Double Attack - Triple Attack

[Cream Soda]

When I talk DA, i talk in terms of % increase your damage, not increase in number of attacks.

[Spider-Dan]

To say that it has diminishing returns implies that the more you add the less you get, which is not at all the case.

While it is mathmatically correct, it gives the wrong idea to those who don't know any better.

It's a poor application of the phrase.

And that's fine, as long as you are willing to accept the necessary correlative logic that going from 0%->5% haste gives you the exact same delay reduction as going from 75%->80% haste.

If you are not willing to say that Haste+5% has exactly the same returns regardless of your current total +Haste bonus, then you should not claim that +2A has the same returns regardless of your total +2A bonus. (Of course, if you are willing to say such a thing, you have completely divorced yourself from any realistic assessment of damage generation and should probably stop talking altogether.)

Bottom line:

As you add +haste, your increase in damage grows larger and larger.
As you add +2A, your increase in damage grows smaller and smaller.

Either you agree with both, or you disagree with both. And if you disagree, you are wrong.

[Cadsuane]

And that's fine, as long as you are willing to accept the necessary correlative logic that going from 0%->5% haste gives you the exact same delay reduction as going from 75%->80% haste.

If you are not willing to say that Haste+5% has exactly the same returns regardless of your current total +Haste bonus, then you should not claim that +2A has the same returns regardless of your total +2A bonus. (Of course, if you are willing to say such a thing, you have completely divorced yourself from any realistic assessment of damage generation and should probably stop talking altogether.)

Bottom line:

As you add +haste, your increase in damage grows larger and larger.
As you add +2A, your increase in damage grows smaller and smaller.

Either you agree with both, or you disagree with both. And if you disagree, you are wrong.

When evaluating damage from auto attack, attack frequency is what you're actually evaluating. Haste returns affect delay linearly yes, unfortunately for your heavy handed but non-existent point attack frequency is the reciprocal of delay.

So bottom line:
With respect to attack frequency, haste returns approach infinity.
With respect to attack frequency, 2A returns are constant.

[FailureMidgard]

Honestly, I'm still at a loss as to what specifically you're talking about or trying to demonstrate, which leads me to believe as I've stated before that you don't know what that is exactly.

And furthermore, that's spectacular, but conveniently misleading, since we'd be talking about attack rate which is number of attacks with respect to time.

I like how you can realize that my example is conveniently misleading, since that's exactly what your entire argument is.

Just ignore the FFXI argument, since you're obviously blinded by something. Use the crop example.

Suppose that one kilogram of seed applied to a plot of land of a fixed size produces one ton of crop. You might expect that an additional kilogram of seed would produce an additional ton of output. However, if there are diminishing marginal returns, that additional kilogram will produce less than one additional ton of crop.

Ok, we all agree that there is diminishing returns in regards to the amount of crop produced per square kilometer, or whatever. But what if we only care about the crop:dollar return? If the second kg of seed only results in an 80% yield, but you can buy the second kg of seed at 25% off as a discount for buying in bulk, suddenly your crop:dollar actually has increasing returns. You get more crop per dollar as you spend more.

Back to FFXI. You are conveniently trying to mislead people into thinking that they care about the damage per second return, which is really irrelevant (or at best a stepping stone) towards what is actually important, which is the damage gained vs the opportunity cost of gaining that DA.

[pahnphoenix]

I like how you can realize that my example is conveniently misleading, since that's exactly what your entire argument is.

Just ignore the FFXI argument, since you're obviously blinded by something. Use the crop example.

Suppose that one kilogram of seed applied to a plot of land of a fixed size produces one ton of crop. You might expect that an additional kilogram of seed would produce an additional ton of output. However, if there are diminishing marginal returns, that additional kilogram will produce less than one additional ton of crop.

Ok, we all agree that there is diminishing returns in regards to the amount of crop produced per square kilometer, or whatever. But what if we only care about the crop:dollar return? If the second kg of seed only results in an 80% yield, but you can buy the second kg of seed at 25% off as a discount for buying in bulk, suddenly your crop:dollar actually has increasing returns. You get more crop per dollar as you spend more.

Back to FFXI. You are conveniently trying to mislead people into thinking that they care about the damage per second return, which is really irrelevant (or at best a stepping stone) towards what is actually important, which is the damage gained vs the opportunity cost of gaining that DA.

you're not going to get anywhere; cadsuane is both an idiot and a child. if you argue long enough, he'll follow you around and start shit. have fun.

[Cadsuane]

No, no, I got that, I know that your "stat points" blather was about opportunity costs. It's just that I didn't see how it could be relevant in a discussion about whether a percentage increase could be called a return. Nor do I see how you can evaluate that opportunity cost in general terms when there are a countable number of gear choices to be made, and hence what this has to do with anything.

edit:

Back to FFXI. You are conveniently trying to mislead people into thinking that they care about the damage per second return, which is really irrelevant (or at best a stepping stone) towards what is actually important, which is the damage gained vs the opportunity cost of gaining that DA.

