This is all amusing, but let's keep the thread focused on parsing results for the most part please. Thanks.
How can u normalize a persons connection, skill, pride or urge to deceive? As a dps we all want to be on top of "any" list. So if I would post my results i would either show everyone how bad i am OR risk having my class nerfed, neither have any appeal to me. Thus although I admire your efforts and likely sincerity when posting your results, I and i'm sure a lot of others will not partake because of said reasoning.
I too like to make decisions based on non-representative environments, incomplete controls, and small data sets. Why? Because I'm good at Science.
Trust me, I thought about this before doing it. Regarding the "desire to deceive"... it's basic Game Theory. Prisoner's Dilemma. All it takes is one person to break and "tell the truth" and it's a bad day for everyone else. Do I think that there's a possibility of a particularly vocal and concerned class banding together to sandbag their parses? Small chance, maybe. I don't think they'd actually do it though, because all it takes is one person to show them to be cheating the intent of the system and, as you aptly noted, everyone has pride. Almost everyone. This stage of the effort is honestly meant to do one thing: convince the devs that we really, really could use an updated training dummy every xpac. They have shown through the last few years of changes that they don't have a strong test environment. We can be that environment for them, but they can't make it difficult for us to do so... (Test server where I can't copy over a Live character? No thanks). If it's streamlined into our normal playing environment people will use it. I would be a bit disappointed if any game developer made hard number decisions based solely on results you would see coming out of this stage of this thIng. It's meant to cue up additional testing (internal or external), and drive discussion. Any educated player will understand enough about the combat engine and raid dynamics to know why these results are broad trends. Dumb people, however, see a spreadsheet with numbers and decimal points and think that automatically indicates precision. Do we have s lot of dumb people playing this game? Yes, we do. Help me fight through the dumb, folks. We're here to help the devs help us.
Beastlord: 29,230 Potency 384895 AB Mod 4150 CB 100.6 Fervor Normalized multiplier of: .9908 Deviation notes: none of the rules. on my home pc so lag was negligible. Results: Test 1-10:58 duration: 2,527,927,350 (Normalized to 2,551,343,338) Test 2 -10:11 duration: 2,576,862,618 (Normalized to 2,600,685,594 I mean 1,000,000,000 nothing to see here )
I see this test as an opportunity to show that 3 or 4 of our dps classes are working well for the content we are facing and a few others need updating and fixing. If Sorcs/Assassins didn't have outdated or down right broken abilities I could see the desire to drop the current group down to their level. but with fixed abilities they would be right up here with us. This testing also lets people of the same class see where they stand and see who to talk to for advice to improve. community improvement is a good thing.
Do you have anything of value to contribute to these threads? You spend a lot of your time trolling people. I feel sorry for you. Are you just not in a good place in life right now, or have you always been this banal?
Koncept just needs a hug that's all. He is a sad Wizard now a day. Be curious to see results of this for an assassin and wizard though. I'm wondering if can get my coercer above some T1
Assassin: Right Side Prestige. Both epic 2.0 abilities @ Ancient. 25,611.5 Potency 413276 AB Mod 4150 CB 50.1 Fervor Normalized multiplier of: .6605 Deviation notes: No deviation Results: Test 1-10:43 duration: 801,760,454 (Normalized to 1,213,783,552) Test 2 -10:38 duration: 870,088,554 (Normalized to 1,317,225,326) 2nd Fight Breakdown
Yeah, got it. Annoying people that are honestly trying to help your class and the game as a whole isn't a productive tactic though. Just like getting angry and screaming at the devs - what do you honestly think the response is going to be? If you're past the point of caring or trying then just take a break or go away forever.
So it seems like the normalization - all preliminary so far, pretty much is mostly in line with where I was intuitively. I might mess around with it tomorrow, but considering Faceroller already posted one I know if I really need to do too much else. But I'll check it to confirm the numbers are in line. Or maybe I'll post a right side version to show how much worse it is.
Makes me feel as if you aren't 100% certain in the data. I'd do both, if I were you, to show right side is worse and to beat Yards. After I beat Yards, I'd tell him to sad.
I'm still not convinced of all of the merits of the testing. We can take the data where it goes, but we also know that parsing on a training dummy is **so** controlled that it won't accurately "sync up" with what happens in a live environment. But in regards to that, it requires a bit of "theory crafting" as to how some classes may over-perform or under-perform their "controlled benchmarks" in a life environment - for example, if Warlocks were expected to hit Dark Siphoning as much as possible for power regen, this would definitely reduce their effectiveness on the parse.
You accidentally hit on my super secret "agenda behind the agenda". I wanted to turn the warlock community against itself to distract them away from spendin their time in the BL balance thread. My tertiary objective was to pit wizards against warlocks in a similar fashion. I can't get any of this accomplished if you're gonna go around egging people like Mogrim on!
