WW: Total # of Attacks on 4/4 vs. 4/6 claw set-up

[Speederländer]

Ok folks, so for 2 claws both hitting the max WW speed, what is the number of possible attacks I'm getting vs. a single target? And, when I have one claw hitting the max BP and one claw hitting one BP slower, what happens to that number of attacks specifically? Do I lose one possible attack? More? None because of some calculation issue in the coding? I don't see this discussed in the IAS thread or FAQ. I also don't see anything on the specific mechanics of missed breakpoints on the barb forum.

[Elwood]

there are 25 frames in one second

so total possible amount of hits in a second possible with 4/4 = 25/4 = 6.25 hits each claw

with 4/6 you get... 6.25/4.16 maximum hits possible

[ilkori]

I've been wondering the same thing myself. Unfortunately I just haven't had the time to dig through the technical information on it. Relaying what I do know, I hear that there are a number of informative posts on the Amazon Basin on the mechanics of WW, and that they are very involved.

Something else I've heard is that the claw break points are wrong... but this is only from one person who had a lot of other misunderstandings, so I don't know how much trust to place in that statement.


Elwood - that works great for total number of hits possible, but there must be two targets in order for Whirlwind to get two attacks. This means at the 4 fpa break, you are actually getting only one attack every 4 frames (and apparently there is some technical information to figure out which claw actualy strikes).

I have no clue what happens when they are at different frame breaks.

[Speederländer]

there are 25 frames in one second

so total possible amount of hits in a second possible with 4/4 = 25/4 = 6.25 hits each claw

with 4/6 you get... 6.25/4.16 maximum hits possible

It's not so simple. I'm talking vs. a SINGLE target. Then it becomes a function of weapon range, and how fast WW actually moves, yes? How far is the distance from when your weapon can FIRST strike the target to the last point a strike is possible. Your WW traces out a path across the screen. Only a portion of that path yields the potential to strike. Therefore, does it really matter if you're sporting 6/4 instead of 4/4? It depends specifically on the applicable strike zone length and how long it takes to traverse it. You then back out speed and the such. Keep in mind, the computer just shows a spinning animation. In reality, it's just a circle moving across the screen that when it encounters a target, chance-to-hit is triggered at a particular rate determined by the WW speed. You might not normally GET an extra strike in on a 4/4 over a 4/6 simply because the geometry doesn't allow it.

The speed at which your WW moves across the screen is an important number. Does anyone know this?

[Elwood]

i see.

well that is some complicated **** man, i really doubt you will find someone to help you there. i'm sure i've seen information on weapon ranges but ww speed and length? can't say i have...

[John Garrano]

Confucious says: "If it works for you, who cares?!"

Man, i dont mean to sound disregardful, but have you tried both (4/4 and 4/6)? If you did, did you notice any difference on duels or in general play?
If so, then go for what you think is best.

By saying this i am by no way trying to offend or something anyone in the forums.
My point is that it may be a case of excessive overkill for the matter and you may not even notice a difference during game play.

This was my useless, lame idea :buddies:

[Zangeif]

No one knows for sure. I've heard so many different explanations on how ww works.

that works great for total number of hits possible, but there must be two targets in order for Whirlwind to get two attacks. This means at the 4 fpa break, you are actually getting only one attack every 4 frames (and apparently there is some technical information to figure out which claw actualy strikes).

No one in the barb forum believes this. For some reason the assassin forum does though.

I also read a LONG explanation of ww mechanics in the barb forum that said the first 8 frames of ww always hit at 4 frame regardless of weapon speed. This could mean that weapon speed isn't a factor in certain situations.

Anyway, keep searching for an answer, but you're going to hear a ton of different stories. Good luck finding the truth.

[skygoneblue]

Does anyone know how to tear apart game code? :lol:

[Speederländer]

Does anyone know how to tear apart game code? :lol:

You would have to decompile and reconstruct it from the assembly language code.

[ilkori]

Confucious says: "If it works for you, who cares?!"

