The best DPS?

No real surprises for me.

-Ice has always been an end pig, when they changed iceblast to be 1.67 they gutted the damage too.

-shout is the worst attack ever. Sonic for blasters has never been that amazing with the lower -res values. It does however, work very well with a fast blap set like /elec or /em.

-Blaze is awesome.

-Psi is a much better st set that most realize, it was not gutted when ported over from defs. Just overall the set is lacking for both AT's

-To be more accurate you should list elec twice in your final ratings. Once like you did and once w/ VS cast included. If people could agree on a fair use of VS you could just avg it. I wouldn't say avg it over 60 sec as that won't represent actual play as you are rarely attacking things non-stop for 60 seconds. But maybe it might be fair to avg (amortize more accurately) the full end cost and cast time over 30 seconds?

[ QUOTE ]
Thoughts?

[/ QUOTE ]

I've got more than a few.

So, rather than actually looking at the disparity between the varying sets and how the various attacks operating withing the confines of the sets, you instead chose to rank the first through third tiers of the powers completely discounting the varying disparities between ranks? You're completely ignoring actual differences in attack chain application simply because you want to have some vague and largely useless analysis.

You'd be better off if, rather than trying to rate the powers based on arbitrary rank, you actually did some attack chain calculations and determined real theoretical values for the various attack chains like in this thread or this on the Scrapper forums.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Thoughts?

[/ QUOTE ]

I've got more than a few.

So, rather than actually looking at the disparity between the varying sets and how the various attacks operating withing the confines of the sets, you instead chose to rank the first through third tiers of the powers completely discounting the varying disparities between ranks? You're completely ignoring actual differences in attack chain application simply because you want to have some vague and largely useless analysis.

[/ QUOTE ]

What do you mean by this? All I did was take the sets, and rank them based on the basic attributes. that is what they'd look like before making chains.



[ QUOTE ]
You'd be better off if, rather than trying to rate the powers based on arbitrary rank, you actually did some attack chain calculations and determined real theoretical values for the various attack chains like in this thread or this on the Scrapper forums.

[/ QUOTE ]

Doing the whole chains wouldve taken much more time, at least I did this much on a whim

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Thoughts?

[/ QUOTE ]

I've got more than a few.

So, rather than actually looking at the disparity between the varying sets and how the various attacks operating withing the confines of the sets, you instead chose to rank the first through third tiers of the powers completely discounting the varying disparities between ranks? You're completely ignoring actual differences in attack chain application simply because you want to have some vague and largely useless analysis.

[/ QUOTE ]

What do you mean by this? All I did was take the sets, and rank them based on the basic attributes. that is what they'd look like before making chains.

[/ QUOTE ]

With a system wherein various ratings are assigned based on rank rather than actual capability, you lose a vast quantity of accuracy. Ranks only operate as a decent metric of performance if the difference in rank is actually demonstrative of capability. If Fire did twice as much single target damage as Energy, it would make sense to give Fire a rank of 8 and Energy a rank of 4. If Elec then dealt 25% more damage than Energy, it would make sense to give it a rank of 5. However, with a ranking system, if Elec did even 5% more than Energy, it would recieve the ranking of 5 simply because it was better.

Assigning a rank within an artificial construct and then using the arbitrarily assigned rank as a method for determining actual capacity is a horribly flawed system since it completely disregards the comparative differences between the powers.

yet, does it change the fact that based on the charts, elec has enough going for it to put it ahead of nrg, psi and ice?

even if it is by like 2%, its still a rank up, even if the differences arent clear.

Perhaps I should go back and make it more clear as to the differences, seeing as it seems like being at a certain rank means they are THAT much better...

Your attack chains are flawed in that they are unsustainable. If you're only looking at a fixed window of 3 attacks (in an order not likely produced anyway), the results are wildly misleading, unless you're just talking about burst damage. Put in another way, most attack chains will look like T3-1-2-1, repeat, not T1-2-3, which will turn into 1-2-3-1-2-gap (or a wasteful AoE). If you can do 3-1-2-1 indefinitely with no gaps, the recharge of each of the powers are meaningless. If you can also sustain said chain w/o blowing your end bar too quickly, the DPE is also somewhat meaningless.

