[X] My Assistant

(IMG:[i.imgur.com] http://i.imgur.com/ATekfb9.png)

I made the spreadsheet look similar to the Monster Lab wiki. The first page has base monster stats. The primary purpose is to compare the overall average damage of each element. Real world data gathered by sssss2 should correspond to HP weighted averages. This method can additionally calculate Pmit weighted averages but with a rapier I'm not sure which is better.

(IMG:[i.imgur.com] http://i.imgur.com/DwAsEY2.png)

In reality the base monster stats never apply at any player level. The closest I could get was around level 69. The variation in scaled monster stats is less than the base.

(IMG:[i.imgur.com] http://i.imgur.com/tmLMFV5.png)

It turns out that player level barely affects the final elemental comparison so from now on I'll just enter level 500. Monster PL matters more as I described earlier. I start out with an equal monster population and PL 2250 even though in reality the game won't allow the average to be that high.

(IMG:[i.imgur.com] http://i.imgur.com/5AQC8Em.png)

In general spike shield simply adds 25% * 25 = 6.25 as long as monster PL is high enough that elemental resistance stays above the lower cap of 0. That's why with higher PL the four elements get increasingly worse than holy/dark, but better with spike shields.

(IMG:[i.imgur.com] http://i.imgur.com/wu9Jrzm.png)

Holy/dark are not as good with imperil, we all knew this. With mages there is no difference since it all drops to 0. I will show the results for sssss2 monster population, varying PL, and non-imperil mages later.

Holy/dark are not as good with imperil, we all knew this. With mages there is no difference since it all drops to 0. I will show the results for sssss2 monster population, varying PL, and non-imperil mages later.

I'd like to clarify that while holy/dark do not get as much benefit out of imperil as others (in part because it reduces mitigations by less than their elemental counterparts, because holy/dark imperil abilities cap out at 40 rather than 50) they still do get very significant benefit out of using imperil.

There is not significant data about non-imperil released at the moment, but it is likely it performs similarly, while costing slightly less real-time (because targeting imperil is slightly more tedious). However the difference in gear and DD perks required to achieve those heights is ridiculous. Most holy/dark mages should still be playing imperil.

This post has been edited by lestion: Nov 4 2019, 09:12

After playing with my spreadsheet I realized the improvement in flame shield is only partly due to PL increase tweaking the numbers. Monster resistances were low enough years ago that flame shield also hit the bottom cap of 0 resistance sometimes. That contributed to shock shield doing better back then. These days they should be more equal.

Optimal Infusion Strategy for Demonic/Hallowed Weapons (Revised)

In the past the elemental relationships were roughly Dark/Holy being 10% stronger than Cold/Electric/Wind and another 10% stronger than Fire. Spike shield adds +15% to Fire, and +10% to Cold and Electric/Wind (plus speed penalty). Except for Imperil usage, Dark/Holy were superior or almost equal in all aspects; no further analysis required.

Given recent evidence I will guess all elements weakened equally, except Cold improved 5% due to changed monster species. I'll guess spike shield adds +15% to Fire/Cold/Electric/Wind after PL increase. With day boost I think spike shield returns to before. Cold with fire shield is now almost 10% stronger than Dark/Holy.

Friday (Void/All), Wednesday (Cold), Monday (Dark) - Arctic user will infuse Dark, and Demonic user will infuse Cold, so it will be the same.
Sunday (Holy) - Day mitigation bonus 10% means Holy damage +20% so it's best for Demonic user to infuse Holy. The day's winner is Arctic by 10%.
Tuesday (Fire) - Demonic can use electric shield so his fire does 15% better damage than Arctic user. The day's winner is Demonic by 5%.
Thursday (Wind), Saturday (Elec) - Demonic can switch to cold/wind shield for 5% improvement if using Haste. The days' winners are still Arctic by 5%.

If Demonic user uses cold/wind shield he will get 15% more element damage. Overall this is 1.5% more damage to the main attack. I studied recently that if using Haste this is around 1.1% of all damage, and if not using Haste surprisingly just 0.6% of all damage. Meanwhile I think the shield creates a loss of 0.6% damage due to counter attacks.

