{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
12/9/2020 7:00:06 PM
40
Total damage, which is already shown, is just as useful as showing DPS, so there's zero point to this.
English
-
No, if you’re trying out something new you can see exactly what percentage of damage you did yourself cus sometimes people do more yourself than other people
-
Then look at your new total damage and use your brain
-
You can’t because if you kill the boss you don’t see numbers, you can’t track what you see as it comes up if you’re using anarchy, a sniper and shotgun bro.
-
If you kill the boss you don't need to know what your total damage or your DPS is, so that's a moot point. You don't use wipes to check DPS, you can go to a lost sector and grab a dollar store calculator for that.
-
[quote]If you kill the boss you don't need to know what your total damage or your DPS is, so that's a moot point. You don't use wipes to check DPS, you can go to a lost sector and grab a dollar store calculator for that.[/quote] Are you going to take a divinity and a fire team of six into a lost sector to test this “theory” and feeling for better raid boss DPS? No.
-
No, you're going to multiply the damage of whatever weapon you took into the lost sector by 5, then add 30%, then boom, there's raid DPS, even though that action is entirely irrelevant since multiplying any weapon by 5 and adding 30% does absolutely nothing to the damage ratio. Again, dollar store calculator level math.
-
[quote]No, you're going to multiply the damage of whatever weapon you took into the lost sector by 5, then add 30%, then boom, there's raid DPS, even though that action is entirely irrelevant since multiplying any weapon by 5 and adding 30% does absolutely nothing to the damage ratio. Again, dollar store calculator level math.[/quote] Seems like a huge amount of work needed when they could just show the damage numbers on successful runs..... Wouldn’t you say mr Maths? Each individual weapon perk and different load outs. Did he have Luna for damage drop off percentages, vorpal weapon, boss spec, beserker mods or the right conditions. Sometimes lost sectors just don’t cut it. Boss health is limited the conditions don’t match the raid bosses in their entirety . ACTUAL empirical data at the end of a clear is concise. It’s really raw data and hurts nobody.
-
It's entirely unnecessary, and is already reflected in the total damage shown on a wipe. The minutia of human error is also entirely irrelevant in the face of simple numbers showing which one is objectively better.
-
[quote]It's entirely unnecessary, and is already reflected in the total damage shown on a wipe. The minutia of human error is also entirely irrelevant in the face of simple numbers showing which one is objectively better.[/quote] Welcome to the minority mate. Why wipe to see numbers that hurt nobody? I can’t wait to see the LFG post saying “I’m a clairvoyant or future prophet and MUST have 2.678 million boss DPS on a successful boss run! It’s also laughable you use skewed figures from scenarios that don’t accurately match the conditions of raid bosses or the team composition. You are NOT taking six different guardians with their individual supers, guns, perk combos and load outs into a “lost sector” and lining up accurate damage numbers at the end based on the same raid boss conditions. That is a an actual joke.
-
Cool, all of that has absolutely nothing to do with how good or bad a weapon is, and has no effect on what weapon is or isn't the best to use. It's useless, overly complicated jargon that serves absolutely no purpose as you can't quantify the probability of human error, even across a massive sample size.
-
[quote]Cool, all of that has absolutely nothing to do with how good or bad a weapon is, and has no effect on what weapon is or isn't the best to use. It's useless, overly complicated jargon that serves absolutely no purpose as you can't quantify the probability of human error, even across a massive sample size.[/quote] It has everything to do with DPS, boss damage phases and accurate real time testing of guns within a RAID SCENARIO. All showing accurate data from six (or five members if using divinity.) Thanks for the concession also.
-
If it's that useful, then explain the relevant differences. Explain why, in a situation like Taniks, where let's say you lose 3 seconds of damage per phase because of the boop, these numbers actually mean anything. Oh wait, they don't, because you're going to experience the boop no matter what weapon you're using, so you're always losing 3 seconds of damage. It's useless, pedantic data that doesn't change how effective any weapons are at all, as they're all going through the exact same experience. That's why you just use lost sectors, a DPS loss of 30% from lost sector numbers is going to be consistent among all weapons usable on him.
-
Edited by ill skillz: 12/11/2020 4:43:42 AM[quote]If it's that useful, then explain the relevant differences. Explain why, in a situation like Taniks, where let's say you lose 3 seconds of damage per phase because of the boop, these numbers actually mean anything. Oh wait, they don't, because you're going to experience the boop no matter what weapon you're using, so you're always losing 3 seconds of damage. It's useless, pedantic data that doesn't change how effective any weapons are at all, as they're all going through the exact same experience. That's why you just use lost sectors, a DPS loss of 30% from lost sector numbers is going to be consistent among all weapons usable on him.[/quote] Taken many six man team fire teams into a lost sector lately and had their numbers stack up against the same boss under those imposed conditions ? Didn’t think so.....
-
Textbook strawman. You're free to try again, this time try to point out relevancies instead of going after an argument that wasn't being made.
