Didn't seem any pissier than my post. Don't worry, I don't get mad on the internet. I just leave
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
EQdpm is not a totally broken yardstick. It is definitely wrong, but definitely in the ballpark. "Worse than useless" describes an untestable hypothesis, which is what is generally put forward on forums. I'm only saying that an inaccurate model can still preserve the deltas of the accurate model.
EQdpm and Project1999 both approximate an EQ combat system that, though changed many times on live, never rearranged its core algorithms. So eqdpm and p99 have a transitive relation. You act like Eqdpm is a random die.
You don't seem to get the precision/accuracy thing in this situation, but I also see that I didn't explain myself well. EQdpm uses an equation that, because it is not an utterly failing model (use it and tell me its data does not correspond somewhere around "very well" with your experience), collects data that shows some amount of precision. It's outputs have undeniable correlation with the "real" values
and with each other, although we can be dead certain they are not accurate. I guess I should have said "an equation that describes reality precisely but inaccurately" instead of "a precise but inaccurate equation?"
Quote:
|
A guess mapped on observed data.
|
How is that not better than pure conjecture or a random number? In fact, this is exactly why we can derive that EQdpm has some precision. And if output values are skewed, they should skew nearly identically.
I'm not misusing any terms. It is simply not true that precision and accuracy are properties only of the methods they used to come up with the equation. You could measure those, too, but someone would probably have to pay you. I'm talking about the resemblance of EQdpm's educated guesses to data from the actual box. And obviously I am not presenting hard data from p99, I am only putting forward the idea that even if EQdpm data points are miles off, they are likely the same number of miles off, and in the same direction. So we get unusable single values, but useful ratios: congruence.
Also, I realized you didn't have a GLS in offhand. I figured I didn't even need to refer to your offhand to shoot down the idea of a 1h combo involving a 9/20 weapon outdamaging a tstaff. There is no level after 20 where that can happen. The combat system will never treat different starting delays as equivalent when hasted, because this would utterly break itemization. Assuming there is a delay floor, haste would calculate as a percentage of the
difference between weapon delay and the floor instead of as a percentage of just your weapon delay. This would ensure that a 9/20 is never as good as a 9/16.
I don't know for sure which setup is better, but I can say for sure that monk epic fists are not some kind of undisputed champ of the dps mountain.