U27 Items Official Discussion - Round 2

[moo_cow]

BDR isn't useless simply because its not the finished formula. The variables it represents are present in any DPS calculation worth its salt. Calling it useless demonstrates lack of understanding of how the game calculates damage. It is indeed a direct contradiction in logic to call it useless, then be interested in calculating damage output using the very same variables and showing how they interact with the other items in the build which are not part of the weapon itself. Without this data, you would not be able to even make such a calculation, nor would the game.

You understand that the BDR that they give us isn't even correct right? If you want to take a looks at a useful part of the weapon looks at the damage die, the crit multiplier, the damage, and the crit range. Because if you think the game needs BDR to perform anything, than you are mistaken. It needs those things I already listed, and while those are the things involved in BDR it makes BDR not necessary. Especially since it isn't even correct and especially not as a data point. BDR isn't even correct, and you think it is necessary for the game? Ridiculous. You want accuracy and proper data, look at those numbers without bdr, and also factor in every other source of damage.

BDR is not necessary to perform calculations. The factors involved in it are, which in fact make up BDR. But it isn't like BDR scales up as you get damage. Therefore BDR has no significant use as a data point. The formula for calculating damage is of course useful. But that isn't what BDR is. BDR is a number that attempts to use the factors to determine how useful a weapon is. And it does that, but it is a meaningless value. You don't need BDR to calculate any damage. You can simply look at the factors on the weapon.

[moo_cow]

Incorrect. The same variables are present in any DPS calc worth its salt. Until you realize this, any attempt at explaining comparative damage not including those, is incomplete, and therefore by your own logic, irrelevant, as in its incompleteness it doesn't reflect damage in any meaningful way.

Lol what are you arguing here. You seem to be disagreeing with a non stated argument. I know that those are factored in a dps calc, I also know that more than that is factored in a dps calc. You don't even seem to understand what is being argued.

[Chai]

You don't need BDR to calculate any damage. You can simply look at the factors on the weapon.

You don't need a vehicle to drive on the road. You just need to sit in a chair while a combustion engine propels this four wheeled contraption forward in relation to the pressure you apply to the pedal on the right, and turns according to the direction you spin the steering wheel.

I don't need to type to post this reply. I just need to press these keys on a keyboard in a specific order, each of which adds a character or space to the post, which can be arranged in a specific sequence to convey an idea similar to written language.

[Axeyu]

You don't need a vehicle to drive on the road. You just need to sit in a chair while a combustion engine propels this four wheeled contraption forward in relation to the pressure you apply to the pedal on the right, and turns according to the direction you spin the steering wheel.

I don't need to type to post this reply. I just need to press these keys on a keyboard in a specific order, each of which adds a character or space to the post, which can be arranged in a specific sequence to convey an idea similar to written language.

I don't think you quite understand what BDR is. It's not a part of the damage calculations. In my DPS calc I never arrive at the BDR number in any way, shape or form. It's a specific formula that happens to be using some of the same variables. It's not a number that just naturally comes up when calculating damage.

[Chai]

I don't think you quite understand what BDR is. It's not a part of the damage calculations. In my DPS calc I never arrive at the BDR number in any way, shape or form. It's a specific formula that happens to be using some of the same variables. It's not a number that just naturally comes up when calculating damage.

1. Doesn't matter how you group the numbers, they are the same numbers. You can call them what you wish and group them however you like, they are the same numbers, all of which are accounted for in your own spreadsheet calc. THe fact that they are also grouped together and called BDR in game does not refute this fact. They are the same numbers and you account for them all in your spreadsheet.

2. When you insinuate I don't understand it, youre indicating Im correct, because that's what people do when they have no refutation for the point made - accuse the opposition of not understanding or attack their cred rather than attacking the point.

The discussion cannot go further due to the these roadblocks. Failure to acknowledge 1, and too much resorting to 2.

[Axeyu]

1. Doesn't matter how you group the numbers, they are the same numbers. You can call them what you wish and group them however you like, they are the same numbers, all of which are accounted for in your own spreadsheet calc.

