Warrior greatsword dps. (never use hundred blades)
1 2
In an effort to debunk this guy’s numbers I confirmed that he has in fact included the final damage in HB and the 3rd hit in basic attack. The problem is he takes each attack as an island, applying the vulnerability to basic attack but not to HB. I will calculate his damage to show he included final hits, then fix the errors.
His numbers:
Attacks———-damage—/—dps—/—total dps—/
total basic————851—/—607—/—607+-/
hundred blades—2030—/—580—/—130—/
whirlwind attack-1036—/—4144—/—450+-/
The damage of the 3rd auto attack is about 1.286 times what the first 2 do. Using that we can find his auto attack is: 259+259+333. Adding in the vulnerability, I’m not sure what spec he used to calculate but you should have at least 20 points in strength for a GS, with that his vulnerability for only using basic attack should be 8%: 851*1.08/1.5=613dps
The damage of HB without the final strike is about 1.91 times the damage of all three auto attacks added together. Using that 851*1.91=1625 The final strike is exactly 1/4 of HB damage. So we get 1625/4=406. (I know this number doesn’t line up with his exactly, but it is close enough to fit his number.)
This is where we differ, you will NEVER just hundred blade. You also auto attack, with 100% up time you can maintain a 6 stack of vulnerability while also doing HB. That changes his formula to: 2030*1.06/ 3.5 = 615dps
But those are still so close. Isn’t it just easier to just auto attack? WAIT WE FORGOT SOMETHING! Forceful greatsword’s might buff! This is where HB shines. It clearly stacks it faster and utilizes a 5 second buff better. 9 attacks in 3.5 seconds vs basic 7. If you’re running quickness it will be even more.
Combine that with sticking and moving, your bleeds, other people applying vulnerability… well… Use the result is you should use your HB. But I think most people knew that anyway.
One last note I would like to toss in there. This is all just math using just the listed numbers. There are some small pauses in auto attack and such that might be beneficial to weed out just what is going on time wise. Maybe I’ll fraps it and look at it closely. :P
Total dps takes into account the cooldown of the skill.
total dps should never take into account the cooldown of the skill as you may use other skills while that ability is on cooldown.
-Desirz Matheon
One last note I would like to toss in there. This is all just math using just the listed numbers. There are some small pauses in auto attack and such that might be beneficial to weed out just what is going on time wise. Maybe I’ll fraps it and look at it closely. :P
I got bored this afternoon and did just that. Here is the data result.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AkOEvvx5XxHTdHBCYnNxTVFidndfdVhRWUR3UmpOc2c#gid=0
I should have done the last 2 basic rotations, but I was looking at HB not so much basic attack. The basic attack result though is more relevant to proving the OP wrong, and has more overall data to support it anyway.
Going back to the OP’s chart it should look more like this (which is more like what I think people would have expected):
Attacks———-damage—/—dps—/
only basic————851—/—389—/
hundred blades—2030—/—615—/
TLDR:
3 basic attack takes about 2.36 seconds not 1.5 like it states it should and does less dps than HB.
HB takes about the 3.5 seconds as would be expected from the ability description.
I read through this whole thing, and only ONE PERSON mentioned the most important factor of HB: Forceful Greatsword
The sheer attackspeed of Hundred Blades means you will stack more might, more bleeds and more vulnerability if you chose the Rending Strikes trait, than if you’re just using the autoattack. Each of the HB hits have a chance to apply on-crit effects from traits and your Sigil.
I cba to do any sort of math on this, but my gut tells me this’d even out and surpass any situational DPS differences between HB and AA.
Space reserved for future witty pop-culture references.
One last note I would like to toss in there. This is all just math using just the listed numbers. There are some small pauses in auto attack and such that might be beneficial to weed out just what is going on time wise. Maybe I’ll fraps it and look at it closely. :P
I got bored this afternoon and did just that. Here is the data result.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AkOEvvx5XxHTdHBCYnNxTVFidndfdVhRWUR3UmpOc2c#gid=0
I should have done the last 2 basic rotations, but I was looking at HB not so much basic attack. The basic attack result though is more relevant to proving the OP wrong, and has more overall data to support it anyway.Going back to the OP’s chart it should look more like this (which is more like what I think people would have expected):
Attacks———-damage—/—dps—/
only basic————851—/—389—/
hundred blades—2030—/—615—/TLDR:
3 basic attack takes about 2.36 seconds not 1.5 like it states it should and does less dps than HB.