For pure and sustained ST damage, Blaze > Flares > Blast > Flares (repeat) beats out all to no one's surprise, but 2nd is BiB > Ice Bolt > I Blast > I Bolt (repeat), followed by Psi (actually, I don't know Psi's optimal ST chain since WD does a sliver more DPA than MB, but its long recharge means it won't be as big a factor--you might be able to nudge Psi's ST damage higher than Ice, but Psi's weakness is its dreadful AoE damage anyway). I can maintain both of the Fire & Ice chains gaplessly and indefinitely (at least long enough for most fights to play out) which makes both recharge times and end costs meaningless. Compared to that, most of your higher (than Ice) ranked blasts fare much worse. En's Burst > Bolt > Blast > Bolt chain isn't even close to Ice's. Anything w/o a T3 blast suffers in the long run, so Elec & AR are right out. Son has a T3, but is completely pathetic. Archery's an intriguing case since its T1 & 2 attacks are kinda weak, but has a decent T3 and it still beats out En once you average out the 3-1-2-1 chain.

Not true in elec's case.

VS acts like a free (albeit small) attack every 3 sec. Its an outside source of damage while you chain your other attacks, and adds up in the long run.

Not sure about Ignite.

I will be making new chains however.

EDIT:

Before I do, did I do ANY good with that chart? At least until I messed up on the chains?

Sparky really throws a lot of wrenches in calculations, but what's your 3rd attack in an Elec ST chain? You can't just do 1-2-1-2 w/o a gap. Are you going to use BL on 1 target (valid, if you can afford the end)? Of course, if you're assuming you can fill it w/your secondary (unless you're /Dev), then things get trickier still. It's prolly fair to assume most Elec blasters have a T1 secondary ranged damage power (unless you're /En) or even a melee attack as filler. In fact, Elec/Fire's RoF > CB > EB > CB chain is better than En's Burst > Bolt > Blast > Bolt, but not better than a comparable En/Fire's RoF > Bolt > Burst > Bolt, though the gap is very narrow at this point (mostly cuz Burst sucks for a T3), so Sparky might tip the balance back to Elec.

Of course, this benefits Arch even more, cuz an Arch/Fire can do BA > Snap > Rof > Snap and get rid of the underperforming Aimed Shot (this will cause a redraw which drops the overall DPS by a hair). Same for Ice/Fire w/BiB > Bolt > RoF > Bolt and so forth. And yes, Ring of Fire has a better DPA (and comparable DPE) than every T1/2 primary power in the game. It also has a shorter range, but it's the same as most T3s so should fit into most ranged attack chains seamlessly. It also immobs targets, just as a bonus.

Or course, not everyone plays */Fire, but it's just an illustration of how comparing Blaster primaries only can be so misleading. Chilblain & Elec Fences are lower than most T1/2 blasts, but higher than a couple. Subdual sorta gets the shaft, but makes up for it w/MM's uber AoEs. Then there's the whole blapping issue. Scrapper comparisons are easier because most of their secondaries are about mitigation, not more damage, though they have their complications also.

BTW, AR's best ST chain might involve Buckshot, since even against a single mob, it has the 3rd highest DPA, unless you can get all of Ignite's damage all the time. In fact, Buchshot has only a bit less ST DPA than Slug. Of course, it's bad DPE for 1 target and there's the whole KB thing.

What Im trying to do is compare the primaries first and foremost.

Adding secondaries scews the comparisons, because then you have to factor flares with RoF vs Flares with elec fence, etc, etc.

Would anyone be willing to help me with this project? I think I did ok up until the Chaining for comparing the basics of the set (St at least)

[ QUOTE ]
Would anyone be willing to help me with this project? I think I did ok up until the Chaining for comparing the basics of the set (St at least)

[/ QUOTE ]

I can help design some primary-only attack strings if you give me some recharge assumptions. It's probably best to do it with a couple different recharge assumptions like 60% (SOs only) and 225% (IO build).

Thanks Umby

What I want to do is this:

Somehow make a chain using BASE NUMBERS

Then a second chain using your standard SO slotting (3dam, 1end, 2rech(we will skip Acc...))

Then we will compare them at IO level. essentially near 3-2 SO lvl of each of the previous stats, plus rech bonus.

Should we include hasten in all of these, or no?


*essentially, I'm curios as to the disparaties between sets from these different standpoints...*

[ QUOTE ]
Thanks Umby

[/ QUOTE ]

Quit calling me Umby... I'm a number cruncher, not green anthropomorph >.<

[ QUOTE ]
What I want to do is this:

Somehow make a chain using BASE NUMBERS

[/ QUOTE ]

Why would you ever make a chain using base numbers? That's nigh upon idiotic. The only time you're using only the base numbers is if you're not using enhancements and, even then, that's not an attack chain. That's barely more than a priority list. The game is balanced under SO assumptions. Acting like base numbers should actually be counted (especially since a fair numbers of the fundamental attacks are only available after SOs have been available for a few levels) is utterly pointless unless you want to show that some blasts are better for the pre-SO levels than others.

