A DPS Simulator 2 - SimFF

[Viridiana]

Time to break more stuff!

Auto-Attacks DPS:
((AA_DMG/33.04+1)*(STR/6.92)*(DET/6715+1)*(1/AA_DELAY)BUFFS)-1.5

This is the formula Dervy has listed for AA DPS, right? And since the (1/AA_DELAY) part gives the "per second" part of DPS, the rest of the formula should be the "damage" part. Now, one of the numerators is AA_DMG, which I'm assuming is what the game labels as "Auto-attack" on weapons, right? So things with a higher "Auto-attack" stat should do more damage if STR/DET are held equal…

My Expanse Machetes aren't doing that. I'm doing some comprehensive WD testing today, but here are the numbers I have from a few weeks back:

      AA_DMG AA_Min AA_Max
i175: 54.40  196    199
i160: 53.76  199    220

Both tests with 569 Dex, 267 Det.

Like I said, I'm doing more WD testing today. I'll make sure to confirm this when I get to those ilvls…

[Hustensaft]

So things with a higher "Auto-attack" stat should do more damage if STR/DET are held equal…

Not necessarily.

We know we have base damage, we know base damage is multiplied with other stuff - for balance sake we do want base damage to be affected by Weapon Delay, else faster weapons would significantly outperform slower weapons (they apply base damage much more often).

Weapon stats have the following relation: AA_DMG == AA_Delay * WD / 3 - so whatever you do, AA_Delay has practically no impact on base damage after the /33 division in Dervys model.

Why does the formula work for Dragoons? Well - all their Heavensward Weapons are 2.8 speed.

[Viridiana]

Not necessarily.

We know we have base damage, we know base damage is multiplied with other stuff - for balance sake we do want base damage to be affected by Weapon Delay, else faster weapons would significantly outperform slower weapons (they apply base damage much more often).

That's the thing, though. Output damage should be a factor of WD scaled to Delay, right? And AA_DMG is WD scaled to Delay. The problem is that AA_DMG seems to be meaningless when it comes to predicting the damage of individual auto-attacks, as I have weapons with higher AA_DMG doing less damage per strike.

[Hustensaft]

That's the thing, though. Output damage should be a factor of WD scaled to Delay, right? And AA_DMG is WD scaled to Delay. The problem is that AA_DMG seems to be meaningless when it comes to predicting the damage of individual auto-attacks, as I have weapons with higher AA_DMG doing less damage per strike.

Yes, and what i'm saying is that one factor in the formula (base damage) is not scaled to Delay - as AA_Delay is hidden in AA_DMG, which is then divided by 33.

You have (1+AA_Delay*WD/X)*STR while it should be (1+WD/X)*STR*AA_Delay.

[Viridiana]

You have (1+AA_Delay*WD/X)*STR while it should be (1+WD/X)*STR*AA_Delay.

Maybe I'm just not understanding what you're getting at, but this doesn't seem to resolve the issue.

Your second formula can be re-written as (1+WD)*STR*Delay/X without changing the outcome. Which can be written as STR*(Delay + WD*Delay)/X. If STR (and Det, which you don't have listed) stay the same, a larger (Delay + WD*Delay) component would cause an increase in output damage. Baldur Daggers are 63 and 2.56, for a De+WD*De of 163.84; Expanse Machetes are 68 and 2.40 for 165.6.

So even your second formula predicts that Expanse Machetes would do more damage per hit than the Baldur Daggers, when they don't. At 378 AP and 298 Det, the Expanse Machetes do 131-144 AA hits versus 133-147 for Baldur.

[Hustensaft]

Your second formula can be re-written as (1+WD)*STR*Delay/X

It would be (x + WD)*STR*Delay/X. And that's changing the outcome.

[Viridiana]

It would be (x + WD)*STR*Delay/X. And that's changing the outcome.

Blarg. Well, I missed that it would be X+WD, but the formula you wrote there would be the same outcome as your original, because you can do multiplication and division in any order as long as you don't botch the parentheses. So we now have (X*Delay + Delay*WD) as being the determining factor. In order for Baldur to beat Expanse…

X*2.56 + 2.56*63 > X*2.4 + 2.4*68
2.56*X - 2.4*X > 2.4*68 - 2.56*63
.16X > 163.2 - 161.28
.16X > 1.92
X > 12

Alternately, I have multiple points where an increase in WD and decrease in Delay cause a higher ilvl weapon to output the same damage range as a lower ilvl one. If I set their formulas equal to each other…

X*2.56 + 6*2.56 = X*2.4 + 7*2.4
.16X = 16.8 - 15.36
X = 9

X*2.72 + 14*2.72 = X*2.56 + 16*2.56
.16X = 40.96 - 38.08
X = 18

X*2.56 + 20*2.56 = X*2.4 + 23*2.4
.16X = 55.2 - 51.2
X = 25

X*2.64 + 30*2.64 = X*2.56 + 32*2.56
.08X = 81.92 - 79.2
X=34

X*2.72 + 58*2.72 = X*2.56 + 63*2.56
.16X = 161.28 - 157.76
X=22

So, yeah, the formula still doesn't work.

In the sim, delay is not a factor in the damage - whether or not that is how the weapon is balanced is sort of irrelevant. The sim fires off autoattack events every DELAY seconds, using stats and AA_DMG to figure out the damage of each autoattack. So if that is incorrect or isn't how the game does it then we need to revisit this.

Well, it kinda is even in the sim if you're using Dervy's formula, since delay is a factor of the AA_DMG term.