PDA

View Full Version : DPS drop in rogues = ~70%?

Quarterling
06-12-2010, 03:44 PM

Correct me if I have any math wrong, this is how I think the attacks per animation will compare between now and Update 5. No other bonus attacks are calculated in here and bonuses to attack speed is disregarded.

The purpose of these charts is to compare the DPS drop in rogues.

A rogue can have Improved and Greater TWF, but first some charts on how many attacks one would get upon completing an attack animation cycle.

Pre-Update 5
2 2 1 1 = Normal (6 attacks)
2 2 1 1 = TWF (6 attacks)
2 2 2 1 = ITWF (7 attacks)
2 2 2 2 = GTWF (8 attacks)

Post-Update 5
(1+.2) (1+.2) (1+.2) (1+.2) = Normal (4.8 attacks)
(1+.4) (1+.4) (1+.4) (1+.4) = TWF (5.6 attacks)
(1+.6) (1+.6) (1+.6) (1+.6) = ITWF (6.4 attacks)
(1+.8) (1+.8) (1+.8) (1+.8) = GTWF (7.2 attacks)

So after fixing the tables and re-doing the math, it seems as if the drop in DPS for pure rogues with GTWF is only 10%? I guess I can live with that, but in my honest opinion it has nothing to do with fixing lag.

06-12-2010, 03:50 PM
9 to 6.4. This is about 70%

I do not know about the rest, but this is not right. That is 71% of the original number, or a 29% loss in attack speed.

Quarterling
06-12-2010, 03:53 PM
I do not know about the rest, but this is not right. That is 71% of the original number, or a 29% loss in attack speed.

Oh yes, I just forgot to flip the numbers when I was doing it on paper. *Fixed*

Calebro
06-12-2010, 04:00 PM
First of all, it should look like this:

Pre-Update 5
2 2 1 1 = Normal (6 attacks)
2 2 1 1 = TWF (6 attacks)
2 2 2 1 = ITWF (7 attacks)
2 2 2 2 = GTWF (8 attacks)

Tempest III Rangers were the only ones that received 9 attacks per round before, and we're not talking about Rangers here.

Secondly, Eldarin claimed that he was convinced that STWF was not in the interest of the game, which I assume meant that it would not be implemented. This claim was made with little time left after a holiday weekend before it went live on Lama. This leads me to believe that STWF won't go live in U5, regardless of the fact that it's there now.

Rework your numbers with these changes.

Aspenor
06-12-2010, 04:01 PM
superior twf is not supposed to go live for anybody.

SaisMatters
06-12-2010, 04:02 PM
Don't rogues have a BAB 15 at level 20?

Aspenor
06-12-2010, 04:03 PM
Don't rogues have a BAB 15 at level 20?

Yes, but they don't get a feat at level 20.

SaisMatters
06-12-2010, 04:06 PM
Yes, but they don't get a feat at level 20.

will they be able to swap a feat at level 20 via Fred for STWF?

Aspenor
06-12-2010, 04:08 PM
will they be able to swap a feat at level 20 via Fred for STWF?

no, because:
1. You can't swap in feats you didn't qualify for when you took the feat you have.
2. STWF isn't going to go live.

Coldin
06-12-2010, 04:08 PM
will they be able to swap a feat at level 20 via Fred for STWF?

Doesn't matter since STWF won't be added to the game.

Calebro
06-12-2010, 04:09 PM
will they be able to swap a feat at level 20 via Fred for STWF?

As both myself and Aspenor have already said, it will probably not go live.
So no, they won't be able to swap a feat for it because it won't exist.

Aesop
06-12-2010, 04:09 PM
will they be able to swap a feat at level 20 via Fred for STWF?

no you must meet the prerequisites at the level the feat is for

ie the 18th level feat would only have a BAB of 13 so ut would not accept a BAB 15 feat

Calebro
06-12-2010, 04:11 PM
:D

SaisMatters
06-12-2010, 04:11 PM
no, because:
1. You can't swap in feats you didn't qualify for when you took the feat you have.
2. STWF isn't going to go live.

this is good news, that I missed it seems. Can you hit me with the link on this please Aspenor!

Calebro
06-12-2010, 04:14 PM
this is good news, that I missed it seems. Can you hit me with the link on this please Aspenor!

