Thread: A complete guide to choosing your weapons

Originally Posted by Shannong

Based on Xpheyel's great description of his typical attack execution, I'd have to guess that auto-attacks occur *only* when the skill timers for next-queued attack skill is affected by either its own cooldown timer or by the global cooldown timer.

In other words, your attack skills do occur on the "ticks" of your auto-attack speed, and if the next-queued skill is not ready for some reason on the next "tick", then your normal auto-attack occurs instead. If the next-queued skill *is* ready, then the skill happens instead of the auto-attack.

I'll start watching my own attack chains carefully to see whether I can verify this theory. Honestly, the combat is so engaging in other ways that I haven't really been able to notice this for myself just yet. Now that I know what to look for it should be easier to verify.

This makes me think of one more possibility, and then i promise i'll quit posting until some others chime in. I always assumed that when a skill is lit up as available and you fire the skill it won't interupt an "auto-attack" currently in progress. haven't you noticed that sometimes a lit up skill won't fire immediately when you hit it? isn't this because you're in the middle of an "auto-attack" sequence? if this is the case then "auto-attacks" simply can't be canceled. i don't really see why devs would make it any other way.

k, i might be new but why bother posting result on first to 100 damage when creatures as low as lvl 4 have atleast 200 health.

If the Duel wield weapon speed is the average of the 2 equiped weapons wouldnt the best setup then be to equip the highest damage possible weapon in your primary and equip the fastest possible weapon in your secondary reguardless of damage in order to effectivly make that high damage weapon speed up? Am i reading that correctly?

Yogoe

Originally Posted by Honchler

good god! does that mean that i could be in "auto-attack" mid-swing, execute a skill and inadvertedly cancel the "auto-attack" that was almost complete?

<my best understanding>
What happens is if you have 3/4 of your autoattack timer complete when your special interrupts it, when the special animation is complete then your final 1/4 of the autoattack timer will complete. The autoattacks fill in the time between the special's animations. They actually have separate timers and only the special animation delays the completion of the autoattack timer.

Originally Posted by Honchler

This makes me think of one more possibility, and then i promise i'll quit posting until some others chime in. I always assumed that when a skill is lit up as available and you fire the skill it won't interupt an "auto-attack" currently in progress. haven't you noticed that sometimes a lit up skill won't fire immediately when you hit it? isn't this because you're in the middle of an "auto-attack" sequence? if this is the case then "auto-attacks" simply can't be canceled. i don't really see why devs would make it any other way.

No, it's not the auto attack that is preventing the skill. It is the skill you fired previously. There is a global skill reset which prevents you from using skills in rapid succession. I believe you can see this if you turn the "skill queue" on. You can queue a skill, but it won't play until the hourglass has run out. If an auto attack can fit in before skill reset time is up, then it does. The devs have said the following many times: An auto attack will never block a skill play, but it will fire if it has enough time inbetween skills (during the global skill reset time). There are certain "quick strike" skills that ignore the global reset, but those are the exception.

Originally Posted by Yogoe

If the Duel wield weapon speed is the average of the 2 equiped weapons wouldnt the best setup then be to equip the highest damage possible weapon in your primary and equip the fastest possible weapon in your secondary reguardless of damage in order to effectivly make that high damage weapon speed up? Am i reading that correctly?

Yogoe

I believe this is true for a class such as burglar, where the majority of skills use your main hand only. However, if you are a champion, most of your skills have an offhand attack also, when you dual wield. In that case, you have more to consider, because the fast offhand weapon is reducing your offhand damage on skill plays.

The other thing to consider is that the faster your average weapon speed, the faster you can play skills and therefore use power. Skills use the same amount of power no matter how much damage they're doing. So, a faster weapon setup will use power faster while doing less damage (depending on your class and the exact skills). You can go slower, higher damage/skill, lower power consumption rate OR faster, lower damage skills(depending on the skill), higher power consumption rate.

All good points. I have learned a good deal from this thread. All I know is that with my gaurdian I have timed how fast a can kill a specific enemy of a specific level with different speed weapons, all sharing the same DPS. I have found that the slowest weapon with the highest average damage can kill the enemy quicker than a faster weapon with the same DPS. I will continue using this tactic because it seems to work with my personal playstyle.

wow, I never knew a LOWER speed meant faster attacks, i thought it was a HIGHER speed for fast attacks, no wonder my axes/maces are so slow :P

Any chance of getting this updated for the MoM expansion?

Originally Posted by Shannong

A final note on the fast versus slow debate
(Thanks to A99barnsey and Brat for reminding me about this)

In every MMO we see a debate about faster weapons versus slower weapons. LOTRO weapon speed seems to work more or less on the same principles as AC and AC2, which means that:
[list][*] In a theoretically long fight, auto-attack damage from a fast weapon versus a slow weapon that both have the same exact DPS will be equal.

[*] In short fights, however, the faster weapon always does more reliable and consistent damage and is therefore better for things like PvP where whiffing one of your big 2H hits can make you lose the damage "race" in a relatively short fight. Yes, a lucky streak with the slower weapon will do more damage but in general for short fights the faster weapon has better odds for doing the most damage within that short time period. I'm not going to rehash the math for this; it's been proven time and again even though this fact seems counterintuitive at first.

I know ShannonG Hasn't been around for a long time. But i just noticed this sticky and wanted to correct a few things.

Now that Weapons are all the same speed, this doesn't really matter. the speed debate doesn't really apply to the DW vs 2H issue.

1. Fast and slow weapons of the same DPS will only perform the same in a "theoretically long fight" if you ignore Critical hits. Since most games do have critical hits this is an incorrect statement. In fact, with critical hits as they are in LOTRO (1.25 x max damage) The longer a fight goes the more benefit a slow weapon will gain. The key is the MAX Damage. If it used average damage for crits, then The assumption would be correct.