Man, i dont mean to sound disregardful, but have you tried both (4/4 and 4/6)? If you did, did you notice any difference on duels or in general play?
If so, then go for what you think is best.I'm sure everyone has their own reasons, but for me I enjoy figuring this stuff out more than actually playing the game. :jig:

The speed at which your WW moves across the screen is an important number. Does anyone know this?My understanding is that it is your walking speed. If I end up finding anything to the contrary I'll be sure to pipe up.

Anyway, keep searching for an answer, but you're going to hear a ton of different stories. Good luck finding the truth.Yeah, no kidding. Whirlwind may just be the final frontier when it comes to important game mechanics. :lol:

No one in the barb forum believes this. For some reason the assassin forum does though.No one in the barb forum believes this? Guess I might have to step my toes in there, in addition to checking the other resources I was considering. It's good seeing all this interest right now. Maybe this time we'll actually make it to the bottom of this.

[BIGeyedBUG]

From information by Hammerman, Ruvanal, Myrddin, Loschonorg, Zath, and others. Any mistakes I've made in interpeting it are my own though. Oh, my aching head.

From what I've been reading, a 4/6 WW will result in something like this-

Frame 4--attack with weapon1. I'm not sure which that would be, but lets say it's the 4 frame weapon.

Frame 8--attack with weapon2. If two targets are in range, attack a 2nd target with weapon1.

[The first attack checks always happen at frames 4 and 8, regardless of speed.]

Frame 12--attack with weapon1. If two targets are in range, attack a 2nd target with weapon2.

Frame 16--Nothing. A minimum of 6 frames must pass for weapon2 to be eligible to attack again.

Frame 20--attack with weapon2. If two targets...blah, blah, blah.

This is very approximate. There's a lot of information, some of it ambiguous, and much of it mixed up with code that I have no hope of understanding. (Ilkori will know what I'm talking about. :lol: )The key points:

--Dual-wield will only get more hits than single if multiple targets are in range.

--WW checks for hits only on multiples of 4 frames.

--The first two attack checks come at frames 4 and 8 no matter what.

--After that, the eligibility of a weapon to hit is affected by its speed.

Those are all points I'm pretty confident in. The rest...?

There's more I could say, but I've got to go. Later.

[Speederländer]

From information by Hammerman, Ruvanal, Myrddin, Loschonorg, Zath, and others. Any mistakes I've made in interpeting it are my own though. Oh, my aching head.

From what I've been reading, a 4/6 WW will result in something like this-



This is very approximate. There's a lot of information, some of it ambiguous, and much of it mixed up with code that I have no hope of understanding. (Ilkori will know what I'm talking about. :lol: )The key points:

--Dual-wield will only get more hits than single if multiple targets are in range.

--WW checks for hits only on multiples of 4 frames.

--The first two attack checks come at frames 4 and 8 no matter what.

--After that, the eligibility of a weapon to hit is affected by its speed.

Those are all points I'm pretty confident in. The rest...?

There's more I could say, but I've got to go. Later.

That's very ineteresting and useful information. The issue then becomes how long are you in range. It goes back to the total range of your ww and the time it takes you to traverse the distance from when your target FIRST comes into range to when it's LAST in range. If you can express this number in terms of frames, you can then apply your information above to give us a working model from which to construct something to test.

[BIGeyedBUG]

By the way, I never did see a solid number given for the number of hits possible on a given target. Like I said in the other thread though, it looks like it's purely a function of WW speed, range, and target size. W/R speed apparently has no effect--although it might have in earlier versions of the game.

When I can stand to look at the sources again, I'll try to add more to my little outline.

[ilkori]

:love:

Looks like BeB beat me to it and already knows a lot more. I learned quite a bit from reading that. I don't suppose there is a spot on the AB where all those threads are linked to? - using a search for something like this isn't nice (though I suppose restricting to Ruvinal would help).


Since I seem to be way behind in the technical mechanics, I'm going to try my hand at a general formula for figuring out how many hits are possible on a single pass. Angle brackets <> are to indicate note numbers since I had to make a few assumptions. Also, I tended to make these some kind of hybrid between pseudocode and excel functions.