[ QUOTE ]
Then a second chain using your standard SO slotting (3dam, 1end, 2rech(we will skip Acc...))

[/ QUOTE ]

This is why I suggested 60% +recharge. 65% might be equally appropriate, but I don't really think it's going to alter much.

[ QUOTE ]
Then we will compare them at IO level. essentially near 3-2 SO lvl of each of the previous stats, plus rech bonus.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is why I suggested 225% +recharge.

[ QUOTE ]
Should we include hasten in all of these, or no?

[/ QUOTE ]

Hasten shouldn't be figured in for the basic SO assumptions (60%), in my opinion, but, if we did, it should be separated from it (SO with Hasten up and SO with Hasten down). Attack chains shouldn't ever use averaged +recharge contribution because the recharges are nowhere near long enough. Hasten should be figured in for the IO optimized (225%) simply because it's the only real way to get that much recharge outside of external buffing.

I'll get working on generating some attack strings for those 2 recharge allotments and all of the relevant numbers (DPS) over the next couple of days.

allright cool, thanks Umbral.

You have a point for base numbers i suppose, dunno why but I had it in my head it may show something different than with SO slotting

I need me some Excel...need to make a spreadsheet for this stuff XD

[ QUOTE ]

You have a point for base numbers i suppose, dunno why but I had it in my head it may show something different than with SO slotting


[/ QUOTE ]

and I was right, after slotting SO's, VS drops dramatically seeing as it cannot get +rech

[ QUOTE ]
I'll get working on generating some attack strings for those 2 recharge allotments and all of the relevant numbers (DPS) over the next couple of days.

[/ QUOTE ]

And here they be, after roughly 2 hours of setting up charts with activation times, various recharge states, and DPAs (along with the ill-fated first attempt to post this info that the forums ate because I spent too long writing the post >.<), I've got attack strings (but not DPS calcs, it's too late for that) for all of the Blaster sets at the 3 recharge values: SO (66.66%), SO w/ Hasten up (136.66%), and IO build (250%).

All of the attack strings were generated using my soon-to-be-made-into-a-guide attack string generation method. The method has shown, repeatedly, to generate the absolute best attack strings possible or, on a rare occasion, barring that, a very close contender (generally because I was too lazy to go back and redo a calculation). The method itself includes waiting periods (re: they won't be seamless all the time), especially when there are attacks that have large DPA disparities, but they will generate superior DPS.

Archery:
SO - Blazing>Snap>Aimed>Snap>Fistful>Wait(.528 secs)
SO w/ Hasten - Blazing>Snap>Aimed>Snap
IO - Blazing>Snap>Fist>Wait(.396 secs)

Assault Rifle:
SO - Burst>Buck>Slug>Burst>Wait(1.848 secs)
SO w/ Hasten - Burst>Slug>Burst>Buckshot>Wait(.66 secs)
IO - Burst>Slug>Burst>Buckshot

Electrical Blast:
SO - Charged>Lightning>Wait(.66 secs)>Charged>Ball>Wait(1.188 secs)>Charged>Lightning>Wait(.66 secs)>Charged>Wait(2.508 secs)
SO w/ Hasten - Charged>Lightning>Charged>Ball>Wait(.396 secs)
IO - Charged>Lightning>Charged>Ball>Lightning>Charged>W ait(1.188 secs)

Energy Blast:
SO - Burst>Blast>Bolt>Torrent>Wait(1.188 secs)>Bolt
SO w/ Hasten - Burst>Bolt>Blast>Bolt>Wait(.132 secs)
IO - Burst>Blast>Bolt

Fire Blast:
SO - Blaze>Ball>Flares>Blast>Flares>Wait(.66 secs)>Blaze>Flares>Blast>Flares>Ball>Wait(.66 secs)>Blaze>Flares>Blast>Flares>Wait(1.848 secs)
SO w/ Hasten - Blaze>Ball>Blast>Flares>Wait(.132 secs)>Blaze>Blast>Flares>Ball>Wait(.132 secs)>Blaze>Flares>Blast>Flares>Wait(.132 secs)
IO - Blaze>Ball>Flares>Wait(.264 secs)>Blaze>Flares>Blast