2. When you insinuate I don't understand it, youre indicating Im correct, because that's what people do when they have no refutation for the point made - accuse the opposition of not understanding or attack their cred rather than attacking the point.

The discussion cannot go further due to the these roadblocks. Failure to acknowledge 1, and too much resorting to 2.

No, you just don't understand. You are not even responding to the attempts to explain it.

I'll try again.
Lets say I have the useful numbers 6 and 12. I multiply them and get 72. See, now I don't have the numbers 6 and 12 any more. You cant say that 72 is useful because you can get 6 and 12 from it, you can get many more numbers from it aswell. Nor can you say that it is useful just because it came about from the useful numbers.
The same principle applies to BDR. It takes a bunch of useful numbers and does some calculations and spits out some result. My point is that the result has no use. The correlation to actual weapon damage is far too weak, and you can't use the number as help for any further calculations.

By the way, remeber that dissmissing an argument =/= refuting an argument.
My argument would be the simplest ever to refute if it was wrong, just demonstrate a use for the BDR number and you are done.

[Chai]

No, you just don't understand. You are not even responding to the attempts to explain it.

I'll try again.
Lets say I have the useful numbers 6 and 12. I multiply them and get 72. See, now I don't have the numbers 6 and 12 any more. You cant say that 72 is useful because you can get 6 and 12 from it, you can get many more numbers from it aswell. Nor can you say that it is useful just because it came about from the useful numbers.
The same principle applies to BDR. It takes a bunch of useful numbers and does some calculations and spits out some result. My point is that the result has no use.

By the way, remeber that dissmissing an argument =/= refuting an argument.
My argument would be the simplest ever to refute if it was wrong, just demonstrate a use for the BDR number and you are done.

Nope. This is not refutation that THOSE SAME NUMBERS are used in your spreadsheet. The fact that they are also grouped together as BDR in game does not refute this. In your example, 6 doesn't stop being 6 and 12 doesn't stop being 12 simply because they can multiply together to make 72. Those can be, and are, used in other calculations as well.

Ive demonstrated full understanding here. If you disagree, refute the above.

Furthermore, I can say all I want that 72 is useful, because I know it came from multiplying the 12 and the 6 together in your example, and I know where those are plugged into other formulas in order to obtain the information I desire.

[Axeyu]

Nope. This is not refutation that THOSE SAME NUMBERS are used in your spreadsheet. The fact that they are also grouped together as BDR in game does not refute this.

Yes, the same numbers are used in my spreadsheet. Together with many other numbers to form useful information. But the BDR number is never used. I think that is what you need to understand. I do not use the BDR formula in my calc. BDR is not a part of the damage forumla, it is just a number derived from some of the same variables.
Being derived from useful variables does however not automatically make it useful. This is very obvious and easy to demonstrate:

Here is a formula for Bas Skada (BS for short):
[W]^2-(critrange+strbonus)/critmultiplier.
My BS formula only contains useful variables, yet it's completely useless.

In your example, 6 doesn't stop being 6 and 12 doesn't stop being 12 simply because they can multiply together to make 72. Those can be, and are, used in other calculations as well.

Yeah ofcourse. No one suggested anything else.
But it still doesn't automatically make 72 a useful number in it self.

Ive demonstrated full understanding here. If you disagree, refute the above.

Furthermore, I can say all I want that 72 is useful, because I know it came from multiplying the 12 and the 6 together in your example, and I know where those are plugged into other formulas in order to obtain the information I desire.

Then it's not 72 that is useful, it's 6 and 12. If you only have the 72 you can do nothing with it, and if you have 6, 12 and 72 you can just ignore 72 without any loss what so ever.

I'm just gonna repeat this:
My argument would be the simplest ever to refute if it was wrong, just demonstrate a use for the BDR number and you are done.

[Chai]

Then it's not 72 that is useful, it's 6 and 12. If you only have the 72 you can do nothing with it, and if you have 6, 12 and 72 you can just ignore 72 without any loss what so ever.