HB takes about the 3.5 seconds as would be expected from the ability description.
I dont know how you’ve tested, but it seems you didnt use steady weapons.
What is this?
Attacks———-damage—/—dps—/
only basic————851—/—389—/
hundred blades—2030—/—615—/
How many basic attacks is this? And Which one’s? Slices, Swings, Brutal Strikes?
I guess this is one sequence of basic attacks against one cast of hundred blades, since the quotient of damage and dps is not the same. But if it’s like i said, what do you want to prove? You said “it should be more like this!” But actually not, ‘cause you wanna compare the damage of one HB with the Damage of AA’s you can perform while casting HB.
I also disagree that HB has the animationlength that’s described in the tooltip, although i can assure you that the deviation from tooltip description and realcasting time is much bigger in case of AA than HB. Therefore you’re right with you approximations.
(edited by PhilKingz.4809)
I dont know how you’ve tested, but it seems you didnt use steady weapons.
I tested weapon swings. Maybe you should try reading a post because I started mine by quoting myself.
One last note I would like to toss in there. This is all just math using just the listed numbers. There are some small pauses in auto attack and such that might be beneficial to weed out just what is going on time wise. Maybe I’ll fraps it and look at it closely. :P
Then started my new post saying that…
I got bored this afternoon and did just that. Here is the data result.
What is this?
Attacks———-damage—/—dps—/
only basic————851—/—389—/
hundred blades—2030—/—615—/
It is…
Going back to the OP’s chart
Just like I said.
How many basic attacks is this? And Which one’s? Slices, Swings, Brutal Strikes?
It is an amended version of…
the warriors dps based on the skill description
…that was in the original post.
I guess this is one sequence of basic attacks against one cast of hundred blades, since the quotient of damage and dps is not the same. But if it’s like i said, what do you want to prove? You said “it should be more like this!” But actually not, ‘cause you wanna compare the damage of one HB with the Damage of AA’s you can perform while casting HB.
No, it is the result of using the OP’s formula and applying my experimental data from:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AkOEvvx5XxHTdHBCYnNxTVFidndfdVhRWUR3UmpOc2c#gid=0
I should have done the last 2 basic rotations, but I was looking at HB not so much basic attack. The basic attack result though is more relevant to proving the OP wrong, and has more overall data to support it anyway.
If you can’t access this, you should say something. The allowances should let people view it though. It’s 3 HB cast’s and 7 full rotations of basic attack.
I also disagree that HB has the animationlength that’s described in the tooltip, although i can assure you that the deviation from tooltip description and realcasting time is much bigger in case of AA than HB. Therefore you’re right with you approximations.
Again, that is what…
…is. It doesn’t matter if you disagree or not. I have empirical evidence that HB is accurate, basic attack is not. Your opinion means squat next to that. If you think it is wrong somehow make your own test, or show a mistake in my data.
WTF, man. I still cant follow you and your attitude is quite unfriendly for someone not leaving his own comfortzone.
- I also have empirical data about HB. Does that make them valid? The most obvious Indicator that empirical data is never correct is your swingtime of HB which varies although the game does not.
- If i understand you right, you compared the weapondps of HB with one single
AA-Sequence. (Btw. AA is not just AA, it’s a sequence with three different attacks.
So AA-DPS varies if you cut in different swings.) See below:
- I repeat:
Attacks———-damage—/—dps—/
only basic————851—/—389—/
hundred blades—2030—/—615—/
There, you not just tested the swing time, but the damage. So you need steady weapons. In addition the quotient of dps and the damage (measured in what? Swings? time? Cars?) is not the same. Means for example those 851 cannot induce 389 dps over the time of HB when 2030 induces 615 dps.
Maybe this was just a hypothecial example from you and i didnt get it. Another hint why HB cannot have a casttime of 3,5s is simply that the castbar has exactly 3,5s in programcode, but there are still starting animations, also endanimations which are performed independent.
