Feedback: Testing Melee Set Performance

[TheAdjustor]

30 minutes ago, MunkiLord said:

It's in this thread, first post. Good stuff and Kaeladin is credible.

 

Here is the actual spreadsheet:   https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1av2vWL9UVgGw183BbjFNweJze7N5P3Tn8tYSppdFQgE/edit#gid=890463997

Thanks Man. I really love gathering this stuff up. It's always good to see how other people think about the game.

 

Edit: Wow Just got done looking at it. My main claws/ea is at the bottom of the pack for everything. I guess I should run screaming around nerf everybody else.

Edited September 17, 2019 by TheAdjustor

[BrandX]

3 minutes ago, Hopeling said:

You can google it if you want, but it isn't the point. I have no idea whether it's accurate either. I'm literally just asking where you're getting the idea that FM is behind lots of things in damage, because whether it's accurate or not, Kaeladin's spreadsheet is to my knowledge the only attempt anyone has made to directly rank powersets by damage.

 

It seems like FM is actually drawing us away from the main point here though. I'm not trying to make a point about FM, but about TW: if it deals more damage than other sets, where's the tradeoff?

 

Sustainable ST?

 

TW isn't exactly End Friendly (hence why it's popular to pair it with a defense set that offers +END and/or +REC).

 

Those Pylon times mentioned, could be built for the best dps and not damage mitigation.  They aren't using Defensive Sweep for sure.

[Hopeling]

44 minutes ago, TheAdjustor said:

I was going on my experience on live and here. I had a fire/shield scrapper back in the day and recreated her here.

Okay, I was just curious if you had some metric I didn't know about.

 

Anyway. It seems like FM is actually drawing us away from the main point here though, so I don't mind dropping the topic, unless you have something else to add.

44 minutes ago, TheAdjustor said:

TW has a variety of tradeoffs that have been repeatedly brought up repeatedly. It's an endhog

33 minutes ago, BrandX said:

Sustainable ST?

TheAdjustor, I know I trimmed your quote here, but the endurance thing is a bit long, so I wanted to discuss it separately.

 

TW absolutely does suck down endurance, but this isn't because its powers are unusually expensive. Its DPE is actually quite good: Rend Armor, Follow Through, and Crushing Blow have DPE as good as anything in War Mace, and Arc of Destruction has slightly higher DPE than Crowd Control. Whirling Smash offers much better DPE than Foot Stomp, doing the same total damage for 3/4 the cost. Titan Sweep has DPE only slightly worse than Broadsword's Slice.

 

Instead, TW spends endurance faster than other sets because it does more total damage. This is because its powers do bonus damage like we've discussed since page 3, and because it can crank out a lot of attacks very quickly.

 

For a specific example, let's compare two attack chains. For TW, we'll use Slow Rend - Follow Through - Arc of Destruction - Crushing Blow - Follow Through. For a brute, this does 519 base damage in 8.052 seconds, at the cost of 64.49 endurance. That's 64 DPS, 8 EPS, and 8.1 DPE. (It's actually more DPS than that considering the -res in Rend Armor, but I'm ignoring that for now.)

 

Compare this to another high-recharge chain, like say, Clobber-Shatter-Jawbreaker from War Mace. This does 299 damage in 5.94 seconds, at the cost of 37.23 endurance. That's 50 DPS, 6.3 EPS, and 8.0 DPE. (By the way, this isn't a cherry-picked example: every brute ST attack does almost exactly 8 DPE, outside special cases like Claws.)

 

So yes, TW is spending endurance faster. But it's getting exactly the same amount of damage for every point of endurance. "You can turn your blue stuff into damage faster than other sets, but no less efficiently" is not a downside!

 

If TW attacks actually had worse DPE than other sets, even with its damage staying exactly the same, this would be a more reasonable situation. As-is, it's hard to call it a tradeoff.

44 minutes ago, TheAdjustor said:

needs very high levels of recharge not being the least.  It also has a complicated and variable attack chain that depends on if you do or do not have momentum.

If the recharge thing is true, nobody has yet attempted to demonstrate it. Earlier in the thread, I gave an example of an ST attack chain requiring 0% global recharge, which does only a few percent less damage than a chain requiring perma-Hasten. (Granted, it mixes in more AoE attacks, so its DPE will be worse.)

 

TW's attack chain is pretty simple: you use one slow attack, then 4 fast attacks. Maybe 3 if you have to move. If you want a specific optimal chain, that can get complex at certain levels of recharge, but against regular spawns, mixing in AoEs at appropriate times is going to make a fixed chain mostly irrelevant anyway. If this is a downside, it doesn't seem like it's nearly proportional to the upside of doing 10-40% more damage on every attack.

Edited September 17, 2019 by Hopeling

[MunkiLord]

47 minutes ago, TheAdjustor said:

Thanks Man. I really love gathering this stuff up. It's always good to see how other people think about the game.