Ice Blast:
SO - BIB>Blast>Bolt>BFR>Bolt>Wait(.396 secs)>BIB>Blast>Bolt>Wait(2.508 secs)>Bolt>Wait(.528 secs)
SO w/ Hasten - BIB>Bolt>Blast>Bolt>Wait(.924 secs)
IO - BIB>Bolt>Blast>Wait(.396 secs)

Psychic Blast:
SO - TK>Will>Mental>Dart>Wait(1.716 secs)>TK>Dart>Mental>Wait(.66 secs)>Dart>Wait(1.188 secs)
SO w/ Hasten - TK>Will>Dart>Mental>TK>Dart>Mental>Dart>Wait(.132 secs)
IO - TK>Will>Dart>Wait(.132 secs)>TK>Dart>Mental

Sonic Attack:
SO - Scream>Shout>Shriek>Scream>Shriek>Howl
SO w/ Hasten - Scream>Shout>Scream>Shriek>Howl
IO - Scream>Shout>Scream>Shriek>Shout>Shriek

Ill do the dps for those...

now, do those just repeat after where they end, Umbral?

Also, Im gonna put the damage for the IO build at 100% vs the so 94.93%...

[ QUOTE ]
now, do those just repeat after where they end, Umbral?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, that's why they're attack strings.

Just making sure

done with the dps values without defiance....now I gotta ddo that along with Sonic's -res

Also, I added VS to the elec chain, all I did was figure out how many time VS would fire *on the target* during the chain, then added it to the damage

Hey Umbry ... (lol)

Ok, heres the DPS for the strongs Umbral came up with (with defiance to boot!):

[u]ARCHERY[u]
SO: 106.55
SO+HASTEN: 115.85
IO: 114.54

[u]ASSAULT RIFLE[u]
SO: 84.96
SO+HASTEN: 102.17
IO: 117.77

[u]ELECTRICAL BLAST[u]
SO: 93.33 (VS fires 3 times)
SO+HASTEN: 115.89 (VS fires once)
IO: 120.32 (VS fires 2 times)

[u]ENERGY BLAST[u]
SO: 98.64
SO+HASTEN: 113.69
IO: 118.24

[u]FIRE BLAST[u]
SO: 142.03
SO+HASTEN: 168.52
IO: 177.67

[u]ICE BLAST[u]
SO: 107.2
SO+HASTEN: 136.36
IO: 133.44

[u]PSYCHIC BLAST[u]
SO: 107.3
SO+HASTEN: 141.53
IO: 148

[u]SONIC ATTACK[u]
SO: 99.08
SO+HASTEN: 94.75
IO: 116.42


Best with SO's:
Fire>>Psi>Ice>Arch>Sonic>Energy>Elec>AR

Best with SO's + Hasten:
Fire>>>Psi>Ice>Elec>Arch>Energy>AR>Sonic

Best with IO's:
Fire>>>>Psi>Ice>Elec>Energy>AR>Sonic>Arch

[ QUOTE ]
Best with SO's:
Fire>>Psi>Ice>Arch>Sonic>Energy>Elec>AR

Best with SO's + Hasten:
Fire>>>Psi>Ice>Elec>Arch>Energy>AR>Sonic

Best with IO's:
Fire>>>>Psi>Ice>Elec>Energy>AR>Sonic>Arch

[/ QUOTE ]So..... Elec.... *doesn't* suck?

What about secondaries?

This is just about primaries for right now, ans secondaries are kinda easy:

Elec>nrg>mental?=fire?>ice>dev

[ QUOTE ]
What about secondaries?

[/ QUOTE ]

I think I specifically mentioned a caveat earlier that doing DPS calculations for primaries is pretty inaccurate. The secondary sets provide nearly half of the attacks that a blaster will get and many of them actually have excellent DPA. A better (and more telling) analysis would be for a comparison of all primaries by all secondaries, but that would be a lot of work, which is more than I'm interested in doing at the moment.

[ QUOTE ]
Also, I added VS to the elec chain, all I did was figure out how many time VS would fire *on the target* during the chain, then added it to the damage

[/ QUOTE ]

That's not actually the appropriate method for adding VSs damage. It's simply better to outright calculate VSs DPS and add it afterwards. Think of it this way, if VS fired once every 4 seconds for 40 damage and the attack string you were adding it to required 5 seconds, you would be adding 80 damage to the 5 second attack string for a benefit of 16 DPS when the VS was only adding 10 DPS. The only time when that method would actually be appropriate is if the attack string is perfectly sync'd with VS's rate of attack.