So i just wanted to understand what you’re talking about, nothing else. Ignore this post if you like.
are we talking bout pve ? or pvp?
i didn’t bother to read the wall of texts..
Blackgate
Shadow Legion of the Dovahkiin [ SLD ]
Shadow Legion of the Dovahkiin [ SLD ]
WTF, man. I still cant follow you and your attitude is quite unfriendly for someone not leaving his own comfortzone.
I treat ignorance with patience, stupidity with scorn. It’s just how I am.
- I also have empirical data about HB. Does that make them valid? The most obvious Indicator that empirical data is never correct is your swingtime of HB which varies although the game does not.
Giving you the benefit of the doubt that you know what the word “emperical” means, why don’t you share that data? I did say that…
If you think it is wrong somehow make your own test, or show a mistake in my data.
Have you even clicked this google doc link yet? https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AkOEvvx5XxHTdHBCYnNxTVFidndfdVhRWUR3UmpOc2c#gid=0
As for the value of the data, testing carries a measure of uncertainty, that’s why you take multiple samples, so if you wanted to be picky my uncertainty is fairly large for HB. But it is not in the range of multiple seconds. The high uncertainty comes from that measured from the click, not the first hit since there is a cast time, but that click is a manually entered event. That it was spot on the expected value two of 4 times and only off by six 100ths of a second for a 3rd says that if it isn’t exactly 3.5 seconds the deviation is not perceptible.
- If i understand you right, you compared the weapondps of HB with one single
AA-Sequence. (Btw. AA is not just AA, it’s a sequence with three different attacks.
So AA-DPS varies if you cut in different swings.)
You don’t understand me right. That you even say that makes me wonder if you aren’t simply a troll since I said in the previous post in response to a similar comment:
It’s 3 HB cast’s and 7 full rotations of basic attack.
Maybe my mistaken, improper use of an apostrophe threw you off. (rolling my eyes) 3 hundred blades, and 7 FULL rotations of basic attack. A “full rotation” is all 3 hits from the basic attack. Read that slow, then read it again just to be sure.
See below:
- I repeat:
Attacks———-damage—/—dps—/
only basic————851—/—389—/
hundred blades—2030—/—615—/
There, you not just tested the swing time, but the damage. So you need steady weapons. In addition the quotient of dps and the damage (measured in what? Swings? time? Cars?) is not the same. Means for example those 851 cannot induce 389 dps over the time of HB when 2030 induces 615 dps.
I didn’t say I tested anything there. I plugged my tested average 2.36 swing speed into values provided by the original poster, along with the other corrections I already made in my previous post.
Or more specifically I simply said, and requoted for you in my last post:
Going back to the OP’s chart
In case you’re not a troll, and an even greater imbecile than I can imagine, so you’re just unable to find the original post by clicking the 1 at the top of the page. Here is his chart:
Attacks———-damage—/—dps—/—total dps—/
total basic————851—/—607—/—607+-/
hundred blades—2030—/—580—/—130—/
whirlwind attack-1036—/—4144—/—450+-/
Maybe this was just a hypothecial example from you and i didnt get it. Another hint why HB cannot have a casttime of 3,5s is simply that the castbar has exactly 3,5s in programcode, but there are still starting animations, also endanimations which are performed independent.
No maybe about it, except it was an edited hypothetical example and explained as such. I even quoted it for you, so I hope you didn’t miss it this time. Here is the OP explaining it for you:
the warriors dps based on the skill description
Here is the OP explaining his math:
Its basicly damage / caste time * vuln
basic attack 851 / 1.5 * 1.07 = 607
hundred blades 2030 / 3.5 * 1 = 580
As for the animations, I measured from the moment the damage number popped up from a hit except for the start of HB where I measured from the click (as I said earlier in this post).
So i just wanted to understand what you’re talking about, nothing else. Ignore this post if you like.
It’s a good troll, if that’s what it is. You give me just enough hope you are someone who, if he gets just enough scorn, maybe I can make you angry or curious enough that you learn how to identify information for yourself. Then, ask questions that make you look informed and deserving of additional information, not stupid and ignorant of information already provided.
If your next post is this inane I will take your advice and ignore it though.
1 2