Moss covered Twig

[DeathsSilkyMist]

Originally Posted by Zuranthium [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

The link was missing a '1' at the end - http://web.archive.org/web/200107091...3&t=000082&p=1

The distribution of hits on P99 is not the same as that graph. P99 has less min hits and more hits in the higher range.

P99 does have similar distributions. My DPS calculator does the same kind of distribution. I know exactly why this distribution occurs. You could test this yourself if you don't believe me. You just need to log in. Thank you for providing evidence that the damage bonus and damage formula are the same as EQEMU and P99 in the Twig time period.

[bcbrown]

Originally Posted by DeathsSilkyMist [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

P99 does have similar distributions. My DPS calculator does the same kind of distribution. I know exactly why this distribution occurs. You could test this yourself if you don't believe me. You just need to log in. Thank you for providing evidence that the damage bonus and damage formula are the same as EQEMU and P99 in the Twig time period.

Show us a distribution graph. All my distribution graphs are missing the spike at min value.

[Zuranthium]

Originally Posted by DeathsSilkyMist [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

P99 does have similar distributions.

No it doesn't. 80% of hits back then were falling in the lower range of the scale. That's not how it works here.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

Originally Posted by bcbrown [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Show us a distribution graph. All my distribution graphs are missing the spike at min value.

008: 079
009: 020
010: 026
011: 042
012: 059
013: 039
014: 045
015: 045
016: 067
017: 058
018: 048
019: 054
020: 045
021: 078
022: 051
023: 051
024: 056
025: 235
026: 037
027: 045
028: 029
029: 025
030: 027
031: 030
032: 025
033: 032
034: 023
035: 021

This is from my DPS calculator. It is a 46 Warrior using a 9/24 weapon against a level 40 mob. Left number is damage value, right number is how many times that damage value was rolled.

Same as this guy:

http://web.archive.org/web/200107091...3&t=000082&p=1

[Zuranthium]

It's not the same. You're getting less minimum hits and more higher end hits, exactly as I already said.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

Originally Posted by Zuranthium [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

It's not the same. You're getting less minimum hits and more higher end hits, exactly as I already said.

I get the highest damage rolls at 8 damage, 21 damage, and 25 damage. The exact same places as your link. As I keep trying to tell you, the defense and AC of the mob are what change how the numbers are distributed. I don't have the exact mob this guy was fighting, so the numbers aren't going to perfectly align when I just throw a random mob in to test with.

http://web.archive.org/web/200107091...3&t=000082&p=1

[Zuranthium]

Originally Posted by DeathsSilkyMist [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I get highest numbers at 8 damage, 21 damage, and 25 damage.

The percentages are not the same. You should have more low hits.

Originally Posted by DeathsSilkyMist [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

the defense and AC are what change how the numbers are distributed.

They weren't fighting anything with high AC.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

Originally Posted by Zuranthium [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

The percentages are not the same. You should have more low hits.



They weren't fighting anything with high AC.

This is fighting a harder mob using my DPS calculator. Level 46 Warrior with a 9/24 weapon:

008: 118 | 009: 021 | 010: 026 | 011: 037 | 012: 042 | 013: 029 | 014: 044 | 015: 031 | 016: 044 | 017: 044 |
| 018: 042 | 019: 044 | 020: 054 | 021: 062 | 022: 035 | 023: 037 | 024: 040 | 025: 133 | 026: 026 | 027: 032 |
| 028: 016 | 029: 013 | 030: 015 | 031: 011 | 032: 014 | 033: 009 | 034: 010 | 035: 007 |

http://web.archive.org/web/200107091...3&t=000082&p=1

[bcbrown]

Very interesting... a while back I did a bunch of parses against Bloodmaw with my 51 ranger. I used three mainhands: Fellspine; Revultant Whip; Jagged Blade of Mourning, all with Infestation as offhand. I also parsed with the Woodsman's Staff. In all five of those parses, there's no spike at the lower level.

However when I looked at one of DSM's parses against the FM named giants, I did see spikes at the min value.

Not sure what to make of that yet.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

Originally Posted by bcbrown [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Very interesting... a while back I did a bunch of parses against Bloodmaw with my 51 ranger. I used three mainhands: Fellspine; Revultant Whip; Jagged Blade of Mourning, all with Infestation as offhand. I also parsed with the Woodsman's Staff. In all five of those parses, there's no spike at the lower level.

However when I looked at one of DSM's parses against the FM named giants, I did see spikes at the min value.

Not sure what to make of that yet.

It is because you are fighting bloodmaw, who is like level 5. This is a 46 Warrior with a 9/24 weapon fighting a level 5:

| 013: 006 | 014: 016 | 015: 023 | 016: 025 | 017: 036 | 018: 047 | 019: 042 | 020: 047 | 021: 081 | 022: 063 |
| 023: 042 | 024: 055 | 025: 708 | 026: 093 | 027: 087 | 028: 087 | 029: 081 | 030: 083 | 031: 077 | 032: 063 |
| 033: 076 | 034: 076 | 035: 065 |