Formula for stationary targets in your line of attack
speed = [movement speed of WW in yards/frame] = ??
range = [radius of attack in yards] = 2 <1>
size = [radius of target in yards] = 1 ? <2>
length = [travel distance where target is within range] = 2 * (range + size)
time = [time available to strike target in frames] = length / speed
fpa = [frames per attack] = 4
attacks = [maximum number of attacks possible, though you will probably get one less] = roundup( time / fpa )

Ok, now for the tricky one. This is for targets who aren't directly on your line of attack. Any formula not mentioned here is the same as the previous.

Generalized formula for stationary targets
skew = [distance of target away from path in yards] =< range + size <3>
length = 2 * sqrt( (range+size)^2 - (skew)^2) )
attacks = roundup( time / fpa ) = roundup( (length/speed) / fpa )

Notes
Claw range is a base of 1 with a rangeadd of 1 (despite what the arreat summit says). At least, this is what I have heard from several sources, and this would mean that the total range is 2. The reason I am mentioning this is that a former dueler (and someone I had a great number of arguements with) claimed that a claw could never hit someone who could hit them with another range 2 weapon. For these calculations, it is assumed to be perfectly round, though at some point I know it will get discritized.
I don't know how big stuff is - anyone have a source for this?
Notice their center can be outside the range, as long as they have a size larger than 0, but you would be lucky to get one attack. The <= simply means less than or equal to, and you would need to know this in order to solve the equation.

[rikstaker]

Hi,zangief pointed me to this link.

I am from the barb forums,I am in the works of a comprehensive ww guide,follwing is a section from it.



WIAS SECTION:

FACTS WORTH NOTING:

Wias/bp only effects the value of check frequency, no other factor is involved in deciding how often a weapon checks for target(s).The other factors have to do with the duration of checks, we'll explore them later.Also see differentiation of checks,attack,hits now.

The first check of ww with all weapons lwbp/non lwbp occurs at the 4th frame & the second occurs at the 8th,then the wias/bp factor kicks in & the check frequency is set to what is alloted at the weapon breakpoint that is a check every 4 frame with a lwbp weapon or a check every 6th or 8th depending on the weapon/bp.
---------------------

RANGE SECTION:

Differentiation of Check,Attacks & Hits: (Crucial)

Checks: This refers to the game mechanism checking for the presence of target(s) in a 5 tile radius (check radius*) at the check interval (depending on the wias/breakpoint) in order to intiate the attack phase. This is the true & definable ww frequency & only wias/bp effects its value. Hence you should always say check frequency or cf instead of attacks per second/frames per attack. A lwbp weapon gives you a 4 frame check frequncey or 6.2 cps (checks per second)

Attacks: With the target in check radius,it must also be in weapon range (attack radius*) then, the weapon proceeds to attack the target i.e a chance to hit check is carried out on the target.If it is out of weapon range the attack is skipped.

Hits: When the chance to hit check is sucessfull, attack is converted into a hit,resulting in the target taking damage.


*CHECK RADIUS; The 5 tile (game distance unit) radius in which the game checks for target at due check-regardless of weapon range..

*ATTACK RADIUS: It is the distance from which target(s) can be attacked. Weapon range determines this value. The longer the range of the weapon, the longer the distance from which a target can be attacked. Attack radius & Attack duration are semi-correlated:

ATTACK DURATION: It is the effective duration between the point of time a target enters your Attack radius to the point where it exits the radius. In other words: It is the time you have, while in whirlwind-, to get your attacks off on the target, since it will get out of range sooner or later, due to your dynamic attack. Pay attention-crucial point coming up: A larger radius(longer weapon range) would cause a target to enter your range early & exit late, thereby increasing the time it is in range for you to get more attacks on it.

In simple words:Target stays in range longer, giving you a good chance of an extra hit or two. Apart from weapon range your Whirl Velocity(effective runwak speed) & chill/slow factor affects Check Duration- see Maneuverability.

Note: This applies to the general target behavior: A target (PVM & PVP) tends to either; remain stationary or move in the opposite direction, or move at a lesser pace in your same direction, meaning either way it is generally always bound to get out of range, very rarely does a target move in your direction & matches your speed & heading, allowing infinite attacks on it.