Arctic is superior against today's regular monster population, but a Demonic user can reduce the difference to 1 or 2 days by using infusions and changing spike shield to match.

This post has been edited by BlueWaterSplash: Nov 5 2019, 00:02

I revisited some staff calculations with some requests from Paruri for certain parameters to be adjusted for accuracy. This is the first part of that data.

This is for imperil mages, and therefore should not be considered a very good evaluation of clear speed. Obviously, the deprecating CR makes a very big difference (somewhere to the tune of about 450 turns per grindfest, according to the imperil simulator I posted about before). But these numbers are interesting because they show the actual damage difference to be minimal in cases of both worst-case and average monster resists.

Additionally, we do know that redwood pulls ahead on raw damage against schoolgirls because they have lower resist. Do not misconstrue these numbers to be true in absolutely every case: they apply against the average set of player monsters, but not against boss monsters.

Now let's talk about the data itself and how it was constructed.

I started with a few assumptions about reasonable base proficiency (I will detail these cases shortly) and used that, combined with various levels of gear, to calculate proficiency factors for various cases. Then I simulated 10,000,000 spell casts against two levels of monster resist and used that and the equipment data to provide some average damage values.

I want to concede that I had to make some assumptions about two things: MDB is very difficult to calculate and will vary largely between gear levels, and so I chose to use static amounts based on real numbers gathered from some players in the Discord. These are approximations, but the relationship between MDB, EDB and counter-resist is essentially linear, and different levels of MDB still produce exactly the same % difference between staffs. These inaccuracies can be forgiven.

Additionally, there is no data on the average monster resist at lower levels. This is impossible to calculate without real play data. I chose to use the same resist rates level 500 players face, and I do not believe the real data would be significantly lower (400 players face essentially the same monsters, with just some slightly lower wisdom, which will cap for some monsters even then).

Now, to explain the cases:
1) Willow & Shoes, at 100% rolls and full forging, can reach 0.79 at 579 base proficiency. Using the same % rolls and base prof, a Redwood user reaches 0.876 prof factor. The EDB is also adjusted.
2) With 0% rolls and 0 forging, neither Willow nor Redwood can reach 0.79. We use the same base as above - 579 - but with this new gear, they reach 0.704 and 0.75 respectively.
3) Now I begin cases for average users - with an easily achievable 520 prof that someone who only just reached level 500 might have, 50% rolls on their gear, and forge level 13 (where ~50% of the maximum forge factor is reached). Again, they cannot reach 0.79 - Willow gets 0.682, and Redwood gets 0.748.
4) Finally, we'll test a level 400 case, using the same 50% rolls, forge level 13, and a reasonably 420 proficiency. Willow gets 0.7, Redwood gets 0.765.

First, the data against the current average monster resist (about 21.6%, provided by sssss2's tests).



Second, the data against maximum resist monsters (27.1%).



Accounting for the res reduction from prof factor as well as imperil, we can see that for pure damage, Redwood is basically the same as Willow at optimal gear levels, and marginally better in other cases.

Obviously, the difference is so small that it can be completely thrown out as irrelevant to your actual game speed, because imperil resists will slow you down far more than the small amount of damage here. lol

This post has been edited by lestion: Nov 13 2019, 04:48

Following up from my previous post, I now have results for the non-imperil cases.

Again, I tested against both 21.6% and 27.1% monster resists. While I think it's important to consider the average case, due to the nature of mage damage being delivered as an area-of-effect your clear speed is essentially determined by the hardest monster in the round (while almost everything else will die very quickly to T3/T2). Thus, if a staff is stronger against the 27.1% case, it is probably going to translate to an overall speed gain.

The cases are described in the charts. This accurately models the true CR values for 4+1 users and also compares vs 3+2 models (using the least wasteful slots, gloves and shoes).