 

Edit: Wow Just got done looking at it. My main claws/ea is at the bottom of the pack for everything. I guess I should run screaming around nerf everybody else.

Claws will never be tops at DPS, but if you use the two -res procs in the top attack chain it will be better than the spread sheet says. The biggest issue with that is getting the needed recharge in the two proc powers while relying on as little enhanced recharge as possible so they proc at a reliable rate.

[TheAdjustor]

 

5 minutes ago, MunkiLord said:

Claws will never be tops at DPS, but if you use the two -res procs in the top attack chain it will be better than the spread sheet says. The biggest issue with that is getting the needed recharge in the two proc powers while relying on as little enhanced recharge as possible so they proc at a reliable rate.

In my current build I have the -res proc in slash. The attack chain using shockwave just isn't sustainable even for energy aura.  Energy drain is slow animating and costs a significant amount of end to cast. I went with the KB->KD IO in shockwave as being better utility in general. If there is any place to complain here, it would be for my Archery/Tactical arrow blaster, that does similar damage (maybe less it's somewhat situational) while being incredibly less survivable.

[Hopeling]

1 hour ago, TheAdjustor said:

Edit: Wow Just got done looking at it. My main claws/ea is at the bottom of the pack for everything. I guess I should run screaming around nerf everybody else.

It's at the bottom because that number does not include Follow Up. The numbers with Follow Up are listed in the next cell, and are much more competitive.

[Galaxy Brain]

I think at this point we need to gather data before going forward. TW is shown to be a huge outlier in what data we have, but those metrics have become questionable... so those results are then questionable. 

 

What I can do is:

 

1) gather data on enemy group resists and break it down by average and per rank to see if there are super significant changes mission to mission, or spawn to spawn that will be a factor for certain sets.

 

2) run data vs the example mission layout I posted earlier for a +0/x3 encounter with various enemy groups that could be fair to both AoE and ST damage. This would factor in the enemy resist averages (per rank) to give an *idea* of what results may be if you optimally ran a bunch of random missions.

 

We cannot really account for runners, or map geography, and other rando X factors. But what we can do is at least make the measuring stick more attuned to what you would expect in average gameplay. Instead of a very specific Pylon target, or vs farm map targets, it would try to emulate the gambit of enemies youd face daily.

 

With that done, it could at least show some more practical numbers to show what sets under or over perform... without random factors at the least. Randomness could then be discussed after the baseline is figured out?

Edited September 17, 2019 by Galaxy Brain

[TheAdjustor]

12 minutes ago, Hopeling said:

It's at the bottom because that number does not include Follow Up. The numbers with Follow Up are listed in the next cell, and are much more competitive.

Well is that a greater call to nerf  claws and all the melee damage sets ? seeing as it's even higher ?

 

Don't blow a gasket man, just messing with you. I use follow up in my rotation. Even so cracking 250 or so just isn't viable. Claws just doesn't have the ability to  use procs the way other sets do and still somehow manages to gulp down my blue bar  despite having 3.66 end/sec recovery (not including panacea and performance shifter)

Edited September 17, 2019 by TheAdjustor

[MunkiLord]

What I found interesting is Claws appears to have the second highest end usage after TW

[TheAdjustor]

Just now, MunkiLord said:

What I found interesting is Claws appears to have the second highest end usage after TW

It's fun it's cool, it makes nice sounds when you hit things. Oddly enough I built a TW/Ninjutsu on test and decided not to bring him to live because TW didn't have anything that could be a scythe (IMNSHO)

[Galaxy Brain]

2 minutes ago, TheAdjustor said:

It's fun it's cool, it makes nice sounds when you hit things. Oddly enough I built a TW/Ninjutsu on test and decided not to bring him to live because TW didn't have anything that could be a scythe (IMNSHO)

A scythe would be so sick...

 

Take back everything, TW is UP until this.

[Haijinx]

  And the thread continued to get worse .. 

[TheAdjustor]

2 minutes ago, Haijinx said:

  And the thread continued to get worse .. 

It was doomed the moment the title was chosen.

[MunkiLord]

9 minutes ago, Haijinx said:

  And the thread continued to get worse .. 

You say that, but we're all being civil so I don't see a problem. The most negative posts recently are from people complaining the thread is still open and/or exists at all.

[Galaxy Brain]

So, in preparation for a new thread (Probably titled "Practical Melee Set Testing" or such), I am grabbing data on resistances based on enemy rank and level ranges. 

 

What would be best? lvl 5 - 20, 20-40, and 40+ as brackets? Or just Pre / Post SO's?

Edited September 17, 2019 by Galaxy Brain

[MunkiLord]

I wouldn't spend too much effort on figuring out the pre-SO stuff. It goes by so quickly that I don't think it matters much for the context of this discussion. Plus, and this is just a guess, I think the endurance thing likely makes a huge impact at lower levels.