SUMMARY:

FACTOR
Attack Radius

VARIABLE EFFECTING (+increasing effect -decreasing effect)
Weapon Range +

FACTOR
Attack Duration

VARIABLE EFFECTING (+increasing effect -decreasing effect)
Weapon Range +
Final whirl speed based on run/walk speed including heavyarmor/shield factor &/or being slowed/chilled factor-(minus)
Target size* +
Target status-stationary/moving-movement speed & direction:dynamic variable*

*Final whirl speed is inversely proptional to Attack duration,the slower you move due to wearing heavy armor/shield & having base runwalk &/or being frozen the longer the check duration. I'd like to address a misconception on being frozen in pvp under meanuverability, be sure to scheck it out.

*Target size- there are three targets sizes-large,normal,small-bosses etc.. are big,players are normal & monsters like flayers etc..are small.Larger targets occupy more tile units(game distance units) therefore they stay in range longer allowing more attacks on them.

*Target status: The most attacks possible are on target(s) that are moving in your whirl direction,they stay in range longer, next come stationary targets,the fewest attacks occur on target(s) moving in your opposite direction-e.g; (BVB)

illkori's & some others posts are interesting,I am studying those.

BTW,just to clarify,ww speed is the same as your walk speed & affected by all factors including frw from gear/skill & heavyarmor/shiled factor.

Razgriz

[Dahmer]

dont have an assa but since ww is main skill on barb i tested dualwield ww with my latest barb

left hand : beast ba
right hand : echoing war sword of anthrax (100psn dmg & only item with psn dmg)

did 1 ww vs other barb without a shield & here's the result :
3 hits ->
1st hit : freeze but no psn dmg -> beast
2nd hit : freeze & psn dmg -> war sword
3rd hit : freeze but no psn dmg -> beast

dualwield ww with 1 fast weapon & 1 slower weapon & both weapons hit the same target while there was no other target near

its a simple test u can do yourself if you really dont believe that both weapons can hit & they dont need the same speed for it

make sure u have no psn on your equip
use chaos as your left claw & any claw with psn dmg as 2nd claw
do NOT cast venom & do 1 ww vs barb/assa/any other char (best without block)

[BIGeyedBUG]

Hi,zangief pointed me to this link.

I am from the barb forums,I am in the works of a comprehensive ww guide,follwing is a section from it.



illkori's & some others posts are interesting,I am studying those.

BTW,just to clarify,ww speed is the same as your walk speed & affected by all factors including frw from gear/skill & heavyarmor/shiled factor.

Razgriz

A really good summary of the basic rules that I had to try and figure out on my own, afaict. One thing I'm glad you mentioned that I forgot to, is the effect of target motion on number of hits.

The R/W thing was a bit of muddled thinking on my part. Several sources suggested that immense amounts of faster R/W had no negative impact on their WW's effectiveness. It seems clear that what they referring to was the rate of damage, rather than to possible number of attacks on a pass. This would make sense, as one could then make very brief, fast whirls, DoD style and have equivalent or better damage over time. Does this jibe with what you know?

The pattern of checks for different WW speeds is more interesting than I thought too. All of the not-divisible-by-4 speeds alternate one check at the expected point, with one check as if they were one speed faster (not counting frames 4 and 8). So WW6 ends up at 4, 8, 16, 20, 28, 32, 40... And WW 10 at 4, 8, 20, 28, 40, 48, 60 and so on. Makes sense, otherwise they would be the same as the next speed slower, but I didn't catch on to that when I posted yesterday.

I'm curious about what your take on the dual-weapon rules are. Everything I read was clear that dual-attacks on each of the checks will only happen if multiple targets are in range (and never on frame 4). Zangeif mentioned that the experts on the Barb forum say otherwise. What's the thinking over there?

[BIGeyedBUG]

its a simple test u can do yourself if you really dont believe that both weapons can hit & they dont need the same speed for it

I'm not sure if this is clear, but nobody is saying that both weapons don't hit during a WW. The real question is whether both weapons can hit during the same frame in a WW, if there's only one target in "range". I can't tell from your test whether you've actually answered that question.

