Quote:
Originally Posted by Zuranthium
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
Your evidence proves you're wrong. You are getting more hits in the higher range and less min hits. You only had 5% min hits before switching to a higher AC parse, and still only 11% in that instance. In Kunark era over 80% of hits were falling in the lower range of the scale, on a normal low AC target, and 15+% were min hits.
|
Here is the Sept 8, 2000 parse again, supplied by Zuranthium. This was more than a week before the Sept 19, 2000 Twig nerf:
https://web.archive.org/web/20010709...3&t=000082&p=1
I converted the data from that post into a new graph, as well as the data from my DPS calculator. I did this so the graph style is the same for both data sets. This makes for easier viewing.
People can take a look at both graphs in the attachment section and come to their own conclusions. If your argument is simply that each parse is not 100% identical, that is a silly argument. People who have done parses know you aren't always going to get the exact number of swings, damage value rolls, double attacks, etc. in two different parses.
People can read the Kunark Strategy Guide and see that 120 AC is not raid-target levels of AC:
https://dn790004.ca.archive.org/0/it...ial_eGuide.pdf
This was the data used in the DPS calculator:
Quote:
A level 46 Warrior with a 9/24 Weapon in main hand with 100 STR using level appropriate skill levels.
vs.
A level 40 Mob with 200 Defense Skill, 150 AGI, 130 AC, and 1 for Parry/Riposte/Dodge.
|
I don't think the OP of the Sept 8, 2000 parse said what mob(s) he was parsing against.