All cases use 100% gear values. MDB and EDB are relatively arbitrary. Non-imperil is a very expensive style to play effectively and it should be considered that most successful non-imperil players should be considering peerless-level proficiency on their armour pieces, even if it means using a mitigation prefix item, and should also aim for as high proficiency on staff as possible.

In spite of the very high standard here, we can infer that likely even at lower levels of proficiency the results will maintain their hierarchy, because the comparisons are not very close.

The average damage formatting is a scale where green is the highest damage, and white is lowest. Of course, the staffs are not directly comparable because they're for completely different elements, so I have also underlined the sets that should be compared together. (Specifically, this is 4+1 holy/dark vs 3+2, 4+1 Redwoods vs 4+1 Willow, and 3+2 Redwood vs 3+2 Willow).

Beginning with 600 base prof sets.



In the second test, I used a more achievable 550 base resist. The only thing that changes here in the test case is that Redwood can no longer reach 1.0 using pants, and has to switch to robe (where it still can't reach 1.0, but it gets closer). I have included both versions in the results.



Now to draw some conclusions.

1) Not too surprisingly, 4+1 holy/dark beat 3+2. We already suspected this, even though it can't hit 1.0. It's a respectable difference at both levels of base prof.
2) Redwood turns out better at lower prof, but Willow is better by a small amount against worst-case monsters at very high prof.
5) Fire/cold users should note that Redwood will dominate Willow for them in every case, because the differences between CR values are completely dwarfed by the EDB difference.

This time, all the values should be far more accurate than my previous post, and as such I'm going to edit the old one to remove the misleading research and note that it has been superceded.

This post has been edited by lestion: Nov 19 2019, 18:44

Edit: all is right in the world. 4+1 shoes is not the best. Thank goodness for that.

Edit 2: error spotted: I miscopied the robe value from somewhere. That also means pants are not best. Order is restored.

This post has been edited by lestion: Nov 13 2019, 06:47

Edit: all is right in the world. 4+1 shoes is not the best. Thank goodness for that.

Just out of curiosity, what about 5+0? (IMG:[invalid] style_emoticons/default/huh.gif)

Just out of curiosity, what about 5+0? (IMG:[invalid] style_emoticons/default/huh.gif)

It'd have an average damage of about 71,869 on the 27.1% resist chart. Absolutely awful (IMG:[invalid] style_emoticons/default/tongue.gif)

It'd have an average damage of about 71,869 on the 27.1% resist chart. Absolutely awful (IMG:[invalid] style_emoticons/default/tongue.gif)

Holy is way stronger than Dark, because of breached defense > this does not show in these figures. After the first landed holy spell, a monster will be weaker for the next.

Holy is way stronger than Dark, because of breached defense > this does not show in these figures. After the first landed holy spell, a monster will be weaker for the next.

Obviously! This is not accounted for in the figures because magic mitigation is not modelled (just multiply the 27.1 figures by ~0.23, or ~0.33 for holy, to get a comparison using that). The main reason I did not do this in the figures is because there is no data for average monster mitigation, so it would be based purely on the worst case scenario, and that is why I suggest using the 27.1% cases.

For reference, I did also mention it in the conclusions in the first post: 'Amusingly, at 600 prof, Redwood is the strongest staff for raw firepower. Obviously, the holy debuff is better than the difference it gains, though.'

The adjusted values, accounting for worst-case monster mitigation, would give holy ~42,812 vs dark ~29,102, making holy real damage about 47% greater than dark. That's nuts!

Just to re-iterate though: this is not an elemental comparison. It's just to compare staffs and the effect of CR vs EDB, MDB and prof when considering their differences.

This post has been edited by lestion: Nov 13 2019, 08:50

Beginning with 600 base prof sets.
[attachembed=135843]

In the second test, I used a more achievable 550 base resist.
[attachembed=135845]

Res reduction for holy/dark was not updated for the 550 case.
I suspect that is why you're finding 4+1 more effective than 3+2.

Thanks for the work you're doing though, it's very interesting!