-
[quote]Textbook strawman. You're free to try again, this time try to point out relevancies instead of going after an argument that wasn't being made.[/quote] Swerved the valid question and claims “straw man” Appreciate the concession. ^^
-
Edited by High Noon at Jötunn Saloon: 12/11/2020 1:02:20 PM[quote][quote]Textbook strawman. You're free to try again, this time try to point out relevancies instead of going after an argument that wasn't being made.[/quote] Swerved the valid question and claims “straw man” Appreciate the concession. ^^[/quote] Yup classic confirmation bias tactic right there. Also, no offense but the second this guy said there was no reason to include the specific damage numbers you should've just cut him loose and saved yourself time. Also...looks like he doesn't even raid. And if he did, he probably gets carried. So I can see why he'd be so triggered by the suggestion that individual damage numbers be shown.
-
[quote][quote][quote]Textbook strawman. You're free to try again, this time try to point out relevancies instead of going after an argument that wasn't being made.[/quote] Swerved the valid question and claims “straw man” Appreciate the concession. ^^[/quote] Yup classic confirmation bias tactic right there. Also, no offense but the second this guy said there was no reason to include the specific damage numbers you should've just cut him loose and saved yourself time. Also...looks like he doesn't even raid. And if he did, he probably gets carried. So I can see why he'd be so triggered by the suggestion that individual damage numbers be shown.[/quote] Personally I don’t see a reason numbers shouldn’t be included. It’s already shown after a wipe. The guys avoided the same question three times and by posting is just adding traction to the post. It’s easy to get high strung people to keep commenting and tied up in their own ego. It’s adding time at the top and will maybe get seen / implemented back in eventually......
-
[quote][quote][quote][quote]Textbook strawman. You're free to try again, this time try to point out relevancies instead of going after an argument that wasn't being made.[/quote] Swerved the valid question and claims “straw man” Appreciate the concession. ^^[/quote] Yup classic confirmation bias tactic right there. Also, no offense but the second this guy said there was no reason to include the specific damage numbers you should've just cut him loose and saved yourself time. Also...looks like he doesn't even raid. And if he did, he probably gets carried. So I can see why he'd be so triggered by the suggestion that individual damage numbers be shown.[/quote] Personally I don’t see a reason numbers shouldn’t be included. It’s already shown after a wipe. The guys avoided the same question three times and by posting is just adding traction to the post. It’s easy to get high strung people to keep commenting and tied up in their own ego. It’s adding time at the top and will maybe get seen / implemented back in eventually......[/quote] Pretty clear he didn't have an answer and trying to deflect back to you. But I don't see where his ego would even come from...he doesn't raid. Anyway I'm sure you know but I agree with you. We should get those damage numbers.
-
[quote][quote][quote][quote][quote]Textbook strawman. You're free to try again, this time try to point out relevancies instead of going after an argument that wasn't being made.[/quote] Swerved the valid question and claims “straw man” Appreciate the concession. ^^[/quote] Yup classic confirmation bias tactic right there. Also, no offense but the second this guy said there was no reason to include the specific damage numbers you should've just cut him loose and saved yourself time. Also...looks like he doesn't even raid. And if he did, he probably gets carried. So I can see why he'd be so triggered by the suggestion that individual damage numbers be shown.[/quote] Personally I don’t see a reason numbers shouldn’t be included. It’s already shown after a wipe. The guys avoided the same question three times and by posting is just adding traction to the post. It’s easy to get high strung people to keep commenting and tied up in their own ego. It’s adding time at the top and will maybe get seen / implemented back in eventually......[/quote] Pretty clear he didn't have an answer and trying to deflect back to you. But I don't see where his ego would even come from...he doesn't raid. Anyway I'm sure you know but I agree with you. We should get those damage numbers.[/quote] Me neither. He just got caught in this whole I’m right as I don’t need these number mentality. I just checked also...... He doesn’t even raid so why would he care!? Either way. No such thing as bad publicity and keeps the post relevant for the masses to see and make their opinion on.
-
Strawmen aren't valid questions, especially when they're made in response to actual valid questions. Care to go on?
-
Edited by ill skillz: 12/10/2020 12:13:30 AM[quote]Strawmen aren't valid questions, especially when they're made in response to actual valid questions. Care to go on?[/quote] Hitchens razor - having made your claims, burden of proof lies on you unfortunately. You still avoided the question. Taken many six man fire teams into a lost sector and accurately tested damage numbers (side by side ) representing the length of time given in a RAID BOSS situation? We will wait.
-
Damage increases as time increases, so spending all your ammo on a raid boss is going to function in the exact manner one would expect by checking a bullets single shot damage and then firing off the rest of the rounds into nowhere and checking how long it takes. There is no burden of proof, I have already proven myself, you're the one who's constantly failed to give any reason for their being a relevant difference between the 2 methods.
-
[quote]Damage increases as time increases, so spending all your ammo on a raid boss is going to function in the exact manner one would expect by checking a bullets single shot damage and then firing off the rest of the rounds into nowhere and checking how long it takes. There is no burden of proof, I have already proven myself, you're the one who's constantly failed to give any reason for their being a relevant difference between the 2 methods.[/quote] Appreciate the concession.
-
You're very welcome, I have a lot of free time so I can take as long explaining it to you as you need, I'm in no hurry.
-
[quote]You're very welcome, I have a lot of free time so I can take as long explaining it to you as you need, I'm in no hurry.[/quote] Yet you have the time to avoid the same question three times now? Funny that.....