No, I'm not. I don't care how people evaluate their damage or what comparison paradigms they use when selecting their gear. I'm just a cantankerous math major bitching about the mutilation of math and economics jargon. Whether or not the definition of return that I'm explaining is important in actual FFXI gear comparisons (as opposed to say, opportunity costs) couldn't be more of a red herring in this thread or matter less to me personally.

[Cadsuane]

you're not going to get anywhere; cadsuane is both an idiot and a child. if you argue long enough, he'll follow you around and start shit. have fun.

I'm not sure you're living up to your own standards here Sparky. If there's anyone holding a grudge here, it's you.

[Deadgye]

So bottom line:
With respect to attack frequency, haste returns approach infinity. (Increasing)
With respect to attack frequency, 2A returns are constant. (Linear)
With respect to percentage increase, haste approaches infinity. (Increasing)
With respect to percentage increase, 2A returns.. decrease.. (Decreasing)
etc

What matters is the context in which you are talking about. Therefore this entire thing is a semantics argument about the proper grammar and context, not about the actual mathematical definition.

[Cadsuane]

What matters is the context in which you are talking about. Therefore this entire thing is a semantics argument about the proper grammar and context, not about the actual mathematical definition.

Pretend for a minute that I've already seen your staggeringly uneducated argument repeated 10 trillion fucking times and try to figure out what reason I could possibly have for taking issue with it.

[Spider-Dan]

So bottom line:
With respect to attack frequency, haste returns approach infinity.
With respect to attack frequency, 2A returns are constant.

Wrong. This is precisely why you fail.

With respect to attack round frequency (which is not the same thing as attack frequency), 2A returns are constant. With respect to attack frequency, they are diminishing.

If I have 2A+0% and I add +1%, for every 100 attacks (read: swings of weapon), I have 1 swing added. If I have 2A+99% and I add +1%, for every 100 swings of my weapon (which happens in ~50 rounds), I get 0.5 extra swings of my weapon. (Feel free to try to save what's left of your face by arguing over the decimal places in that 0.5 number.)

Thanks for providing such a clearly worded example of why you don't know WTF you are talking about.

[FailureMidgard]

No, no, I got that, I know that your "stat points" blather was about opportunity costs. It's just that I didn't see how it could be relevant in a discussion about whether a percentage increase could be called a return. Nor do I see how you can evaluate that opportunity cost in general terms when there are a countable number of gear choices to be made, and hence what this has to do with anything.

edit:


No, I'm not. I don't care how people evaluate their damage or what comparison paradigms they use when selecting their gear. I'm just a cantankerous math major bitching about the mutilation of math and economics jargon. Whether or not the definition of return that I'm explaining is important in actual FFXI gear comparisons (as opposed to say, opportunity costs) couldn't be more of a red herring in this thread or matter less to me personally.

Thank you for once again replying only to the part of the post I didn't want a reply to. Please reply to the seed/crop example.

Also, diminishing returns is basically 100% economics, so don't be offended as a math major (I too majored in math).

[pahnphoenix]

"stat points"/% DoT increase are the returns you yield from stuff like DA, haste, etc. months later and cadsuane is too stupid to understand this. i hope you're better at math than you are at general thinking. re: personality games, i'm still right, and you're still butthurt. that's all any of this is, and it's the only reason you're arguing now (butthurt about the argument; i doubt it has anything to do with me. probably a general anger toward everyone who has the right answer you're too embarrassed to allow yourself to figure out).

[Shamaya]

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v7...ingReturns.png
One (a mediocre one) obvious illustration of what everyone means and mutually understands. We could always make things easier by saying "net gain" and "marginal gain" or something else less ambiguous. :/

[Cream Soda]

In pure number of attacks, no diminishing returns. In % increase, yes there is diminishing returns. Adding more DA to your previous DA is less of an increase than adding DA to no DA.

For example.
A) You have 1 Dollar
B) You have 100 dollars

A) Add 1 dollar
B) Add 1 dollar

A) You now have 2 dollars, 100% increase in your money
B) You now have 101 dollars, 1% increase in your money.

Yes, you get the exact same amount, 1 dollar in both situations, but when you have less dollars to begin with, the increase is bigger.

hi again

[Byrthnoth]

There's no point in this argument. We had it months ago, I made a graph contrasting % gain per Haste with % gain per DA, people still said I was wrong, etc. It's apparently a semantics argument, but I don't know enough of the other side's background to understand it. I think that some people from the other side (like CDF) likely understand the vocabulary we're using better than we do though.

All I know is that you can make the same argument with every additive stat in the game. Like Critical Hit rate:
1) If pDIF is such that a Critical Hit doubles the damage of your swing, then:
2) (1 - Crit Rate)*100% Damage + (Crit Rate) * 200% Damage = % increase in damage from crits
3) If you start with a Critical Hit rate of 24% and move to a Critical Hit rate of 30% (Destroyers, etc), then:
4) (.76+.48 ) = 124% Damage.
5) (.70+.60) = 130% damage.
6) 130/124 = 4.8% increase in damage, not 6%.

