Dual Wield vs. Single Weapon (Again, but I thnk this is a ..

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

Ok, lets say you've got a set of dual wields that do 10 damage every second
and a one handed weapon that does 30 damage every 3 seconds. The dps is the
same, 10 dps.

Now, lets say you fighting a group of three monsters, each with 100hp. With
the dual wields, the first monster is dead after 10 seconds and you move on
to the next one. Second one is dead in 10 seconds, same with the third.
Overall time with the dual wields 30 seconds.

With the one handed weapon you hit for 30 at the start, 3 seconds later
another 30 point hit (60 total), 3 seconds later 30 more (90 total), 3
seconds later 30 more (120 total, monster dead), over all time elapsed 10
seconds BUT your next hit won't be for another 3 seconds on the second
monster and now the dual wielder is 2 seconds (and 20 damage) ahead. The
more monsters, the further behind you get (in this case 2 seconds for each
monster over the first one).

I hope I'm explaining this clearly. I thought about it on the ride to work
today. Any flaws in my logic?

LoonBoon

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

The logic sounds right ..but..
1. I believe the 2nd hand of the wield doent always hit..so I presume
that the 10 dps considers the average hits on the 2nd hand.
2. You picked numbers that make your point. If the mobs had 90hp, the
numbers come out the same
3. If you can melee a mob in only 3 hits, then I don't think you need
to worry about the extra 2 seconds. If it takes you much longer (40-60
seconds), then the extra 2 seconds gets lots in the noise.

So in principle you are right but I don't think it has substantive
impact. Besides, if you get to choose when to attack, then 30/30 weapon
will take that much of a bigger bite out of the mob and mean less
damage on you until he is dead. Imagine if you had a 100/100..one hit
on the SINGLE mob and hes dead and you take no damage.

LoonBoon wrote:
> Ok, lets say you've got a set of dual wields that do 10 damage every
second
> and a one handed weapon that does 30 damage every 3 seconds. The dps
is the
> same, 10 dps.
>
> Now, lets say you fighting a group of three monsters, each with
100hp. With
> the dual wields, the first monster is dead after 10 seconds and you
move on
> to the next one. Second one is dead in 10 seconds, same with the
third.
> Overall time with the dual wields 30 seconds.
>
> With the one handed weapon you hit for 30 at the start, 3 seconds
later
> another 30 point hit (60 total), 3 seconds later 30 more (90 total),
3
> seconds later 30 more (120 total, monster dead), over all time
elapsed 10
> seconds BUT your next hit won't be for another 3 seconds on the
second
> monster and now the dual wielder is 2 seconds (and 20 damage) ahead.
The
> more monsters, the further behind you get (in this case 2 seconds for
each
> monster over the first one).
>
> I hope I'm explaining this clearly. I thought about it on the ride
to work
> today. Any flaws in my logic?
>
> LoonBoon

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

[NOTE: I'm an Enchanter, so I have no actual clue if this is right, but it
matches what I've seen pretty smart melee players do and say.]

LoonBoon <LCallis@nuvox.net> wrote:
>Ok, lets say you've got a set of dual wields that do 10 damage every second
>and a one handed weapon that does 30 damage every 3 seconds. The dps is the
>same, 10 dps.

The formulae are complicated enough that the only way to really compare this
accurately is by parsing. And it'll vary by mob.

>Now, lets say you fighting a group of three monsters, each with 100hp. With
>the dual wields, the first monster is dead after 10 seconds and you move on
>to the next one. Second one is dead in 10 seconds, same with the third.
>Overall time with the dual wields 30 seconds.

If you're optimizing your weapons for mobs that you kill in 10 seconds
soloing, you're not playing the same game I am. Rounding differences from
overkill hits (your last 20 damage on your first mob get wasted) and the
mid-swing delay when switching mobs are pretty irrelevant to most situations.

>I hope I'm explaining this clearly. I thought about it on the ride to work
>today. Any flaws in my logic?

Only that this particular effect is lost in the noise of mobs that take 45s or
more for a group to kill, and is FAR outweighed by even a small difference
in DPS, or by the cost of ripostes, damage shields, etc. that will hurt
more when dual wielding.

In most cases, pick the weapon set that does the most damage for you, with a
bias toward 2H weapons if it's a close match between the two.
--
Mark Rafn dagon@dagon.net <http://www.dagon.net/>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

On Thu, 10 Feb 2005 09:28:08 -0500, "LoonBoon" <LCallis@nuvox.net>
wrote:


>
>I hope I'm explaining this clearly. I thought about it on the ride to work
>today. Any flaws in my logic?
>
I prefer to dual wield because it looks cooker - and shields are for
wimps !

--

Bunnies aren't just cute like everybody supposes !
They got them hoppy legs and twitchy little noses !
And what's with all the carrots ?
What do they need such good eyesight for anyway ?
Bunnies ! Bunnies ! It must be BUNNIES !

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

Are you talking about EQ1 or EQ2? The Steelwarrior has huge numbers of parses
on the differences between using 1H, 2H, DW for EQ1.

