monk ratios, primary and offhand choices

[DeathsSilkyMist]

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

It’s a big wide game. Do you really need one of us grown-ups to tell you how to go parse a thing or where to go to get it done? You talk a big game - I figured hopefully you’d be smart enough to do that on your own.

I’ll give you some advice though:

-For accuracy you will want to control all variables as closely as you can. I recommend no buffs as they could expire while you gather data.

-For monks specifically you can, with time, obtain parses of great length off the same exact mob to control all variables. Find a static mob spawn that doesn’t wander and meets the criteria for what you’re trying to investigate. Fight it until it is low. FD to let it regen. Stand up and go again. Rinse and repeat.

AC/attack and other variables can range pretty widely from one zone or expansion to another.

Go forth and figure it out. Quit begging others to do work for you.

Troxx never gives specifics because if he gives us a mob name and he's wrong, he'll have to admit being wrong.

Give us a mob and a timeframe, since you are so much better at the game. You should be able to tell us easily.

[bcbrown]

Before we start comparing parses, DSM, I've got two sets of questions for you:
1) Your earlier parse had a 47% hit rate for IFS and a 74% hit rate for SoS. How do you interpret that? How does similarity in hit rate across multiple weapons correlate with statistical robustness when comparing DPS?

2) You calculated your dual wield success chance from your parse at 48%, yet your final napkin math used a 75% success rate. Why are those numbers so different? Did your parse really show a 48% success rate for SoS? What was the DW success rate for fist weaving?

[DeathsSilkyMist]

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

Before we start comparing parses, DSM, I've got two sets of questions for you:
1) Your earlier parse had a 47% hit rate for IFS and a 74% hit rate for SoS. How do you interpret that? How does similarity in hit rate across multiple weapons correlate with statistical robustness when comparing DPS?

2) You calculated your dual wield success chance from your parse at 48%, yet your final napkin math used a 75% success rate. Why are those numbers so different? Did your parse really show a 48% success rate for SoS? What was the DW success rate for fist weaving?

Get some parses first and then we'll talk. I've given data. You've given nothing.

[bcbrown]

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

Get some parses first and then we'll talk. I've given data. You've given nothing.

If I bring a parse will you answer those questions?

[DeathsSilkyMist]

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

If I bring a parse will you answer those questions?

Indeed!

[Troxx]

Results on one mob in one zone do not necessarily carry over to all zones and all mobs. There is no universal best one mob out there. Some have high ac - some have low. Low ac mobs tend to favor ratio most. Dmg bonus importance scales with mob mitigation. Some are deep dark blue while others are almost about to green out. Defensively, some have very high attack - others not so much.

You need to find out what part of the game you want to investigate. Your parse target will be dictated by the answers you are seeking to find. Once you start to gather a foundation of knowledge you will learn pretty quickly when you move to new areas just how similar (or not) that area is to places you have already gathered data from.

The more you parse, the more you will see it and the better you will understand the game.

You really seem not to have a clue just how clueless you actually are …

No more begging. Go out there and do your homework.

I’ve already done mine.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

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

Results on one mob in one zone do not necessarily carry over to all zones and all mobs. There is no universal best one mob out there. Some have high ac - some have low. Low ac mobs tend to favor ratio most. Dmg bonus importance scales with mob mitigation. Some are deep dark blue while others are almost about to green out. Defensively, some have very high attack - others not so much.

You need to find out what part of the game you want to investigate. Your parse target will be dictated by the answers you are seeking to find. Once you start to gather a foundation of knowledge you will learn pretty quickly when you move to new areas just how similar (or not) that area is to places you have already gathered data from.

The more you parse, the more you will see it and the better you will understand the game.

You really seem not to have a clue just how clueless you actually are …

No more begging. Go out there and do your homework.

I’ve already done mine.

As you can see, Troxx has no idea what targets are good to parse. He can't name any. For someone who supposedly has Gamparse up for every session, this is a terrible look.

He can keep pretending he is good at the game if he wishes. He isn't convincing anyone. He acts just like someone who is pretending. All talk, no specifics. Classic Troxx.

[bcbrown]

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

You need to find out what part of the game you want to investigate. Your parse target will be dictated by the answers you are seeking to find.

This is so important. You need to already have a hypothesis to answer and an expectation on what you'll find - coupled to a an openness to being surprised. If you find a flaw in your methodology you need to use new data with the corrected methodology - or else you'll end up p-hacking your way to erroneous conclusions.

[Troxx]

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

This is so important. You need to already have a hypothesis to answer and an expectation on what you'll find - coupled to a an openness to being surprised. If you find a flaw in your methodology you need to use new data with the corrected methodology - or else you'll end up p-hacking your way to erroneous conclusions.

Yep. Unfortunately this is one of DSM’s biggest weaknesses. Napkin math does not always translate to reality. You can’t solo one frog on a level 60 shaman - tabulate those numbers from that specific fight and then assume you could replicate that in a fast paced xp group with multiple charm pets with a kill time of <20 seconds. That other F’n thread went on for hundreds of pages (of the nearly 600 total pages) in large part due to that.

You don’t just go do one parse (of any length) against one single mob and then try to make assumptions that applies verbatim to the whole game.

… but the more you do it the better you globally come to understand the game.

I have always enjoyed applying the scientific method to my addiction of choice (EQ). I genuinely find satisfaction in it - that’s why I parse things literally any time I’m on with a heads up display. I don’t often do the deep dive but it does give you a good general awareness.

Most common theme I see? People have no idea how much damage they actually do. Most people severely overestimate what they or some classes can do.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

Troxx still hasn't named a single mob to parse, or a proper timeframe. He does this because any time data proves him wrong, he will claim the mob wasn't right, the parse wasn't long enough, etc.

With his supposed experience, this should be trivial.

I wonder how many more long paragraph posts he is going to do before he gives us an answer.