monk ratios, primary and offhand choices

[Ripqozko]

we always have 50 pages of napkin math, just go to a vindi raid. happens every 8 hours, hit attack on the mob. doesnt have to be your mob, just hit it and parse. youll see for yourself instead of your dumb math.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

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

Amazing things happen when we stop having napkin math arguments on loop.

Troxx has no evidence to suggest I am wrong, nor will he provide it.

It is sad people think math doesn't work in a game made entirely on math. If you know the damage formula, you can work out how a weapon will parse without parsing. You are just running the same formula the game is doing.

For those interested in how you can think about the melee damage formula in P99, read this post:

https://www.project1999.com/forums/s...&postcount=440

Nobody in this thread has provided a better explaination.

[Snaggles]

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

we always have 50 pages of napkin math, just go to a vindi raid. happens every 8 hours, hit attack on the mob. doesnt have to be your mob, just hit it and parse. youll see for yourself instead of your dumb math.

I dug up an old tstaff monk 41% non-avatar parse on vindi.

https://www.project1999.com/forums/s...&postcount=439

A better thread than this nightmare would just be a list of “best dps results” per class, gear, buffs, and discs on Vindi. At least when people ask about crap like this we can point them to a general list of real results.

[Snaggles]

Not that the first few pages were bad. Someone needed an answer and most of us said the same thing.

[Jimjam]

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

Yes. This has always been the case. If you look back at the graphs I posted you will noticed 20 distinct hit values (except in those cases where I stacked enough AC you didn't see any of some of the upper DIs).

There was a melee revamp at some point. I am sure pre revamp you could see some huge hits - the loss of those made the game a bit less fun for me. I think your pics come after the revamp where it was just db+di and without what I assume was some kind of random bonus which could be added (perhaps related to strength?)

[Troxx]

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

There was a melee revamp at some point. I am sure pre revamp you could see some huge hits - the loss of those made the game a bit less fun for me. I think your pics come after the revamp where it was just db+di and without what I assume was some kind of random bonus which could be added (perhaps related to strength?)

For NPCs (pets included i think), there was only a total of 20 possible hits. Bashes/kicks could have separate values. You could see this when there was a 'clean' parse where the tank didn't use defensive or some of the later (vie style??) buffs were not used.

Player hits were always much more variable (messy).

[Troxx]

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

It is sad people think math doesn't work in a game made entirely on math. If you know the damage formula, you can work out how a weapon will parse without parsing. You are just running the same formula the game is doing.

It is worth reiterating:

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

When we say the word "napkin math " it is because we are straying from known values and hard collected real world data. Napkin math is, by nature, extrapolative and starts to become theoretical. The basic value of 'napkin math' comes from the fact that it is grounded in observational data ... but you have to be cautious assuming that just because something was observed once (or twice or however many times) that it will mathematically carry over to all situations.

Heck, the above situation is the PERFECT example.

https://wiki.project1999.com/Corudoth

That's a LEVEL 5 turtle with 200k hp. You have collected data sets that imply that offensive parses on this level 5 turtle are very shockingly similar to an XP group (relatively high level) xp mob in Frontier Mountains. Those fights happened. You have the numbers. You even video taped it (why you insist on doing this is beyond me - I do not recall anyone ever asking for video evidence). I will agree that the parses are similar enough that I am comfortable using "napkin math" to then infer that dps done vs Corudoth with a particular setup will be similarly ... VERY SIMILAR to what you might expect off that giant in FM.

Where napkin math runs into problems is if you blindly assume that the same proportionality exists between Corudoth and ... Vindi, Avatar of War, Kael arena mobs (notoriously high ac for their level) etc etc.

There is value in napkin math. But when napkin math is used improperly you're going to get stupid irrelevant results. This was the problem with you using napkin math of you soloing a damn level 40 frog in seb. You solo'd a level 40 frog in seb using dots. You did actually do that amount of dps to that mob between you and your pet. That was fact. You had the logs. You had the videos. YOU DID A THING. You and your pet did enough damage in a unit of time that you knew you had done XYZ dps. You then said "hey shamans can be expected to do XYZ dps all the time and in all circumstances" ... and we were like ... 'uh no, that's not how it works'. The conversation was regarding who was going to be the best 4th in a group that already had a cleric and 2 charming enchanters. Mobs would be dying quickly. Those spells aren't exactly quick to cast and you were not actually going to average the same thing in a fast 20 second or less fight that you had the luxury of doing when it was just you (and only you and your pet) with the full hp bar of the mob to play with. Necromancers feel this pain as well. Dots in this era are just not very cool for xp groups where mobs die pretty quickly.

"Napkin math" is hugely problematic when it is divorced from reality and the person using it is to hyper-focused on the napkin math results to step back and think clearly.

This has been a consistent problem for you DSM. I am not making fun of, mocking, or trying to disparage you right now DSM. For once I actually am not. I am trying to give you honest feedback. This is a problem for you. Whether you have the clarity of mind to see/acknowledge this and have some personal growth ... whether you just get angsty/pissy and double down ... well that is up to you.

"Napkin math" is math. IT IS MATH. But it is math that takes a known set of variables and from there makes attempts to extrapolate and theorize - to predict outcomes in other situations. It is a wonderful thing. This phenomenon (whether we are using math at all) is one of the things we as humans can do that separates us from lower organisms. Other members of the animal kingdom do it too to varying degrees but we humans do it best.

So napkin math. Maybe this works out. Maybe it does not. In the case of weapon performance in project 99 on a level 20 or a level 5 green mob with low ac vs weapon performance on a level 70+ with very high ac? No. You have to understand actual game mechanics and understand the breakpoints.

Math is math. But math requires you know ALL the actual equations and variables involved. You do not. You don't know the actual equations. You don't know the actual interplay between attack and mob ac. When they make you a chief sever developer and top tier GM - when you have access to all the actual *math-facts*, then you will be able to do the actual math.

Until then it is just wild guess-work and napkin math. It isn't a replacement for actual parses. Of the parses that have been provided - 2handers are the clear winners for high ac raid mobs.

[Jimjam]

Theory is derived from observation and tested by data?

[DeathsSilkyMist]

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

Theory is derived from observation and tested by data?

Exactly! For people interested in that process and how the damage formula probably works, please read this post. Troxx will keep denying it simply because he doesn't like when he is wrong. He doesn't have a better equation or argument right now:

https://www.project1999.com/forums/s...&postcount=440

[Snaggles]

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

Theory is derived from observation and tested by data?

People miscalculate, use incorrect tools, and incorrect/outdated logic all the time.

Go ahead and dive into medical techniques from 200 years ago. Luckily being wrong about how to apply dps to non-trivial targets in an elf sim has never given someone a lobotomy. Outside maybe reading a couple forum posts like this one.