[attachembed=135865]
Calculated comparison of arcane magic score of Wind/Elec/Dark imperil mage.
Detail may be a bit inaccurate.. (<0.1%? If the calculation is correct)

Global setting
level 500, base prof are 525 and all prof perks unlocked, All Peerless, Willow destruction with 5pen, Charged Armors 4+1, Fully forged

setting 1
Wind/Elec mage using prof gloves, prof factor 0.704
setting 2
Wind/Elec mage using prof shoes, prof factor 0.672
setting 3
Dark mage using prof robe, prof factor 0.802
added setting 4
Wind/Elec mage using prof robe, prof factor 0.802

Reminder: dark spell is different from wind/elec

Res reduction for holy/dark was not updated for the 550 case.
I suspect that is why you're finding 4+1 more effective than 3+2.

Thanks for the work you're doing though, it's very interesting!

Good spotting! You're absolutely right, and I've fixed it. As you expected, 3+2 does come out better after all if your prof is much lower.

...
Reminder: dark spell is different from wind/elec

Specific note for others: dark spells are the same with max abilities at T3, but slightly stronger at T1 and T2. However, dark imperil reduces by less than elemental types, which is why dark sees slightly lower damage here at 0.8 prof factor (it needs 1.0 to reduce all to 0).

Another little note for anyone not sure how to read the values: the mitigation %s are how well it performs against varying levels of specific elemental resistances on monsters. The 75% value is the worst case scenario and will generally be very high level monsters, often the ones that are determining the speed at which you clear the round.

This post has been edited by lestion: Nov 13 2019, 20:04

It'd have an average damage of about 71,869 on the 27.1% resist chart. Absolutely awful (IMG:[invalid] style_emoticons/default/tongue.gif)

I didn't realize it would be that bad. (IMG:[invalid] style_emoticons/default/blink.gif)

Since I'm not a mage, maybe what I'm going to write may be wrong. Correct me if I'm wrong.

From what I understand from previous posts, the best 4+1 option would be using Cotton Robe (not Pants or Gloves as they said before). That's right? It used to be said that using Cotton Robe you lost a lot of EDB, so people tried to use other parts as proficiency piece.

4+1 seems to be ideal (or at least enough) for elemental mages. But for Dark and Holy mages 3+2 still the best option, because of the need for a higher proficiency factor? If so, what would be the pieces of proficiency? Gloves and Shoes?

Are all these cases only for non-imperil style?

I didn't realize it would be that bad. (IMG:[invalid] style_emoticons/default/blink.gif)

Since I'm not a mage, maybe what I'm going to write may be wrong. Correct me if I'm wrong.

From what I understand from previous posts, the best 4+1 option would be using Cotton Robe (not Pants or Gloves as they said before). That's right? It used to be said that using Cotton Robe you lost a lot of EDB, so people tried to use other parts as proficiency piece.

4+1 seems to be ideal (or at least enough) for elemental mages. But for Dark and Holy mages 3+2 still the best option, because of the need for a higher proficiency factor? If so, what would be the pieces of proficiency? Gloves and Shoes?

Are all these cases only for non-imperil style?

These cases are all for non-imperil, yes. The research suggests that 4+1 is better for holy/dark too, but only at very high base prof. The main difference between holy/dark and elemental here is that redwood has more prof, and therefore gets closer to 1.0 far sooner (and can exceed that target, even with pants rather than robe, if base is high enough). Shoes are still the ideal piece for imperil mages (unless you have very low base prof).

If you are much lower base prof, 3+2 with gloves+shoes is shown to be better than 4+1 for holy/dark (and presumably the same would apply to elemental mages too, but if your base prof is THAT much lower, you are probably not ready to play non-imperil yet - given the enormous amount of investment it takes to make the style good).

This post has been edited by lestion: Nov 14 2019, 03:54

I assumed you were testing with 2 infusions, but on hindsight 3% seems too low, if it was 3% for each infusion then you can halve the number of infusions to 1460...For DwD you would want a dark or holy infusion which would speed up things well above 3% so it would need another test entirely.

