sk starting points

[DeathsSilkyMist]

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

Derp.

1. I have deemed the whole parse insufficient
2. Ripostes are a static thing that happen at mathematically predictable frequencies - they don't matter that much. Beyond that, this was with a much lower damage 1hs compared to my 2handers (one of which is a NTOV raid BIS type item)
3. There are no differences in 1h vs 2h when it comes to average dps. As long as the weapon is consistent it doesn't matter if it's a fine steel sword vs a Palladius Axe of Slaughter for comparison sake ... Dude i expedted more of you.
4. The parse itself sucks, i am not submitting it for final review. The mob is therefore irrelevant.
5. My difference in DPS was 4. Yours was 3. I was using a Hate 1hs. You were using a ToV 2hander. The point was I used the same exact mob over and over again with the same exact everything minus exactly 20 str. What weapon you use - rusty dagger vs ToV 2hander ... it doesn't matter. % difference is % difference

This is not rocket surgery.

I agree, it isn't rocket surgery.

The difference in raw DPS was 1. Your number was probably inflated due to ripostes unless you somehow got the exact same amount with and without the 20 STR. In the turtle fights I removed ripostes because I got 4 ripostes on the first test, and 9 ripostes on the second test. This can add up to thousands of extra damage, especially when using a good weapon.

I also do not know when gameparse considers a fight to be started or finished, so it is tough to say how it calculates average DPS. Your numbers may be inflated a bit from that too.

So far you haven't shown anything other than both of our parses were similar, which means your idea that the turtle is an invalid DPS test target is currently up for debate.

I pointed out 1H vs 2H because you have been really specific about the test having as little variability as possible. You don't even want mob level to be different. You should be using a 2H weapon as well, to keep consistent with this paradigm.

I appreciate you are willing to admit your data was flawed though!