have trouble at. Stool at least gave us two....

No I just generally get bored of people who aren't too bright.

Here's the problem with your logic. If the other characters are weaker geared so is the rogue. So blaming aggro shifting on super-geared rogue over weak-geared tanks is as silly as your previous assertion.

The whole point of DPS calculations is to look at what the tricked out build can do. As I said in other places, if you don't like the parameters then tell us what, fundamentally equivalent, gear you want on the characters.

If everyone is uber geared and the barb is only putting out 400 DPS because he, for some reason, is the only character w/o uber gear then maybe he should just stand off to the side and go RAWRRRRR* a lot.

So who's the better tank - the 400 DPS Barb with 900 HP or the 600 DPS rogue, who's damage goes to ***** when he has agro, with 500? Who are you going to put on elite Horoth?

You can't take this chart as gospel as more than 99% of the people out there WILL NOT have the gear needed to meet this numbers.

[Vanshilar]

Any chance of getting a 4th "scenario"?

1. 0% Fort (Trash)
2. 50% Fort/DR (Boss)
3. 100% Fort (Portal/Undead)
4. Auto-Crit: Epic

I'd be interesting in the dps comparisons of classes vs. held mobs in epics.

I did some auto-crit numbers in this thread. The interesting thing is that the Monster came out on top, even more than rogues (assuming I did the calculations correctly, I haven't fully double-checked everything yet). One thing that people tend to forget is that although 6 tempest splashes lost out a lot in Update 7, they're still worth 5% more hits, which is really useful in auto-crits as opposed to a rogue's DPS which is substantially sneak attack-based, and hence doesn't benefit from auto-crit as much.


For comparing the relative DPS between builds, I prefer doing it in this format:



(The specs I used were given in the thread linked above; note that they will differ somewhat from Aaxeyu's numbers because we assumed somewhat different "standard" gear, but most of the builds should have similar relative DPS if everything goes right and assuming I plugged in numbers correctly; the exception is that I assume eSoS does not have devil's ruin to bypass DR. As a disclaimer, I haven't gone through and fully double-checked each of the setups yet, so there may be some errors.)

The build is on the left, with the bars going to the right. The reason for this is that English is largely a horizontal language, and this allows enough space to describe each build without interfering with the space needed for the description of neighboring builds (the alternative is to rotate the text so that it's vertical, but that makes it harder to read). This allows the comparison of many different builds at once if desired; I've put over 30 builds in there to compare them at once without it looking too cluttered (to me, at least). The bars for the different scenarios are overlapped, so that they don't affect the visual perception of the other scenarios, yet stay within the row for that build. Hopefully it's easy to figure out which number corresponds to which scenario/build in the chart. If it's not clear, "+fa" refers to having favored enemy, while "-fa" refers to not having favored enemy, for ranger DPS.

Note that it turns out that for 50% fort, the DPS for regular 15 DR (in which case a lightning 2 khopesh is used for TWF) is very similar to the DPS for high DR (in which case a mineral 2 khopesh is used for TWF), except for THF where the ESoS is still helpful versus normal 15 DR. They can pretty much be considered identical I think, for TWF. I haven't done 100% fort yet because I'm not sure yet what sort of standard weapon should be used.

[NaturalHazard]

I dont like these charts because they make me feel gimp