sk starting points

[DeathsSilkyMist]

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

This is precisely why nobody really takes you seriously. Just because this game is built on rules and logic doesn’t mean every application of the game has an objective truth.

You are incorrect here. The rules and math of the game allow you to statistically determine things like best stats.

It is easy to prove this. Just take a look at video game metas. In a game like League of Legends, there are objectively better or worse champions. This is because people can run the numbers and determine which champions have a statistical advantage, after accounting for player skill, latency, etc. Does this mean a lower tier champion cannot compete? No, but you will be at a disadvantage.

The reality is yourself and other posters simply do not understand this concept well enough. This is why you simply keep insisting it is subjective.

[bcbrown]

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

It is easy to prove this. Just take a look at video game metas. In a game like League of Legends, there are objectively better or worse champions. This is because people can run the numbers and determine which champions have a statistical advantage, after accounting for player skill, latency, etc. Does this mean a lower tier champion cannot compete? No, but you will be at a disadvantage.

The reality is yourself and other posters simply do not understand this concept well enough. This is why you simply keep insisting it is subjective.

I'm aware you have some sort of professional experience in the games industry, and I'm sure you have far more experience than I do with things like adjusting game mechanics to guide the meta towards whatever you're attempting to accomplish.

But this concept you're talking about is well within my bailiwick. I've built epsilon-greedy multi-armed bandits for online commerce. I've worked on systems that attempt to correct for the "banana problem" in collaborative recommendation systems. I've worked through the mathematics of recursive descent, and understand mechanics of and motivation for using something like simulated annealing to avoid local optima. So yes, I'm explicitly arguing from authority here.

The difference between what you're talking about with LoL and what we're talking about with EQ SK attribute starting points is that the cost function is well defined in your LoL example, but there is no well defined cost function here, which is exactly what I mean when I say "best is subjective".

Min-maxing or formal optimization is about using a cost function across some domain of parameters, where you try to choose parameters that minimize the cost function. With LoL, that cost function would be loss percentage, modified by something like an Elo rating system to account for opponent player strength. The parameters would be something like team champion choices, opponent champion choices, map; not really sure because I've never played LoL.

What's the cost function in EQ? I genuinely can't think of any formal cost functions that could apply. The game content is too easy; that's why we all agree that starting point allocations have minimal impact. There's things like solo artist challenges or low-man raids, but that's only relevant within those subsets of the larger game content.

So when I say that the best is subjective, what I mean is that there's no universally applicable cost function. I mostly enjoy leveling minimally-twinked characters through pickup groups, so my cost function is going to overweight attributes like undergeared DPS, carrying capacity, and so on. You seem to mostly enjoy end-game soloing and maybe raiding, so you're going to underweight those attributes.

If we don't share a cost function, we won't agree on "best".

[DeathsSilkyMist]

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

The game content is too easy; that's why we all agree that starting point allocations have minimal impact. There's things like solo artist challenges or low-man raids, but that's only relevant within those subsets of the larger game content.

This is correct. That is why it is best to put your starting stats into the statistically best option, because it isn't going to matter much anyway. If you agree that we can statistically discover which champions are better or worse in LoL, you will agree the same can be done in EQ. There is nothing special about EQ's code and equations that make it impossible to apply statistics to things like starting stats.

I think the problem is people have an inflated concept of what "best" means. I think they assume it means "so much better you will regret everything else". I am not saying that. INT is simply the best choice in a set of options that are ultimately not going to impact your character in a significant way. This is backed up by statistical evidence.

There is nothing wrong with saying:

1. INT is the best choice statistically.
2. You can pick any other stat, and you will not have noticeable issues with your character.
3. Other stats have benefits, which are as follows...

The best solution is to give people the facts, and trust them to make the right decisions. I see no benefit in basically saying "everything is subjective, therefore it doesn't matter". Not only is this a false statement, but it hurts the players who enjoy min/maxing. Players who do not enjoy min/maxing will not be hurt by the facts. It is a win/win to supply the best information possible.

[bcbrown]

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

There is nothing special about EQ's code and equations that make it impossible to apply statistics to things like starting stats.

What's your cost function?

[DeathsSilkyMist]

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

What's your cost function?

I have mentioned it many times.

If we agree that starting stats will not affect your character in a meaningful way, then the benefits of each individual stat are deemed to be outside the scope of our consideration for this conversation. It doesn't really matter if you get +1 DPS, +100 HP, or +200 MP.

