monk ratios, primary and offhand choices

[DeathsSilkyMist]

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

Three minutes is enough to tell between a rusty weapon and a BiS weapon, yeah. It's not enough to tell between two weapon-sets that are within 10% of each other. For example, if you want a 95% probability that the number of heads on a fair coin is between 40% and 60%, you need to flip the coin 500 times.

I asked in part because I noticed the skill-up for h2h in the log. But the other reason I asked is because you have a 75% hit rate for the 1hb but just a 57% hit rate for 2hb. 62% hitrate for main-hand h2h, 60% for offhand h2h, so I wondered if there might be a skill disparity between 1hb and 2hb.

I'd expect at the same skill level for 1h and 2h to have similar hit rates, wouldn't you? I think it must be an artifact of the small sample size.

If you want to parse longer and provide video evidence, please do! Sadly you have no data either, so you have nothing to balance against my data. You aren't helping the conversation.

[bcbrown]

I'd be happy to heal your monk on my cleric or druid for a longer parse.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

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

I'd be happy to heal your monk on my cleric or druid for a longer parse.

Please do some parsing yourself, so it isn't only me ever providing data in these conversations. It's quite one sided how little data is provided by other posters. I've provided a lot of data over the years.

[Troxx]

Bcbrown offered to help you get longer parses. Why did respond so rudely to that?

[DeathsSilkyMist]

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

Bcbrown offered to help you get longer parses. Why did respond so rudely to that?

You have been rude the entire conversation. You have also provided no data. Fix yourself first please. Where are those parses you did after the 2h change occured? You could post those!

[bcbrown]

Going back to your data. You showed 4999 damage / 30.67 DPS with the 1h setup, and 4883 damage / 31.5 DPS with the 2h setup and fist weaving.

The hand-to-hand damage across the two datasets is pretty consistent after accounting for the main-hand damage bonus. Average hit of 22.8 in main-hand and 14.8 in off-hand weaving. 1hb has 76 hits and 25 misses for a 75% hit rate, total damage of 2035, and a 26.8 average hit. 2hb has 53 hits and 40 misses for a 57% hit rate, total damage of 4319, and 81.5 average hit.

If the 2hb had the same average hit but a 75% hit rate to match the 1hb data, it would have 70 hits with a total damage of 5705. Leaving the h2h data along this would result in the 2h setup doing a total of 6269 or 40.4 DPS vs the observed 30.67 DPS of the 1h setup.


If the 1hb had the same average hit but a 57% hit rate to match the 2hb data, it would have 58 hits for 1554 damage. Leaving the h2h data along this would result in the 1h setup doing a total of 4518 damage or 27.7 DPS vs the observed 31.5 DPS of the 2h setup.

[Troxx]

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

If the 2hb had the same average hit but a 75% hit rate to match the 1hb data, it would have 70 hits with a total damage of 5705. Leaving the h2h data along this would result in the 2h setup doing a total of 6269 or 40.4 DPS vs the observed 30.67 DPS of the 1h setup.

Careful explaining too much or he might start to understand why short parses are so prone to error.

[bcbrown]

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

Careful explaining too much or he might start to understand why short parses are so prone to error.

The part I find amusing is that it's the same thing as his original point about variance in small samples!

[DeathsSilkyMist]

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

The part I find amusing is that it's the same thing as his original point about variance in small samples!

Incorrect. The game you are playing is simply you will never agree that a parse is the "correct" length. When I've done longer parses in the past this nonsense was the same.

You should do some parsing yourself and show us how it's done!

[Troxx]

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

The part I find amusing is that it's the same thing as his original point about variance in small samples!

DSM has never been consistent. His whims flap aimlessly in accordance with whatever crackpot point he is trying to make. He’s also happy to cherry-pick whatever most conveniently supports … whatever crackpot point he is trying to make.

He flip flops a lot.

Some things never change.