Here ya go

1) I've been convinced that STWF is not a benefit to the game. Instead of opening up new options, its presence instead would close many.
2) The Barbarian Capstone's alacrity bonus is a bug.

SaisMatters
06-12-2010, 04:16 PM
Here ya go

danka

Symar-FangofLloth
06-12-2010, 04:19 PM
First of all, it should look like this:

Pre-Update 5
2 2 1 1 = Normal (6 attacks)
2 2 1 1 = TWF (6 attacks)
2 2 2 1 = ITWF (7 attacks)
2 2 2 2 = GTWF (8 attacks)

Expanding off of this, Post-Update 5, assuming the current numbers and build, would look like this:

1+.2 1+.2 1+.2 1+.2 = Normal (4.8 attacks)
1+.4 1+.4 1+.4 1+.4 = TWF (5.6 attacks)
1+.6 1+.6 1+.6 1+.6 = ITWF (6.4 attacks)
1+.8 1+.8 1+.8 1+.8 = GTWF (7.2 attacks)

We lose 20% of our offhand attacks, or 10% of total attacks if we have GTWF. This is true for all classes, with the exceptions of 20 Fighter (who gets 10% more mainhand attacks), Paladin with Zeal active (who also gets 10% more mainhand attacks), and Tempest Ranger (who gets varying buffs based on which tier of the PrE).

Calebro
06-12-2010, 04:25 PM
Expanding off of this, Post-Update 5, assuming the current numbers and build, would look like this:

Ah, good catch. I didn't notice the missing off hand checks for the first attack when I read it.

SaisMatters
06-12-2010, 04:50 PM
Not trying to de-rail this thread, appologies if it seems so, but it seem that the stoppage of STWF isn't being talked about alot that I can find. So my question is what else did I miss on how they are changing TWF. Are they leaving it alone, or will TWF line still only give your second hand a percentage chance of hitting?

Calebro
06-12-2010, 04:59 PM
Not trying to de-rail this thread, appologies if it seems so, but it seem that the stoppage of STWF isn't being talked about alot that I can find. So my question is what else did I miss on how they are changing TWF. Are they leaving it alone, or will TWF line still only give your second hand a percentage chance of hitting?

The quote by Eldarin that I linked to was from the thread discussing the changes. He was updating the OP as things changed, so I'm under the assumption that it will go forward in U5 as stated in the edited OP, with the sole exception of the removal of STWF.

I say that "I'm under the assumption" because there has been little else to go on at this point. After that thread devolved into chaos, I doubt it was even read any further by the Devs. They certainly haven't commented on it in a while that I'm aware of.

So it looks as if the rest of the changes are going forward as planned. But you never really know around here, huh?

Niclos
06-12-2010, 05:04 PM
Expanding off of this, Post-Update 5, assuming the current numbers and build, would look like this:

1+.2 1+.2 1+.2 1+.2 = Normal (4.8 attacks)
1+.4 1+.4 1+.4 1+.4 = TWF (5.6 attacks)
1+.6 1+.6 1+.6 1+.6 = ITWF (6.4 attacks)
1+.8 1+.8 1+.8 1+.8 = GTWF (7.2 attacks)

We lose 20% of our offhand attacks, or 10% of total attacks if we have GTWF. This is true for all classes, with the exceptions of 20 Fighter (who gets 10% more mainhand attacks), Paladin with Zeal active (who also gets 10% more mainhand attacks), and Tempest Ranger (who gets varying buffs based on which tier of the PrE).

going off your proposed numbers every one has a chance to land 8 attacks with or without gtwf. so 4.4 for nothing, 4.8 for twf, 5.8 for itwf, and gtwf would be correct at 7.2 if we used the numbers Calebro posted. I think right? You can see the higher penalty for not having gtwf. What level do rogues qualify for gtwf without a split class? So end game the numbers should work out ie lvl 20 however the road to getting there is much different with the proposed change.

So then my next thing to bring up is a UMD check these have percentages tied in with the roll 75% for heal scroll would be a 35 UMD, right? That was a consistent umd for my rogue. Mathmatically im sure it worked out but there many times I think it should have read 50/50 instead and even sometimes as low as a 25% chance. I am afraid that since we dont know what triggers this offhand strike to happen, is a d100 rolled and any number 1-80 is an off hand strike? I had weighted dice for tomes and vorpals everything else not so much... Just because you have 8 out of 10 tickets for the lottery doesnt mean youlll win...