Or Accuracy:
1) You have 80% Hit rate and you put on 7 Accuracy.
2) Now you have 83.5% Hit rate.
3) 83.5/80 = 104.4% Damage
4) You have 90% Hit rate and you put on 7 Accuracy.
5) Now you have 93.5% Hit rate.
6) 93.5/90 = 103.9% damage
7) The % benefit of Accuracy decreased, though it's still greater than the % increase in Hit rate.

I dunno, but when comparing gearswaps you generally have to convert between whatever stats you're comparing and % damage so that you can compare things in the same units.

[Shamaya]

I understand perfectly well what they mean (& so do you). Being a philosophy grad, semantic arguments are all too familiar. They are behind a very great many of "major debates" that persist. Think ethics in general. Or think "gay marriage" in particular. Course if I'd been a better student I'd hope that maybe I could help wizard our way out of this one.

[Shinryuu]

For every point of DA, total damage dealt keeps increasing at a diminishing pace. Does this mean technical diminishing returns? If you were to make a function of damage(DA), it'd have to look like Y = X^(<1). If it does, it has diminishing returns.

Y = X^(<1): Diminishing
Y = X^1: Constant returns
Y = X^(>1): Increasing returns

[Cream Soda]

1 for one don't care about any technicalities or special wording. Whehter you want to call it "diminishing" or not is not my concern.

The fact is
If you have 1% DA w/ 0% DA as a base, you will gain a higher % increase in damage than if you add 1% da w/ 20% DA as a base.


10 dmg/hit, 100 hits

1000

add 1% DA

1010 dmg

add 20% DA

1200

Going from 1 DA to 20 DA is +19% DA

1200/1010 = 18.8% increase

19 > 18.8

Adding 19 DA to 0 DA is a 19% increase in total damage, but w/ the 1% DA already present, adding 19 more reduces your damage increase to 18.8%.

The more DA you start with, the less% increase in damage you get.

[Gethsemane]

I think people are getting confused. There is NO diminishing return if I'm not calculating swapping existing gear and comparing the damage value that I'm losing while swapping in a piece of DA gear. There's one big difference.

If you're just worried about stacking DA and not worried about losing potential damage from an existing piece of gear; it's not diminishing until you do the calculations of what you have lost. And by adding DA gear NOT taking into effect what gear you are losing to do it; the added DA does increase damage.

I think people just get confused. Now if you're going to sit down and calculate okay I add +2% DA for legs and switch out the haste+5% accuracy+5 legs for it; then obviously you would want to do the calculations. 110 hits for 20 damage in a lesser amount of time to hit that 110 hits then you would with 110 hits without the haste and just the +2% DA. You would obviously compare both stats to each other and see which one did more damage on a set amount of time. Like in 60 seconds for example.

I think people just got the whole message wrong. YES DA+% adds damage. YES DA+% does not have diminishing returns if that's all you are factoring. Now it could have diminishing returns depending on what gear you are substituting it with. So in fact DA+% would do less damage = dimishing returns overall.

Now there could be a different formula you would use for a weapon skill setup for finding what does more damage in the end. I guess it all depends on if that DA only lands on first two hits of a multi-hit weapon skill is 100% fact or fiction. That's the only debate I saw often in all of those threads; there's the Rampage/RR tests and what not in this one thread somewhere on here. Anyways, hopefully people get how DA plays both sides of the fence here. Depending on what you're calculating it shows diminishing returns in one set and it shows +x% increase from DA activation + damage increase.

/endthread

[Gethsemane]

Okay I stand corrected. There is slight diminishing returns because everyone knows that FFXI's math is not rounded up/down/etc. I see the light But it's very, very trivial.

1000 hits at no DA
1% 1010 hits = 1.01
2% 1020 hits = 1.00990099009901 (1020/1010)
3% 1030 hits = 1.009803921568627 (1030/1020)
4% 1040 hits = 1.009708737864078 (...)
5% 1050 hits = 1.009615384615385 (...)
6% 1060 hits = 1.00952380952381 (...)
7% 1070 hits = 1.009433962264151 (...)
8% 1080 hits = 1.009345794392523 (...)
9% 1090 hits = 1.009259259259259 (...)
10% 1100 hits = 1.009174311926606 (...)

Now yeah if you compare 10% DA 1100/base of 1000 it would be 10%. Interesting stuff. If someone would've made this chart earlier might have stopped a lot of replies.

1 for one don't care about any technicalities or special wording. Whehter you want to call it "diminishing" or not is not my concern.

The fact is
If you have 1% DA w/ 0% DA as a base, you will gain a higher % increase in damage than if you add 1% da w/ 20% DA as a base.


10 dmg/hit, 100 hits

1000

add 1% DA

1010 dmg

add 20% DA

1200

Going from 1 DA to 20 DA is +19% DA

1200/1010 = 18.8% increase

19 > 18.8

Adding 19 DA to 0 DA is a 19% increase in total damage, but w/ the 1% DA already present, adding 19 more reduces your damage increase to 18.8%.

The more DA you start with, the less% increase in damage you get.