sk starting points

[Troxx]

Originally Posted by Ripqozko [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Why can’t ya do 78?

/GU Lord Doljonijiarnimorinar in 177s, 92687 @523 | Riphealer 13741@(80 in 170s) | Molf 13498@(80 in 168s) | Gatruk 13442@(78 in 171s) | Kittla 11514@(68 in 169s) | Enviee 8790@(54 in 162s) {X}

I did 80 here with shovel on my pally

My pally was unbuffed other than self buffs. I’ve put out similar numbers fully buffed 256 str, + attack and fully hasted in raids brother.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

Originally Posted by Troxx [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Your comparative skills are lacking. You got a 3dps difference and I did have 4 but ….

Flawed though my testing was ….

-I got a difference of 4 dps using a plane of hate 1hs where the max dps was 29 va 25 with my weak ass half elf str. That is a 16% difference.
-You had a 3 dps difference using a ToV 2 hander. Dps of 70.25 vs 67.3 dps on a level 5 mob. That’s a 4.38% difference.

That’s a whole world of nowhere close. It’s not a 3 dps vs 4dps difference. It’s 4.38% dps more vs 16% more.

If I had been putting out 67.3dps with my ToV weapon … my flawed study would have proportionally been putting out 78.06 dps (that’s 16% more than 67.3). So not a 3 dps increase … closer to 11dps.

Again, I don’t trust my tests. I need to dedicate more time and do them properly. It can’t possibly be as high as a 16% difference.

Even if your parses were 100% accurate, 4.3% is nothing to sneeze at. This is a game of inches and most players would give a leg for being 4.3% better at whatever. It certainly makes a strong enough case for killing faster and not needing 20 more intelligence on a low str iksar sk.

Your ideas about percentages are just wrong. The percentage difference in DPS on 1H weapons is bigger simply because the DPS numbers are lower. You don't need to read further into it than that. You have no evidence to suggest you will also get a 16% increase with a 2H weapon.

So far your data supports mine. If your data is flawed, bring more and we can discuss it.

I am not sure why you keep needing to make these strange explanations when your own data speaks for itself.

You also keep forgetting that a lower level player will be getting less than 3-4 DPS from 20 STR. I am not sure why you think this number will remain the same, or get higher, when the player is lower level, has less skills, has a worse weapon/haste item, etc.

[Troxx]

Originally Posted by DeathsSilkyMist [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Your ideas about percentages are just wrong. The percentage difference in DPS on 1H weapons is bigger simply because the DPS numbers are lower.

It doesn’t work like that.

Sorry.

Hope that helps.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

Originally Posted by Troxx [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

It doesn’t work like that.

Sorry.

Hope that helps.

It does work like that. You can check it on your calculator.

It is funny you are trying to write off the simple fact that both of us got a similar raw DPS number for the difference as coincidence.

You don't need to try and save face. Just provide more evidence if you think you are correct.

So far you are supporting my position with your own data.

Here is my data: https://www.project1999.com/forums/s...&postcount=105 and here is yours https://www.project1999.com/forums/s...&postcount=168 .

People can look at it themselves.

[Troxx]

Originally Posted by DeathsSilkyMist [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

So far you are supporting my position with your own data.

Oh good lord. So even my broken worth nothing data set (WAY to strong and in my favor to even be considered valid) supports your position?

Just to be clear …
-my flawed data showed 20 str from 140 to 160 showed a 4dps increase with a PoH 1hs … a 16% dps increase vs a high green that gives xp
-your raid troll str with NToV weapon showing a 3dps increase (little over 4% dmg bump) vs a level 5 turtle

And you consider my broke ass data supporting your position?

Are we in the same galaxy?

[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[DeathsSilkyMist]

Originally Posted by Troxx [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Just to be clear …
-my flawed data showed 20 str from 140 to 160 showed a 4dps increase

And my data showed a 3 DPS increase, which is similar.

Maybe this is a coincidence, and maybe it isn't.

What happens if your data keeps showing this?

I am not sure why you are so angry at the possibility of proving me correct.

[Troxx]

At least everyone here can see how this thread:

https://www.project1999.com/forums/s...d.php?t=406923

Got to 449 pages despite nobody agreeing with you. I bet if I had the stamina to keep this back and forth going we could make this thread 500 pages as well.

Autism and retarded (excuse me … intellectually disabled) are not a good combination.

Back to gifs I suppose. It killed the last thread once up a yesteryear. Maybe it will work here too.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

Originally Posted by Troxx [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

At least everyone here can see how this thread:

https://www.project1999.com/forums/s...d.php?t=406923

Got to 449 pages despite nobody agreeing with you. I bet if I had the stamina to keep this back and forth going we could make this thread 500 pages as well.

Autism and retarded (excuse me … intellectually disabled) are not a good combination.

Back to gifs I suppose. It killed the last thread once up a yesteryear. Maybe it will work here too.

Nice meltdown. I might be right, so now you have to resort to posting an off-topic thread where you were also proven wrong. And you are also going to start posting gifs again, just like the hundreds of gifs you posted in that thread.

Thank you for conceding! Thank you for proving you are just a troll.

Here is my data: https://www.project1999.com/forums/s...&postcount=105 and here is yours https://www.project1999.com/forums/s...&postcount=168 .

People can take a look and come to their own conclusions. I would be happy to take a look at future data if you think you have something better.

[Ripqozko]

Originally Posted by DeathsSilkyMist [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Nice meltdown. I might be right, so now you have to resort to posting an off-topic thread where you were also proven wrong. And you are also going to start posting gifs again.

Thank you for conceding!

This is the new face of kittens

[Lune]

Originally Posted by Troxx [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

At least everyone here can see how this thread:

https://www.project1999.com/forums/s...d.php?t=406923

Got to 449 pages despite nobody agreeing with you. I bet if I had the stamina to keep this back and forth going we could make this thread 500 pages as well.

Autism and retarded (excuse me … intellectually disabled) are not a good combination.

Back to gifs I suppose. It killed the last thread once up a yesteryear. Maybe it will work here too.

Originally Posted by cyxthryth [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

For the sake of civil discussion, what definition of "nonsense" are you using?



For the sake of civil discussion, what definition of "insult" and "meme" are you using?



I am not sure why your post would seem to indicate/reveal/betray that you (seemingly) believe that you are aware of what others think, or why your post would seem to imply that there is any merit or relevance whether a particular poster is "any better than" another particular poster (or what that even means, as you have provided no definition[s]).

For the sake of civil discussion, what definition of "better" are you using?



You have provided zero evidence to support your apparent claim that "refusal to believe basic math and data does not mean the posts are the same" (whatever that is supposed to mean).



For the sake of civil discussion, what definition of "trolls" are you using?

Hehe. [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

epic. Cyxthryth had the right approach