That is all discuss

Calebro
06-12-2010, 05:15 PM
going off your proposed numbers every one has a chance to land 8 attacks with or without gtwf. so 4.4 for nothing, 4.8 for twf, 5.8 for itwf, and gtwf would be correct at 7.2 if we used the numbers Calebro posted. I think right?
No. My numbers were a correction on the OP for his Pre-U5 table.
Symar's numbers were a correction on the OP's Post-U5 table (that I didn't originally notice needed correcting).

Just because you have 8 out of 10 tickets for the lottery doesnt mean youlll win...

That is all discuss
No, you won't win every time. But if you enter 1000 raffles where they only sell 10 tickets to each, and you bought 8 for every raffle, you'll still probably win somewhere around 800 of the raffles.

Symar-FangofLloth
06-12-2010, 05:32 PM
going off your proposed numbers every one has a chance to land 8 attacks with or without gtwf.

Yes, you'll have a 0.16% chance of getting 8 attacks with no feats.
2.56% chance of 8 attacks with only TWF
12.96% chance of 8 attacks with only ITWF
40.96% chance of 8 attacks with GTWF

So although the chance is there, I would not count on it ever happening without at least ITWF, and I would not expect it with any regularity without GTWF.

ArkoHighStar
06-12-2010, 05:53 PM
Friday mornings build contain these additions to the lama release notes

Lamannia-only Changes

LAMANNIA ONLY - Superior Two Weapon Fighting is no longer available.
LAMANNIA ONLY - Corrected an error with Double strike.
LAMANNIA ONLY - The Epic Ring of Spell Storing, Mysterious Bauble, and Bunny Hat have been updated to their pre-Update 5 forms.
LAMANNIA ONLY - Interrupted actions will no longer clear the cooldown. This has been reverted to its pre-Update 5 state.
LAMANNIA ONLY - The Exclusive flag has been temporarily removed from the Epic Staff of Arcane power. Existing versions of the Epic Seal of the Earth should no longer lose Superior Acid Lore.

Quarterling
06-17-2010, 12:19 PM
So in conclusion, 7.2 / 8 = 0.9. So only a 10% average drop in DPS for rogues using GTWF?

Razcar
06-17-2010, 12:55 PM
So in conclusion, 7.2 / 8 = 0.9. So only a 10% average drop in DPS for rogues using GTWF?
That depends. Rogues get hit harder by this nerf than other TWF using classes, And Finesse/Dex build rogues get hit harder than Str rogues.

That is because Sneak Attack hits the same regardless of what hand you hit with. But Strength does not. It gets halved for the off-hand.

As an example, say we have one TWF barbarian and one TWF Dex rogue, both with GTWF. Both do, say 400 DPS. Now Update 5 descends over DDO, contaminating and destroying with neither pity nor remorse. ;) Both builds get -20% less off-hand attacks.

But while the barb just had 30% of his total 400 DPS coming from his off-hand (since lots of his damage comes from Strength), the rogue had 50% of his DPS coming from his off hand.

So the barb lost 24 DPS. His off hand attacks were doing 120 (out of his total DPS of 400), and he lost 20% of that. He now does total 376 DPS.

But the rogue lost 40 DPS, almost the double. His off hand attacks were doing 200, and he lost 20% of that as well, ending at 40. So he now does 360 DPS. This nerf hits him harder.

These were just made up examples, but the principles are correct. Since rogues do their damage more equally with left and right hand attacks than many other melee classes, they get hit harder by this nerf. And Dex rogues get hit the most, Str rogues fare a little better. Rangers also have large bonuses that affect both hands equally (Favored Enemy) but they get special compensation in this system. Rogues do not.

Quarterling
06-17-2010, 01:36 PM
But the rogue lost 40 DPS, almost the double. His off hand attacks were doing 200, and he lost 20% of that as well, ending at 40. So he now does 360 DPS. This nerf hits him harder.

Okay, that makes sense.

Rangers also have large bonuses that affect both hands equally (Favored Enemy) but they get special compensation in this system. Rogues do not.

Thus the easy button remains the same/nearly the same. Now there's no point in being a pure rogue when you could be a Rogue/Wizard or Ranger/Rogue/Fighter (or other similar builds) http://forums.ddo.com/images/icons/icon9.gif