Therefore, the only real consideration left is the statistical probability that you will cap the stat. This is because a capped stat provides zero value.

If you take a look at the distribution of which stats appear on useful SK equipment, you will see STA and STR appear with higher frequency. INT appears less often. In addition to this, the amount of STR that can be applied to a character via buffs is also much greater than INT.

Therefore, INT is the statistically best choice.

[Troxx]

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

If you take a look at the distribution of which stats appear on useful SK equipment, you will see STA and STR appear with higher frequency. INT appears less often. In addition to this, the amount of STR that can be applied to a character via buffs is also much greater than INT.

Therefore, INT is the statistically best choice.

Following that logic, if you look at the distribution of which stats appear on useful SK you will see that wisdom appears even less often than intelligence.

Therefore, WIS is the statistically best choice.

Translation:

[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

(I fully expect my sarcasm and straw-man to be lost on him - no I was not being serious)

[DeathsSilkyMist]

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

Following that logic, if you look at the distribution of which stats appear on useful SK you will see that wisdom appears even less often than intelligence.

Therefore, WIS is the statistically best choice.

This simply shows your lack of understanding of the game mechanics. WIS provides no value to an SK to begin with. You get zero value with 80 WIS, and zero value with 100 WIS. This is not true of INT, STA, or STR on an SK.

You really need to try harder with your trolling attempts. This is why I call you an unfunny troll. There is no link between INT and WIS on an SK. You cannot even troll correctly.

[Ripqozko]

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

I have mentioned it many times.

If we agree that starting stats will not affect your character in a meaningful way, then the benefits of each individual stat are deemed to be outside the scope of our consideration for this conversation. It doesn't really matter if you get +1 DPS, +100 HP, or +200 MP.

Therefore, the only real consideration left is the statistical probability that you will cap the stat. This is because a capped stat provides zero value.

If you take a look at the distribution of which stats appear on useful SK equipment, you will see STA and STR appear with higher frequency. INT appears less often. In addition to this, the amount of STR that can be applied to a character via buffs is also much greater than INT.

Therefore, INT is the statistically best choice.

I know statistically speaking your int sk will always be worse than mine. Hope that helps.

[bcbrown]

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

Therefore, the only real consideration left is the statistical probability that you will cap the stat. This is because a capped stat provides zero value.

So your cost function is "minimize overcapping of relevant attributes". That's not my cost function: I will never cap any stat on any character I play, and even if I did, I will have no regret to minimize.

What I care about is what will maximize my quality of life while leveling from, say, 20 to 40? And although we all agree that the impact of starting stats is minimal, minimal is not zero.

So my cost function applies zero weight to overcapping any stat, and instead emphasizes kill-speed while leveling and loot carrying capacity.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

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

So your cost function is "minimize overcapping of relevant attributes". That's not my cost function: I will never cap any stat on any character I play, and even if I did, I will have no regret to minimize.

What I care about is what will maximize my quality of life while leveling from, say, 20 to 40? And although we all agree that the impact of starting stats is minimal, minimal is not zero.

So my cost function applies zero weight to overcapping any stat, and instead emphasizes kill-speed while leveling and loot carrying capacity.

If you want to argue the merits of individual stats, you are going against your claim that starting stats are irrelevant.

There is nothing wrong with changing your position on whether or not starting stats are irrelevant. However, you now need to provide tangible evidence to support your position. It is misleading to tell people they are getting tangible improvements to kill speed, when you haven't actually done anything to prove this. You are guessing.

https://www.project1999.com/forums/s...&postcount=300 - So far I have shown a 1.5 average DPS increase with +20 STR on a level 60 character. This number is probably going to be lower on a lower level character with worse gear, unless someone can show evidence otherwise. I am not saying this evidence is fool proof. I am happy to be proven wrong if someone can bring something better.

I have stated before that there is nothing wrong with picking STR if you want short term gains. Your first character on a server or a self found character are characters that may want short term gains. That doesn't make STR the objectively best stat to pick, it simply makes STR the best stat for your specific scenario. There is nothing wrong with this.

If you know that the STR is a short term gain, and will not be as useful later on, you won't have any regrets. People feel regret when they realize they made a mistake. You won't make a mistake if you know what you are doing and why. That is why we need to have the objective facts.