[rikstaker]

A really good summary of the basic rules that I had to try and figure out on my own, afaict. One thing I'm glad you mentioned that I forgot to, is the effect of target motion on number of hits.

The R/W thing was a bit of muddled thinking on my part. Several sources suggested that immense amounts of faster R/W had no negative impact on their WW's effectiveness. It seems clear that what they referring to was the rate of damage, rather than to possible number of attacks on a pass. This would make sense, as one could then make very brief, fast whirls, DoD style and have equivalent or better damage over time. Does this jibe with what you know?

Faster runwalk does have an effect,but its indirect as I said,it effects how long target is in weapon range,be too fast & it will be out of range when checks occur.In duels like BVB frw doesnt matter,since it evens out,as you will have him in range as long as he has you.Fast short whilrs is a good practice in pvp,but not pvm-more whirls mean more mana & there is a delay between ending & restarting your whilr,so you loose out on dmg over time to a barb whirling normally.

The pattern of checks for different WW speeds is more interesting than I thought too. All of the not-divisible-by-4 speeds alternate one check at the expected point, with one check as if they were one speed faster (not counting frames 4 and 8). So WW6 ends up at 4, 8, 16, 20, 28, 32, 40... And WW 10 at 4, 8, 20, 28, 40, 48, 60 and so on. Makes sense, otherwise they would be the same as the next speed slower, but I didn't catch on to that when I posted yesterday.

Yes thats true,The first two checks occur without the bp factor into play,all subsequent check delays however are dependent on it.

I'm curious about what your take on the dual-weapon rules are. Everything I read was clear that dual-attacks on each of the checks will only happen if multiple targets are in range (and never on frame 4). Zangeif mentioned that the experts on the Barb forum say otherwise. What's the thinking over there?

Quite a few people have carried out tests including myself & following is the summary against single target in range:

-weapon 1 only hits in the 4th frame
-weapon 2 & 1 hit on the 8th

What we have arrived at is:As long as the target is still in range when the second weapon get it's hitcheck, you'll get two hits(1st hits with it).
--
One more thing to note is:Some experts carried out test with modded standard dmg weapons eg:121-122 & compared the dmg done to target when dualwielding & singlewileding it.Dualwielding resulted in ~100% more dmg on single target when using long whilrs(well past the 8 frame before target enters range).Link (http://www.rpgforums.net/showthread.php?t=276633&page=3&pp=25)

Thats credible evidence that both weapons were consistently hitting in the same frame.

This can mean one thing,that for dualwieding, short whirls rob you of dmg,since only one weapon hits in the 4th but in all subsequent checks both weapons can hit in the same frame.

Razgriz

[Neuroff]

I'm sure WW has to be able to hit twice in the same frame. Otherwise Claw/Shield WW Asns would dominate Claw/Claw ones.

[BIGeyedBUG]

Quite a few people have carried out tests including myself

The convincing test is the one mcm did. Clicky. (http://www.rpgforums.net/showpost.php?p=2237573&postcount=15) I hope you're planning to credit him in your guide.

I'm asking about this on the AB tech forum anyway. Ruvanal, Myrdinn and others still stop by from time to time. Also there are several people I trust there who can do mod tests. No reflection on mcm--he sounds credible. I just don't know him.

I'm sure WW has to be able to hit twice in the same frame. Otherwise Claw/Shield WW Asns would dominate Claw/Claw ones.

That's not good evidence on its own since c/c gives other advantages. WB, +skills, more life, and variety of mods are some of the ones that come to mind.

[Speederländer]

That's not good evidence on its own since c/c gives other advantages. WB, +skills, more life, and variety of mods are some of the ones that come to mind.


Those considerations are balanced on the other side though as well, namely a claw-shield will have more block, faster block rate (IIRC), better attack rating due to higher dex, etc.

The big divider really comes down to number of possible attacks.

[BIGeyedBUG]

Those considerations are balanced on the other side though as well, namely a claw-shield will have more block, faster block rate (IIRC), better attack rating due to higher dex, etc.

The big divider really comes down to number of possible attacks.