All in all unless 1H players have very bad clearing speed (very low level, weak equipments, low t/s) infusions are still worth the cost.

Ah I'd noticed that your math seemed doubled. Yeah it's 3%~5% improvement in 1H clear speed for regular arenas per infusion, so just one infusion. Still, I have low t/s so infusions are less attractive to me.

I had tested DwD a year ago and coincidentally found that I improved by exactly the same 3% with holy infusion, hence I never use infusions on School Girls either. The reason being that I primarily kill School Girls with Vital Strike. There are too many different ways to play SG arenas so I don't want to speculate on the possibilities.

There's another thing we didn't consider. Some people don't play a set amount of time but rather just play until finishing all arenas, or just preferred ones (some players skip SG arenas, or vice versa). If this is the approach then infusing is not worth it as the lost income is not gained back.

You could say that time is saved regardless, but after completing all arenas hardcore players may go on to do grindfest. Income is lower there and Energy Drinks may be needed. The time/credits comparison we did earlier, even if in favor of using infusions, would turn against using infusions in this realm for 1H players.

It just occurred to me that even if one entertains my unconventional idea that Swift Strike is a good 1H potency, at best it's a wasted useless potency. Because you can just increase your Agility nearly for free, to gain as much Swift Strike and Evade as you like, up to a point.

-snip-

After further thought, if you believed Swift Strike is a decent 1H potency it's still just as good as ever. However, if you are consistent to this belief you perhaps ought to increase your Agility by 40~100 points which gives an additional 1 or 2 Swift Strikes almost for free.

My old post is outdated after my recent Haste experiments and analysis showed that attack speed is much better than previously believed. Things can swing either way depending on various factors; the default assumption should be that attack speed does not affect 1H offense.

However evade and similar abilities from Agility, Shadow Veil, or Wind/Cold Shield do weaken 1H offense, by the same amount as has always been thought.

Agility grants both evade and attack speed bonus. Evade comes from total Agility while attack speed only starts accumulating after Agility (with equipment bonuses) exceeds player level. A high level player gets less attack speed from high Agility; about half. Burden complicates the comparison. A good target for 1H is 70 burden, this reduces evade to near zero while leaving about half any attack speed bonus.

Another 1H philosophy wants 40 burden, or as close to that as you can get. This reduces evade by about half while providing nearly full attack speed. While evade does hurt 1H offense it provides 3~4 times more defense in comparison. Unwanted evade can be removed by reducing Agility. This lowers PMit but using Haste or Swift Strike could compensate for that.

That idea can also apply to high burden 1H. The Haste analysis earlier did not consider that using it may allow someone to lower Agility and Endurance and boost Strength and Dexterity in their place. High burden is probably better since feathers can lower it if desired.

Imperil 1H PFFEST with this (11366 ADB, 70.7% Parry, 51.8% Crit Chance) = 1h36 = 96min
Imperil 1H PFFEST with this (10091 ADB, 68.2% Parry, 50.6% Crit Chance) = 1h46 = 106min
Similar TPS.

Observations:
1) Aside from the ADB and Counter-Parry, there is not any significant difference between both weapons
2) With the rapier, being parried is more punishing.
3) The difference in clear time seems to match the difference in ADB (roughly 10%)
4) The result suggests that the pros and cons of both Bleeding Wound and Penetrated Armor cancel each other out, and in the end it doesn't matter what proc one uses. The Bleeding Wound applies straight off the bat, keeps on damaging the mob when we're parried and stacks better with Imperil. The Penetrated Armor has an easier work on the mobs that remained unaffected by Imperil.
5) Given the frequency at which I've been parried with the rapier, compared to the shortsword, it looks like using Overpower 5 / Butcher 4 may be the optimal weapon setup, though nothing is certain with just this little test.