K

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

LoonBoon <LCallis@nuvox.net> wrote:
: Ok, lets say you've got a set of dual wields that do 10 damage every second
: and a one handed weapon that does 30 damage every 3 seconds. The dps is the
: same, 10 dps.
:
: I hope I'm explaining this clearly. I thought about it on the ride to work
: today. Any flaws in my logic?

Not as such, except you picked the right numbers to prove your point.

What happens if the target has 30 hp? The single weapon will kill it on the
first hit, while the dual wields will take three hits (2 extra seconds of
taking damage!). The numbers will come out in different directions
depending on the ratio of the damages of the two weapons, and the amount of
hp the target has. It's true that for any combination of weapons, and
target hp, the faster weapons will come out slightly ahead slightly more
of the time, but all in all, the difference is extremely minor and in
the case of having "wasted" seconds at the end of a fight with the slower
weapon, it might to take you longer than that to start fighting the
next target anyway.

That said, I think about similar strategy issues all the time, although
I think it's more relevant to spell casters. As a wizard, I have to work out
whether it's more appropriate in a given fight to go with a couple of big
nukes, or a larger bunch of smaller nukes (or a combo). Even given two
with the same peak efficiency, I need to weigh mana costs, casting times
and recast times, resists on different types of nukes, and aggro. If all
I had to do to min/max my efficiency was think about the speed of my
weapons... I'd probably be bored and quit.

Hugh

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

Hippie Ramone <kdeacon@scrye.com> wrote:
: Are you talking about EQ1 or EQ2? The Steelwarrior has huge numbers of parses
: on the differences between using 1H, 2H, DW for EQ1.

He wasn't asking about parses, he was comparing dual wield weapons that
do X DPS to a single weapon that does X DPS. Parses are only needed to
work out what X DPS is, given weapons with different stats/skills.

Hugh

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

On 2005-02-10, Hughie MacAngus <hughie-200502@grfb.com> wrote:
> Hippie Ramone <kdeacon@scrye.com> wrote:
>: Are you talking about EQ1 or EQ2? The Steelwarrior has huge numbers of parses
>: on the differences between using 1H, 2H, DW for EQ1.
>
> He wasn't asking about parses, he was comparing dual wield weapons that
> do X DPS to a single weapon that does X DPS. Parses are only needed to
> work out what X DPS is, given weapons with different stats/skills.

EQ1 have massively different combat engines for dual wield,1h, etc.


Parses are the only way to validate his hypothesis, which already
falls at the first hurdle ... 'weapons that do X DPS'. There is no
such constant figure for comparison, and dual wield/2h'er/1h'er
scale differently depending on critter.

Hippies comment is good advice if you actually want to make an
informed decision about weapons in EQ1. The flavour of the post
makes me think it was just an unlabelled EQ2 question though.

M

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

On Thu, 10 Feb 2005 14:37:58 -0500, Mark Morrison <drdpikeuk@aol.com> wrote:

>I prefer to dual wield because it looks cooker - and shields are for wimps !

Never used Bash to interrupt a MOBs cast, eh?

Best regards,

Tim ==
(substitute 'tcsys.com' for 'nospam.co.uk')
_________________

Seeq Endestroi
Paladin of Mithanial Marr, The Rathe
http://www.magelo.com/eq_view_profile.html?num=507035

Grave Wisdom / Grave Intentions - a Rathe Guild
http://www.gravewisdom.com

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

Seeq Endestroi <seeq@nospam.co.uk> wrote in
news:vba111hfvh74givdkkcmhua6ec7seinks7@4ax.com:

> On Thu, 10 Feb 2005 14:37:58 -0500, Mark Morrison <drdpikeuk@aol.com>
> wrote:
>
>>I prefer to dual wield because it looks cooker - and shields are for
>>wimps !
>
> Never used Bash to interrupt a MOBs cast, eh?
>

Not if you start with a reasonable race to begin with... :b

Large races get the Slam racial ability, uses bash skill, requires no
shield to be equipped.

--
On Erollisi Marr in <Sanctuary of Marr>
Ancient Graeme Faelban, Barbarian Soothsayer of 70 seasons

On Steamfont in <Insanity Plea>
Graeme, 24 Dwarven Mystic, 22 Sage
Aviv, 12 Gnome Brawler, 19 Craftsman

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

On Mon, 14 Feb 2005 07:38:23 -0600, Seeq Endestroi <seeq@nospam.co.uk>
wrote:

>On Thu, 10 Feb 2005 14:37:58 -0500, Mark Morrison <drdpikeuk@aol.com> wrote:
>
>>I prefer to dual wield because it looks cooker - and shields are for wimps !
>
>Never used Bash to interrupt a MOBs cast, eh?
>
I prefer to take the pain !

Besides, as a Priest I'm too busy casting damage spells to interrupt
anything...

--

Bunnies aren't just cute like everybody supposes !
They got them hoppy legs and twitchy little noses !
And what's with all the carrots ?
What do they need such good eyesight for anyway ?
Bunnies ! Bunnies ! It must be BUNNIES !