I understand what you're saying, but making conclusions on a specific game mechanic based on the behavior of players is nutters. There are too many other factors involved. It's a nice place from which to start asking questions, and a poor place from which to answer them. The only thing for that is testing.

[Speederländer]

I understand what you're saying, but making conclusions on a specific game mechanic based on the behavior of players is nutters. There are too many other factors involved. It's a nice place from which to start asking questions, and a poor place from which to answer them. The only thing for that is testing.

Yup, I agree.

[rikstaker]

The convincing test is the one mcm did. Clicky. (http://www.rpgforums.net/showpost.php?p=2237573&postcount=15) I hope you're planning to credit him in your guide.

Our rivalry is quite famous I reckon,The recent more credible tests were carried out by taz & he arrived at a relevant & accurate conclusion & he did not compare dualwield vs 2handers in terms of dmg,his conclusion was 100% more attacks than singlewielding.Moreover atleast he understands that a check on the 4th & 8th frame doesnt mean wias dont matter.


- One 200-201 damage range 1 weapon reaching -35 ww breakpoint held in one hand.
- Two 200-201 damage range 1 weapons reaching -35 ww breakpoint dual weilded.
- One 200-201 damage range 5 two handed weapon reaching -60 ww breakpoint.

Damage with level 7 ww is 198-199 listed

Ten "8 frame" WW attacks were made for each weapon setup and the results recorded. The length of the WW was controled by myself and confirmed by the number of audible hits "smack smack" this being always TWO for an 8 frame attack.

Damage dealt to the meat bag:
1 handed range 1 weapon: 68, 68, 68, 68, 68, 68, 68, 68, 68, 68
2 handed range 5 weapon: 68, 68, 68, 68, 68, 68, 68, 68, 34, 68
Dual weild 1 handed range 1 weapons: 102, 102, 102, 102, 102, 102, 102, 102, 102, 102

Regarding the 34 for the 2 hander, I can only assume this was a miss due to 5% chance of missing (95% cap on chance to hit.)


He concluded in the first 8 frames:


To reiterate, this is on a SINGLE pvp opponent. I believe these results speak for themselves, with the dual weilding consistently doing 50% more damage by virtue of the fact that both weapons attack on the 8th frame..

Suggest you read this (http://www.rpgforums.net/showpost.php?p=2951589&postcount=15) as well.I applied actual weapon dmg numbers to taz's results & it is evidence enough that its only from frame 16 that dualwield gives you more dmg than 2handers.You can also find further above in the thread mcm,stating the 100% more dmg possibility.

I understand we need to mod weapons to deal consistent dmg,but based on the 100% more dmg or 50% in 8 frames derived with dualwielding modded weapons you cant conclude dualwield gives you 100% more dmg or 50% more in 8 frames in-game,thats what mcm did & hence my differences with him.Which range 1 or even range 3 1hander lwbp weapon does the same dmg as range 5 2hander?.If you dont factor the higher dmg of 2handers in your tests you shouldnt conclude dualwield gives you 100% more dmg or 50% more dmg in 8frames,attacks yes but not dmg.Taz did it right but our hero didnt.As for getting him in credits-I doubt that will happen.

Razgriz

[rikstaker]

Onto his long ww tests:

This test was extended to long range WW, again all weapons are at their last breakpoint (4 frame attack checks) starting far from the meat bag to eliminate the 4 and 8 frame attacks, and in this case the dual weilding 1 handed range 1 weapons performed close to 100% greater damage than either the 1 handed single weild or the 2 handed:

I agree that you can achieve 100% more dmg with dualwield or 50% in first 8 frames over single 1handers,but not over 2handers.Thats not possible in-game.His conclusions/interpretation on it can lead novice players astray, who cant spot the obvious flaws in testing conditions.

Razgriz

[ilkori]

rikstaker, in mcm's defense, I would like to point this out:- One 200-201 damage range 1 weapon reaching -35 ww breakpoint held in one hand.
- Two 200-201 damage range 1 weapons reaching -35 ww breakpoint dual weilded.
- One 200-201 damage range 5 two handed weapon reaching -60 ww breakpoint.You will notice that every single one of his modded weapons had the same damage (single or dual wield), meaning that given his testing parameters the values and important conclusions are correct. Anyone who reads (and tries to understand) his conclusions will see the obvious "flaws" in the interpretation you give his information.