I'm just gonna repeat this:
My argument would be the simplest ever to refute if it was wrong, just demonstrate a use for the BDR number and you are done.

If I only have the 72 I can do something with it. Because I understand what variables went into attaining that value, and I can sub in the value of 72 for them, even if I don't have the value of each of the individual variables. If base damage = x and factoring in the crit Y with the weapon multiplier Z = 72, the value of 72 is still applicable, and can still be plugged into a complete damage formula with this understanding.

Simplest to refute indeed.

[Axeyu]

If I only have the 72 I can do something with it. Because I understand what variables went into attaining that value, and I can sub in the value of 72 for them, even if I don't have the value of each of the individual variables. If base damage = x and factoring in the crit Y with the weapon multiplier Z = 72, the value of 72 is still applicable, and can still be plugged into a complete damage formula with this understanding.

Simplest to refute indeed.

How exactly are you going to plug in 72 into a complete damage formula? What would you do with that number?


You have not yet demonstrated how BDR is useful. Please go ahead and do so. Don't spare the detail.

[Chai]

How exactly are you going to plug in 72 into a complete damage formula? What would you do with that number?

Plug it into the complex equation and removing all variables interacting the same way which are used to derive the result. This is how algebra works. If I know that x+y+z = 72 and I see x+y+z in your "complex equation" - even without knowing what x, y, or z are individually, I can plug the value of 72 into that equation for that part of it.

You have not yet demonstrated how BDR is useful. Please go ahead and do so. Don't spare the detail.

You claimed it would be easily refutable if it was wrong, and it was, because it was.

[Axeyu]

Plug it into the complex equation and removing all variables interacting the same way which are used to derive the result. This is how algebra works. If I know that x+y+z = 72 and I see x+y+z in your "complex equation" - even without knowing what x, y, or z are individually, I can plug the value of 72 into that equation for that part of it.



You claimed it would be easily refutable if it was wrong, and it was, because it was.

Alright, now do that with BDR while showing how it is in anyway useful to do so. Show us the money, so to speak.

[Chai]

Alright, now do that with BDR while showing how it is in anyway useful to do so. Show us the money, so to speak.

In the old barrage app, first 5 variables are BDR. For comparing weapons this tool is well thought out. You know this, because you took part in the initial discussion on these forums when this tool was demonstrated.

The reason why your previous example of Balizarde -vs- thunderforged bastard sword is a poor comparison is due to it being a non equal comparison (loaded question fallacy), due to keen on balizarde vs no keen on the TF BS. With this understanding of what goes into the calculation (something ive already accounted for in multiple posts now) it is still possible to begin the comparison (not do an entire comparison) with those numbers, as every single variable in the BDR is also used in the actual total damage calculation. One would simply open the program, and plug in the numbers associated with each - the first 5 of which can be substituted with BDR provided the weapon is not keen or impact, and the result is the same.

[moo_cow]

In the old barrage app, first 5 variables are BDR. For comparing weapons this tool is well thought out. You know this, because you took part in the initial discussion on these forums when this tool was demonstrated.

The reason why your previous example of Balizarde -vs- thunderforged bastard sword is a poor comparison is due to it being a non equal comparison (loaded question fallacy), due to keen on balizarde vs no keen on the TF BS. With this understanding of what goes into the calculation (something ive already accounted for in multiple posts now) it is still possible to begin the comparison (not do an entire comparison) with those numbers, as every single variable in the BDR is also used in the actual total damage calculation. One would simply open the program, and plug in the numbers associated with each - the first 5 of which can be substituted with BDR provided the weapon is not keen or impact, and the result is the same.

Since weapons don't display additional crit multiplier and expanded crit range than comparing any weapon through BDR is stupid. You have to be kidding me if you are missing this. Old barrage did not have overwhelming critical, pulverizor, and everything else to contribute to all these changes.

Compare a thunderforge maul to greataxe. Greataxe has better bdr yet it isn't as much dps. That's so weird ...