[Hopeling]

24 minutes ago, Galaxy Brain said:

So, in preparation for a new thread (Probably titled "Practical Melee Set Testing" or such), I am grabbing data on resistances based on enemy rank and level ranges. 

 

What would be best? lvl 5 - 20, 20-40, and 40+ as brackets? Or just Pre / Post SO's?

Those level brackets sound fine.

 

Do you have a map picked out to use yet?

[TheAdjustor]

24 minutes ago, MunkiLord said:

I wouldn't spend too much effort on figuring out the pre-SO stuff. It goes by so quickly that I don't think it matters much for the context of this discussion. Plus, and this is just a guess, I think the endurance thing likely makes a huge impact at lower levels.

 

That raises a good question where should the balance point be ? The original devs balanced around SOs (something of a cop-out on their part).  What is legitimate for the build ?  Common IOs ? Uncommon IO sets ?, Rare Sets ?, Very Rare sets with ATOs ? 

Edited September 17, 2019 by TheAdjustor

[Galaxy Brain]

4 minutes ago, TheAdjustor said:

 

That raises a good question where should the balance point be ? The original devs balanced around SOs (something of a cop-out on their part).  What is legitimate for the build ?  Common IOs ? Uncommon IO sets ?, Rare Sets ?, Very Rare sets with ATOs ? 

Earlier on we had settled at the most basic of "Average Joe" slotting, that being: 3 Dam, 1 Acc, 1 End, 1 Rech at either SO or even lvl common IO level.

 

Introducing more and more IO's would be a bit too variable, unless its just adding in incredibly common uniques / etc that *anyone* could slot. With the above, it would be a better showcase of the "Base Level" of the sets more or less as intended without outside variables.

 

Edited September 17, 2019 by Galaxy Brain

[MunkiLord]

2 minutes ago, TheAdjustor said:

 

That raises a good question where should the balance point be ? The original devs balanced around SOs (something of a cop-out on their part).  What is legitimate for the build ?  Common IOs ? Uncommon IO sets ?, Rare Sets ?, Very Rare sets with ATOs ? 

I vote for Generic IOs. I don't think worrying about Purples and ATOs is worthwhile for this discussion as that type of slotting breaks the game for countless builds.

[TheAdjustor]

1 minute ago, Galaxy Brain said:

Earlier on we had settled at the most basic of "Average Joe" slotting, that being: 3 Dam, 1 Acc, 1 End, 1 Rech at either SO or even lvl common IO level.

 

Introducing more and more IO's would be a bit too variable, unless its just adding in incredibly common uniques / etc that *anyone* could slot

 

Going to see endurance as a real limiting factor then.

[MunkiLord]

Since they are cheap test it without Miracle and Numina, then with. For a generic build Stamina will almost definitely require 2 or 3 slots, so it'll be as simple as replacing an enhancement.

[TheAdjustor]

Ahh here we go

 

Quote

With certain exceptions, attack powers appear to have a strict 1:10 endurance to damage ratio (1 endurance for every 10 base damage). This was revealed by Back Alley Brawler in a forum post on August 7th, 2008 (post purged).

https://paragonwiki.com/wiki/Endurance

 

That serves as a natural check on sets. Much of the OP in sets for raw damage, is really about the ability gain greater levels of recovery.

[Hopeling]

6 minutes ago, TheAdjustor said:

That raises a good question where should the balance point be ? The original devs balanced around SOs (something of a cop-out on their part).  What is legitimate for the build ?  Common IOs ? Uncommon IO sets ?, Rare Sets ?, Very Rare sets with ATOs ? 

That's largely up to the devs. We can test under multiple conditions and simply provide the data.

 

Personally, I don't expect SOs vs IOs to drastically change the ordering of melee sets - all the numbers will be higher, sure, but every set benefits a lot from recharge and from procs. If I'm wrong about that, OK, good to know.

6 minutes ago, Galaxy Brain said:

Earlier on we had settled at the most basic of "Average Joe" slotting, that being: 3 Dam, 1 Acc, 1 End, 1 Rech at either SO or even lvl common IO level.

For what it's worth, I don't think we need to prescribe standardized slotting. The "Average Joe" slotting is probably fine for most attacks, but if we're trying to measure how good sets really are in practice, the player needs to have a little bit of room to use their brain. Lightning Rod is always paired with Build Up, so it's probably better with recharge slotting instead of accuracy.

 

Or, to put it another way, if I run an Electric Melee character and do a bad job of it, and somebody else can get a better time with smarter slotting, that better time is the one we should record in the end. The goal is to test sets under certain limitations (like "SOs only"), rather than to hamstring them with generalizations.

[Galaxy Brain]

@Hopeling, thats a fair point, though "basic slotting" would cover 90% of attacks 🤔