The only bone I have to pick about his testing at this point would be in regards to whether or not his PvP conclusions are worth including with his testing. Being niether an experienced PvP player or hardcore Barbarian player, I honestly don't give a rip, and would rather not see them included.

[rikstaker]

rikstaker, in mcm's defense, I would like to point this out:


- One 200-201 damage range 1 weapon reaching -35 ww breakpoint held in one hand.
- Two 200-201 damage range 1 weapons reaching -35 ww breakpoint dual weilded.
- One 200-201 damage range 5 two handed weapon reaching -60 ww breakpoint.

You will notice that every single one of his modded weapons had the same damage (single or dual wield), meaning that given his testing parameters the values and important conclusions are correct. Anyone who reads (and tries to understand) his conclusions will see the obvious "flaws" in the interpretation you give his information.

The only bone I have to pick about his testing at this point would be in regards to whether or not his PvP conclusions are worth including with his testing. Being niether an experienced PvP player or hardcore Barbarian player, I honestly don't give a rip, and would rather not see them included.


The last paragraph is the most interesting(more like I see the same """flaw""" (bone) you pointed out but I dont give a damn,since I dont play barbs).

mcm's test & my arguments were meant for the barb class & not assns though his dualwield over wep/shiled results are applicable to yours.I was replying to Beb's suggestion of including him in the credits of my guide also for barb class,I cant figure out how that could trigger an irritated response from you.

Actually,your comment on parameter just made my job easier. So you noticed that every single setup had the same damage though strangely you didn’t mention 2handers. Which means that his results & conclusions are true to his test & parameters alone, not in-game. That’s no biggie. The whole point of testing is to determine & better the choices/options in-game.

K an e.g, I am testing 3 engines for their hp or initial acceleration in 0-100 or whatever. One a V6 one a twinV6 & another a V12.What I’d then do- is restrict the power of the V12 to the same hp as a V6,I am not sure why I’d do that & as a result quite understandably the power output of twinV6 setup would be higher. So I’d give a report to the folks high up stating that twinV6 is superior even to the V12.

Check this (http://www.rpgforums.net/showpost.php?p=2916765&postcount=56) test-same method but addressing the right question & nothing beyond-how much more often does dualwielding attack over a single 1hweapon against a single target?. Similar everything- but limited to the point & no 2handers in the tests bottom-line: an accurate & true to the game conclusion. Therefore much more easier to accept. All weapons he used were 1handed & modified by minimum dmg jewels.

We cant blatantly ignore the higher damage of 2handers, mcm was better of not using them in the tests or attaching a condition in conclusion, a side note, anything that would highlight & state that even 2handers were modded to do the same dmg & that may not necessarily be true in-game.

We must be careful when we adopt the role of testers to use the right phrases & attach conditions wherever necessary, not everyone’s understanding is as deep as your, mine, or mcm ‘s.

I fully agree to Taz’s decision to not to factor them at all-why? Since the difference between the dmg of 2 & 1handers is relative & varies with case-that’s why I used the results from Taz’s tests & applied in-game weapon stats to explore the actual damage output of dualwield vs 2handers. (http://www.rpgforums.net/showpost.php?p=2951589&postcount=15)

I came in peace. :xrollseye

Razgriz

[ilkori]

*backs off* Didn't mean to offend. I jumped into the middle of a rivalry without reading the full threads - that was my bad. Thanks for the lesson anyway. My misunderstanding popped out of one phrase that was unclear rather than a full disagreement/hostility. (That, and I posted a bit too late for my sanity last night, so things weren't making as much sense as they should).

"The whole point of testing is to determine & better the choices/options in-game."
In the long run, yes. However, you need to know the mechanics first. After reading the full thread (http://www.rpgforums.net/showthread.php?t=276633&page=1&pp=20), I think we could have saved a bit of time just getting a link to that. :lol: mcm posted his valid results first, then taz added his. Applying the game scenarios later is great, but factoring in the effects of shield vs no shield and player skill make even that analysis nigh impossible for anything but the most basic duels (i.e. BvB).

