Quote:
Originally Posted by DeathsSilkyMist
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
Think of a set of weapon swings as a coin toss. I'll go back to the original example. For every 150 swings the 1h 11/18 weapons dish out (this includes dual wield), you'll get 60 swings from a 29/30 weapon in the same time interval. This means every 60 swings is 1 coin toss. Heads is above average, tails is below average.
If you only toss the coin once, you have a 50% chance that you'll get below average. However, you only have a 25% chance to roll two tails in a row. So 1h is more likely to give you a head + tails, resulting in getting the average.
I'll gladly take a 75% chance of getting the average over a 50% chance of getting below average when looking at a single fight that cannot be retried for 7 days. On a normal distribution this will even out eventually, but most people don't fight that many AoWs per year, unless you are extremely active.
|
A couple of notes:
- If you flip a single coin, you can never get the average/expected value
- If you flip two coins the probability of getting the expected outcome is 50%, not 75%
- If you're reducing 60 swings, each with 21 possible outcomes, to a single coin flip you're already misusing statistics and probability and any further analysis will be tainted.
I'd really like to hear Ripqozko, 7thGate, Snaggles, or Solist give their reasons why they think (if they do) that 1h is better than 2h on high-ac raid targets. I understand why using low-delay 1h weapons is better than high-delay 1h weapons (damage bonus is the same in both cases and is applied after AC is taken into account), but since 2h damage bonus scales with delay I share Vivitron's conclusion/confusion.