A DPS Simulator 2 - SimFF

[pandabearcat]

What Viridiana is saying is that higher AA damage is not giving you higher total damage.

Delay is simply how fast the autoattacks come out.

So the formula is not doing the right thing.

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.

The damage Dervy models for his spreadsheet normalizes AA for this.

[Hustensaft]

What Viridiana is saying is that higher AA damage is not giving you higher total damage.

Yes. And i am saying that a higher AA_DMG stat on any weapon does not mean your auto-attacks will be higher.

Assume you have 20 Basedamage, and that is modified by AA_Delay to be added to your AA.

20 * 2.4 = 48
20 * 2.56 = 51.2

Basedamage modified by AA_Delay is a huge factor, and Dervy's formula has a significantly reduced interaction between these two. His dragoon formula works because virtually all heavensward dragoon weapons are 2.8 AA_Delay with a selected few at 2.88.

[pandabearcat]

Are you saying that delay doesn't actually make autoattacks tick faster/slower, and is just a damage mod?

Because if so then

1. This game is stupid.
2. Super stupid.
3. There is no reason the two should be separate stats.

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.

No I stripped it out, on the basis that the whole point of it was to normalize autoattack damage for his spreadsheet, since it doesn't do dynamic stuff. You can check the formula used in the latest version, inside simff.config which has all the damage formulas. aap is Autoattack Damage (potency) while aad is Autoattack Delay.

[Hustensaft]

Are you saying that delay doesn't actually make autoattacks tick faster/slower, and is just a damage mod?

That's not what i'm saying. I'll try to explain it a little bit simpler.

Imagine two itemlvl 175 weapons - one with 2.56 speed and one with 2.4 speed.
Both will have 68 physical damage.
The 2.56 speed weapon will have 68/3 * 2.56 = 58.02 AA_DMG and hit every 2.56 seconds
The 2.4 speed weapon will have 68/3 * 2.4 = 54.4 AA_DMG and hit every 2.4 seconds

Now let's insert these values into Dervy's formula:

(58.02/33.04+1) = 2.756
(54.4/33.04+1) = 2.646

Now assume you have 800 STR.

2.756*(800/6.92) = 318.61
2.646*(800/6.92) = 305.89

Divide by AA_Delay

318.61 / 2.56 = 124.45
305.89 / 2.4 = 127.45

The 2.4 Speed Weapon is actually better in Dervy's formula. Why? Because it applies the same amount of Base Damage - contained in (STR/6.9) - more often than the 2.56 Weapon.
If the game is designed properly, base damage is adjusted to AA_Delay. In the most simplistic case it would be similar to the WD/3 * AA_Delay relation, i.e. BaseDamage/3 * AA_delay.
In WoW there's weapon speed normalization (http://wow.gamepedia.com/Normalization) to account for that.

Given the fact that a slower speed weapon with lower AA_DMG does hit harder, base damage seems to be adjusted in some way.

[pandabearcat]

Yes I know what you're saying, but even in your example the higher AA damage weapon is doing more damage per hit.

But in Viridiana's trials the higher aa damage weapon is doing less damage...per hit.

I do not care about this normalization for dps - let the devs figure that out.

I do not care if a weapon is better or worse dps than another.

I am simply worried if it turns out our AA damage formula, PER HIT, is incorrect.

[Hustensaft]

I am simply worried if it turns out our AA damage formula, PER HIT, is incorrect.

That's what i'm trying to say: The formula is wrong because it does not adjust base damage for AA_Delay.

[Viridiana]

No I stripped it out, on the basis that the whole point of it was to normalize autoattack damage for his spreadsheet, since it doesn't do dynamic stuff. You can check the formula used in the latest version, inside simff.config which has all the damage formulas. aap is Autoattack Damage (potency) while aad is Autoattack Delay.

But the "aap" in your formula, to use Expanse Machetes as an example, would be 54.40, right? Because that has aad as a factor, since it's equal to WD*aad/3.

That's what i'm trying to say: The formula is wrong because it does not adjust base damage for AA_Delay.

Again, unless I'm just horrendously misunderstanding things, it does account for AA_Delay.

Also, just tested my Zeta versus the HQ i133 gear. Same WD, kept AP and Det the same. 2.40 Delay Zeta gives 115-128, 2.72 Delay Titanium Pugiones gives 133-147.

2.4/2.72 = .8823
(115+128)/(133+147) = .8679

Gonna look more into it, but it's pretty close to equal. Bear in mind that the 115-128 needs to be a rounded down 115 and a rounded up 128, or else it's too big a spread. So it's possible it might be very slightly higher than shown here.

[Hustensaft]

2.4/2.72 = .8823
(115+128)/(133+147) = .8679

Gonna look more into it, but it's pretty close to equal.

Exactly, they're equal. Using the numbers of my previous post

2.4/2.56 = 0.9375
305.89/318.61 = 0.96

Assume a 2.72 weapon: 61.65 AA_DMG - 2.866 * (800/6.92) = 331.32

2.4/2.72 = 0.8823
305.89/331.32 = 0.923 to get to ~0.88 i'd need 345 hits

331.32/2.72 = 121.8 dps

The slower the weapon is - the lower the dps on dervy's formula. Your numbers even have the slower weapon slightly higher in terms of dps.

[Viridiana]

Exactly, they're equal.

Well, the best I can get without just making a whole new AP/Det point and trying again is the 2.4 doing about 87% of the damage of the 2.72 when it should in theory be just over 88%. That's using Venom and Venom+DE numbers to weed out some rounding issues. I mean, that's still pretty close, but I'm not yet willing to say they're equal. I might go get a whole new data set, though…

Your numbers even have the slower weapon slightly higher in terms of dps.

Well, my only assumption going in was that a higher Auto-attack stat would lead to a higher auto-attack per hit. I only referenced Dervy's formula after realizing that this was not the case. And Dervy's formula makes the same prediction I had going in, which has been shown inaccurate. Any references I've made to it since then have only been to reinforce that it makes predictions that don't pan out in practice, which Dervy is working to fix.

Edit: Well, a second assumption I had would have been that equal WD would yield equal DPS.

[SunnyHirose]

I'm not about to read through allllll that, but when I tested it in 2.5, the hypothesis that autoattacks were normalized to do the same base damage at the same WD, AP, and DET was correct.

That may or may not be the case with these oddball ilvl items from Heavensward.