Anyway, we didn't want more summaries, we wanted the meat of the discussion. Assassins aren't mindless zombies, and now I can say the same thing for the Barbarian forum as well. In all sincerity, thank you for being willing to share your results with us. The end results don't make as much of a difference to us (except in melee duels), but knowing how it works anyway is a good thing.


And now, it's time for a jig! :jig:

[rikstaker]

However, you need to know the mechanics first.... we wanted the meat of the discussion.

Glad you are getting the idea,hopefully in the future you'd respect the folks who carry out test(zang also),who are just trying to establish the facts(meat) that you are presumably looking for.Just because you dont have the time to test or 'look into' the game code for that purpose doesnt mean you should swat attempts by those who are willing.

Though the first line aplies to me as well,I am just making sure it is done right. :uhhuh:

The 'summaries' that you speak of are ww mechanics/rules from credible sources like Hammerman & RTB.Those are from the game code & from my experience & observation they are true.

Your comment that you dont want more of that is in confirmation with what folks in my place speak about here.You are just taking that extra step to prove them right.

I still stand for peace. :xrollseye

Razgriz

[ilkori]

The 'summaries' that you speak of are ww mechanics/rules from credible sources like Hammerman & RTB.Those names I recognize, yours I didn't. Now I do, but that doesn't change my point of view asof a few days ago. I was just trying to make sure it was done right the same as you were. Respect is another issue, but you can't expect too much if I'm going to play an Assassin. j/k


By the way, have you taken another look at the #hits equation I posted earlier? I think there could be some fine tuning so that it gets accurate results without the disclaimer that there might be one less hit. This is especially in regards to the issue of when the frames are counted from. Is it the 4th frame of the whirlwind regardless of target location, or is it dependant on other factors such as the 5-tile hit check.

Oh yeah, and is a tile the same distance as a yard from other sources? It would be really handy if they were the same, but knowing Blizzard anything is possible.

[rikstaker]

I havent looked at posts in detail,as something else got my attention,I'll check those & post my comment.

Razgriz

[rikstaker]

I havent looked at other posts in detail,as something else got my attention,I'll check those & post my comment.

Razgriz

[rikstaker]

Damn database errors, I couldnt edit my posts,sorry for the double post.

By the way, have you taken another look at the #hits equation I posted earlier? I think there could be some fine tuning so that it gets accurate results without the disclaimer that there might be one less hit. This is especially in regards to the issue of when the frames are counted from. Is it the 4th frame of the whirlwind regardless of target location, or is it dependant on other factors such as the 5-tile hit check.

Oh yeah, and is a tile the same distance as a yard from other sources? It would be really handy if they were the same, but knowing Blizzard anything is possible.

A tile unit (t.u) is 2/3 of a yard.

Why would the 4th frame of ww be regardless of target location? Ww checks for targets in a five tile radius & proceeds to attack them only if the target tile is within weapon range.

I am working on a max hits formula as well,but I am double checking the issues with variable input units from various scraps of info from LL & basin,but I am sure that it still wont be 100% accurate as well.

Razgriz

[ilkori]

I guess the reason I was asking about the checking was the difference in testing between the "short" and "long" whirls where the first frame (and maybe more) were purposely skipped.

Anyway, I think the formula I have is accurate, though some unit conversions might be in order since r/w speed is usually given in yards per second. I would assume that weapon range is in tiles since the maximum check distance for WW is 5 tiles.

[rikstaker]

I guess the reason I was asking about the checking was the difference in testing between the "short" and "long" whirls where the first frame (and maybe more) were purposely skipped.

How could you get confused so easily? They were skipped to eliminate the loss of 1hit in the fourth frame when dualwielding,that has no bearing on the necessity of target to be in weapon range for attack at any delay.

I doubt it is safe to assume weapon range is in tiles(I was tempted as well, but I wont do that untill I can back that up with tests)

Thats all from me now,back to my home.Nice knowing you. :xrollseye

Razgriz