[Chai]

Since weapons don't display additional crit multiplier and expanded crit range than comparing any weapon through BDR is stupid. You have to be kidding me if you are missing this. Old barrage did not have overwhelming critical, pulverizor, and everything else to contribute to all these changes.

You quoted a post which had this in it:

it is still possible to begin the comparison (not do an entire comparison) with those numbers

And replied with a claim about how it is stupid to start a comparison with the correct numbers to start that comparison with, right after it was clearly demonstrated that it was the right numbers to start it with......

What'd we learn? You cant reach an accurate final comparison without the correct beginning numbers plugged in first.

Compare a thunderforge maul to greataxe. Greataxe has better bdr yet it isn't as much dps. That's so weird ...

In order to even begin talking about pulverizer versus headsman's you would first need to start the comparison with what I outlined the comparison is started with, the entire time the post claimed to be beginning the comparison with those numbers, and not doing an entire comparison with only those numbers. .

[Axeyu]

In the old barrage app, first 5 variables are BDR. For comparing weapons this tool is well thought out. You know this, because you took part in the initial discussion on these forums when this tool was demonstrated.

I have no memory of that, link please?

The reason why your previous example of Balizarde -vs- thunderforged bastard sword is a poor comparison is due to it being a non equal comparison (loaded question fallacy), due to keen on balizarde vs no keen on the TF BS.

Which was kind of the the point. You can't use it to compare different weapons, so what good is it? It even favours Balizarde due to keen, yet TF BS comes ahead because of the base damage. It only works if the weapons have the same base dice and crit profile, but at that point it's already obvious which one is best.

With this understanding of what goes into the calculation (something ive already accounted for in multiple posts now) it is still possible to begin the comparison (not do an entire comparison) with those numbers, as every single variable in the BDR is also used in the actual total damage calculation. One would simply open the program, and plug in the numbers associated with each - the first 5 of which can be substituted with BDR provided the weapon is not keen or impact, and the result is the same.

I don't know what the first 5 variables are, but I highly doubt that you could substitute them with BDR. Even if that were true you would at the very least have to enter the crit range, crit multiplier and base dice again as those are important for other variables and cannot be extracted from BDR without entering even more information.

The notion of using BDR in a damage calculation is frankly ridiculous. Why would you make a separate crit calculation for the base damage of the weapon when you have to use the crit profile of the weapon for the rest of the damage anyways. The same goes for [W], you will still need [W] for variables that are not included in the BDR.

So BDR is only useful to compare weapons if you add the number to a convoluted calculation where you still have to add almost all variables that BDR is based on anyways, but only if the weapons have the same crit profile. I really don't see the point.

[moo_cow]

Chai, you have proved on this page of the thread that you don't even know what BDR is.

[moo_cow]

The notion of using BDR in a damage calculation is frankly ridiculous. Why would you make a separate crit calculation for the base damage of the weapon when you have to use the crit profile of the weapon for the rest of the damage anyways. The same goes for [W], you will still need [W] for variables that are not included in the BDR.

So BDR is only useful to compare weapons if you add the number to a convoluted calculation where you still have to add almost all variables that BDR is based on anyways, but only if the weapons have the same crit profile. I really don't see the point.

He has proved he doesn't know what BDR is. His idea of how BDR is useful has failed. He is grasping at straws because it kills him that he is wrong. (that's what I think at least)

[Axeyu]

He has proved he doesn't know what BDR is. His idea of how BDR is useful has failed. He is grasping at straws because it kills him that he is wrong. (that's what I think at least)

You are exactly right.

[Chai]

So BDR is only useful to compare weapons if you add the number to a convoluted calculation where you still have to add almost all variables that BDR is based on anyways, but only if the weapons have the same crit profile. I really don't see the point.

That same convoluted calculation is something you've used quite often to figure out DPS. Right now youre simply quibbling over semantics of how the analysis is done, and taking a "mine is better" approach due to lacking refutation of what I stated earlier, which has yet to even be addressed. The more this takes place, the more I rest assured that I am correct. If refutation of what youre glossing over here existed, it would have been posted by now.