On Mon, 24 Jan 2000 jhenders@... wrote:

> On Mon, Jan 24/00, kim@... wrote:
> >
> > The reason for putting a fast weapon in your primary is to
> > raise dual wield skill - a 10 delay weapon would give 60 dual
> > wield checks (and thus chances to improve) every minute. A
> > 100 delay weapon would only give 6 checks. If your skill is
> > maxed, this is a non-issue.
> >
> > (For those of you who remember, the disagreement JM and I had
> > over this was a matter of definition - he was using dam/delay
> > ratio, I was using average damage over time.)
>
> I thought you both agreed that dual weild checks were based on the
> secondary weapon delay. Have you now changed your mind on this? If the
> check happens when the secondary weapon delay expires then that
> contradicts the first sentance I quoted above.

Arrrgh. It's *not* a contradiction - that's what I'm trying
explain.

For the sake of argument, say the listed dam/delay ratio is
what you actually get. Say you're comparing a 6 damage 20
delay weapon with a 12 damage 40 delay weapon (both with a 0.3
ratio). Say the average damage is half the max damage.

Both weapons in the primary hand:

6/20 weapon swings 50 times. Avg total damage = (6/2)*50 =
150.

12/40 weapon swings 25 times. Avg total damage = (12/2)*25 =
150.

Say dual wield succeeds 40% of the time. Both weapons in
secondary hand:

6/20 weapon swings 50*0.4 = 20 times. Avg total damage =
(6/2)*20 = 60.

12/40 weapon swings 25*0.4 = 10 times. Avg total damage =
(12/2)*10 = 60.

So the fast weapon gets 20 dual wield skill checks vs 10 for
the slower, which makes it great if you're trying to raise DW.
But in terms of average damage, there is still no difference.
If weapon A is better than weapon B in your primary hand, it
is better in your secondary. If the two are equal in your
primary, they will still be equal in your secondary. The
greater number of dual wield checks with a faster weapon is
exactly canceled out by the greater damage of the slower
weapon (assuming comparable weapons).

The disagreement between JM and me was because of me using the
term "avg dam/delay." By putting the "avg" in there, I meant
the real average damage the weapon generated - what you'd get
from running a parser on your log file (which didn't exist
then). He read the "dam/delay" part and thought I meant the
damage and delay stats listed in the weapon description.

> And, with the typical fight, putting a 10 delay weapon in either hand
> with a bard at high levels, assuming an under one minute fight, would
> probably yeild something like this, assuming all 6 dual weild checks
> succeeded (ya right)
>
> At least that's how most of my fights looked. Given the clumpiness of
> the random rolls I'd rather have a lot more chances for hits.

Yes, a slower weapon generates clumpier data (though the
average remains the same). But we weren't comparing a slow
weapon vs. a fast weapon. What we were looking at is given
you will be using two weapons - A in primary B in secondary,
or B in primary A in secondary - does speed of the weapon
matter? It doesn't. The better weapon should go in your
primary.

--
John H. Kim
kim@...