Conclusion:
It doesn't matter that much what weapon one uses for Imperil 1H, but there still can be one to prefer over the other, given the player. The Shortsword will be a better option (both for the higher ADB and BW working better than PA with Imperil) if one is rigorous enough to Imperil the mobs properly (=recasts). The rapier will be slightly more handy for those who don't use Aether Shards or will just cast 3 times and call it a day, disregarding the cases when there are a bit too many mobs that remain unaffected.

Further experiments to do (I won't do these, I have other things to do with my life):
1) The case of Overpower. It is unclear how much its contribution is.
Hypothesis to check (H0): Overpower is more beneficial than Fatality.
Experiment to check the hypothesis: using two (near) identical weapons, one with OP5B4, the other with B5F4, and then check with HV Utils the number of attacks that have been parried, as well as the overall clear time.
2) Slaughter VS Nimble. It is unclear how much parry will contribute to the overall damage output.
Hypothesis to check (H0): the extra parry provided by Nimble provides enough extra counterattacks to outweigh the ADB bonus provided by Slaughter.
Experiment to check the hypothesis: Waki of Slaughter VS Waki of the Nimble, or Rapier of Slaughter VS Rapier of the Nimble. Then read the final clear time in both cases.

I had similar ideas on Slaughter vs Nimble as well. I think this question can be handled theoretically without testing.

Maximum rapier parry is 18.89 base; maximum nimble parry is 26.94 base. Difference of 8 base parry is scaled to 10 parry at level 500, then 13.3 parry after max forging.

The major problem is that this additional parry gets diluted with your block and other sources of parry. Let's roughly assume 70% block and 70% parry on an ordinary peerless level 500 warrior. The chances for both of these to fail is 0.3 x 0.3 = 9%, so the additional granted parry of nimble would be around 9% * 0.133 = 1.2%

Ignoring the limit of 3 counters per turn, that would be 1.2% more counter attacks. Using the typical 1 counter per turn average, counter attacks do about 24% of your total damage; let's use 25% here. So a nimble player would overall do 25% x 0.012 = 0.3% more damage. You could double this if you think you have way more counters.

Slaughter is about the same as Butcher 15, so an overall 5.4% to 6.9% adb increase by my estimates. The clear winner.

A similar comparison is what creates more damage on a rapier: Lmax parry or Lmax critical?

Lmax - Lmin parry is 18.89 - 16.29 = 2.6 parry, which becomes 4.32 parry after scaled and forged. Applying the above dilution factor of 9% then the damage factor of 25% yields 0.1% more damage from a good parry roll.

Lmax - Lmin critical chance is 5.37 - 4.48 = 0.89, which becomes 1.48 after scaled and forged. A critical will do about 83% more damage on a typical player, let's just say 100%. On a rapier it's more like 200% because it also inflicts Penetrated Armor, which is basically worth almost an extra hit on any future hits. After diluting with the overall typical critical chance of 53% to 60% on a level 500 player, a good critical roll gives 1.2% to 1.5% damage increase.

For interesting comparison, a top ADB roll on a rapier is worth about 2/3 of the Slaughter suffix, so 3.6% to 4.6% more damage. It's best as expected, but crit roll on a rapier is quite competitive, which is why I say it's the 3rd best stat on a rapier.

Parry is probably the 4th most important roll on a rapier. It should be considered to provide almost no offense, and the above calculated 4.32% improvement on defense (dilution should not apply in a defensive sense). The 2nd most important rapier roll is the most obvious plain one to see; it's just slightly more important than critical chance.

I should try to calculate how Strength and Dexterity rolls weigh in comparison next.

This post has been edited by BlueWaterSplash: Nov 19 2019, 01:08

5) Fire/cold users rejoice: Redwood being stronger than Willow here means that you don't need to see specific results for Fiery/Arctic willow, because it'll just be an even bigger lead for Redwood.

In addition, Fire/cold users could also consider Fiery/Arctic Redwood of Elementary in non-imperil mode.

Of course, we can't simply compare these two equipments since the front proveide more ele prof, but we could consider give F/ARE 5+0 or 4+1. And it seem these would better than F/ARD at much lower(<530?) base prof and top(full 600) base prof at level 500.