Iksar Shaman - Solo Challenges?

[DeathsSilkyMist]

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

Sure thing! Note, I do not know the details of how damage is calculated, so there will be a couple places in this proof where details are elided.

Axiom: The hit rate (miss vs damage dealt) is independent of weapon using the same skill.

Axiom: If a weapon hits, the damage done is drawn from 20 possible values, equally possible. I don't know the details of the maximum and minimum values, but they are a function of the "damage" attribute of the weapon.

Axiom: The expected value of a weapon swing equals the average value.

Axiom: The average value of a weapon swing equals (2 * Weapon_Base) + Bonus_Modifier + STR Modifier, which we can simplify (in notation) to 2 * X + Y

Axiom: The number of swings per minute of a weapon is inversely proportional to the "delay" attribute of the weapon.

Axiom: A weapon with a delay of 60 will swing once per minute. Note: I don't know the exact calculation here, but this will not affect the proof.

Definition: The expected damage per minute for a weapon equals the expected damage per swing multiplied by the swings per minute.

Proposition to prove: a 15/20 weapon is expected to do more damage than a 5/35 weapon. In formula: EV(15/20) > EV(5/35) where EV is the Expected Value. Note: I don't know what ratio a NTOV weapon should be, so here I'm plugging in some arbitrary numbers.

Other axioms:

1. There's no procs
2. hate generation (due to procs) is irrelevant
3. the target is not immune to non-magical weapons

This proof is of the form direct proof

Step 1: The expected damage per minute of the rusty weapon is average damage times number of swings per minute, or (2 * 5 + Y) * 60/35

Step 2: The expected damage of the NTOV weapon is (2 * 15 + Y) * 60/20

Proof:
(2 * 15 + Y) * 60/20 > (2 * 5 + Y) * 60/35
(30 + Y) *35 > (10 + Y) * 20
1050 * Y > 200 * Y
1050 > 200
QED

As you can see, there is no information in this format that is different from the information I have already provided. You can find all of the mathematical formulas and axioms in my guide already. You can also take a look at my posts in this thread.

You haven't shown why restructuring my argument into this format will provide any new insight.

Hopefully you will answer my question this time:

Where do you believe I am incorrect with regards to FSI vs. Regeneration on a Shaman, and where is your counter-evidence supporting your claims?