2. In short fights,(like PVP) the critical factor in these "damage races" is hit chance. At high hit chances Slower weapons will win a "damage race". At high miss rates, the faster weapon will win. Since almost all MMO's have a High to hit chance, slow weapons are better.

I have built an Auto attack simulator in Excel that i can set up weapon stats and run a "damage race" to a morale target i pick. I can then run that thousands of time in a minute or two to see the results. So by selecting two weapons with the same DPS, but different damages and speeds I can easily check these theories.

Two issues are at work here:
1. First hit - Because the slow weapon swings on the first "tick" along with the Fast weapon, it gets a jump on the "race".
2. Probability - A slow weapon needs less hits to achieve a target. therefore it is much more likely to happen. I can isolate this from any other considerations by removing the critical option and by starting the slow weapon off in the middle of its cycle instead of at the end.

For the test i used 2 10 dps weapons:
30 damage every 3 seconds
10 damage every second

I used miss chance of 20%. and i delay the slow weapon by one swing of the fast weapon. This results in a swing pattern liek this:

Code:

slow .x..x..x
fast xxxxxxxxx

When you do this you find that the fast weapon will win to morale targets right on its interval (ie if you set the target at 100 morale instead of something like 115) It turns out this experiment is very sensitive to the morale target chosen. but for most small morale targets, the slower weapon will win the majority of the time.

Slow weapon wins at morale targets of 60,80,90,110.... while the fast weapon will win at targets of 70, 100...And the slow weapon wins at almost all the numbers ending in 5.

If you then let the slow weapon start off with a hit in the first moment. it wins almost every morale target, until they get large (the theoretically long fight). But then if you turn on the Criticals.. it wins more the longer the fight goes.

This works out mathematically too. Abashail hit the issue on the head in the post above. If you look at all the possible outcomes rather than the most likely it changes the view.

Originally Posted by Hakon_Stormbrow

1. Fast and slow weapons of the same DPS will only perform the same in a "theoretically long fight" if you ignore Critical hits. Since most games do have critical hits this is an incorrect statement. In fact, with critical hits as they are in LOTRO (1.25 x max damage) The longer a fight goes the more benefit a slow weapon will gain. The key is the MAX Damage. If it used average damage for crits, then The assumption would be correct.

This isn't quite the full story.

Let's say a weapon has some speed (s), an average damage (a), a max damage (m), and we have a critical chance (cc) and a critical multiplier (cm). Then, the expected damage of a weapon is (a * (1 - cc) + m * (1 + cm) * cc) = a * ((1 - cc) + (m / a) * (1 + cm) * cc). So the expected DPS of a weapon is (a / s) * ((1 - cc) + (m / a) * (1 + cm) * cc). Now (a / s) is the listed DPS of the weapon, so if we're considering weapons of comparable DPS that'll be equal between two weapons. cc and cm are presumably global characteristics that are independent of the weapon, so the only quantity that can vary between weapons is (m / a) - or the ratio of the weapon's maximum damage with it's average damage.

As a concrete example, assume we have a slow weapon with 2 speed, a 80-80 damage range, with a DPS of 40, and a fast weapon with a 1 speed, a 30-50 damage range, with a DPS of 40. Assume a critical rate of 10%, and a critical mulitplier of +25%. The slow weapon has an expected DPS of (80 * 0.9 + 80 * 1.25 * 0.1) / 2 = 41. The fast weapon has an expected DPS of (40 * 0.9 + 50 * 1.25 * 0.1) / 1 = 42.25. So even though the slower weapon has a higher maximum damage, it doesn't matter, because it's maximum damage to average damage ratio is 1, while the faster weapon has a maximum damage to average damage ratio of 1.25.

In short, it's not the maximum damage that's important, it's the variance of the damage range that's important.

Originally Posted by moebius92

In short, it's not the maximum damage that's important, it's the variance of the damage range that's important.

Since all weapons are now the same, it doesnt matter.

Skill sequences, including fast and immediate skill use for overriding, are now what distinguish high DPS from low DPS, not weapons. This whole thread should be de-stickied as its obsolete given the new mechanics.

Originally Posted by moebius92

This isn't quite the full story.

Let's say a weapon has some speed (s), an average damage (a), a max damage (m), and we have a critical chance (cc) and a critical multiplier (cm). Then, the expected damage of a weapon is (a * (1 - cc) + m * (1 + cm) * cc) = a * ((1 - cc) + (m / a) * (1 + cm) * cc). So the expected DPS of a weapon is (a / s) * ((1 - cc) + (m / a) * (1 + cm) * cc). Now (a / s) is the listed DPS of the weapon, so if we're considering weapons of comparable DPS that'll be equal between two weapons. cc and cm are presumably global characteristics that are independent of the weapon, so the only quantity that can vary between weapons is (m / a) - or the ratio of the weapon's maximum damage with it's average damage.

As a concrete example, assume we have a slow weapon with 2 speed, a 80-80 damage range, with a DPS of 40, and a fast weapon with a 1 speed, a 30-50 damage range, with a DPS of 40. Assume a critical rate of 10%, and a critical mulitplier of +25%. The slow weapon has an expected DPS of (80 * 0.9 + 80 * 1.25 * 0.1) / 2 = 41. The fast weapon has an expected DPS of (40 * 0.9 + 50 * 1.25 * 0.1) / 1 = 42.25. So even though the slower weapon has a higher maximum damage, it doesn't matter, because it's maximum damage to average damage ratio is 1, while the faster weapon has a maximum damage to average damage ratio of 1.25.

In short, it's not the maximum damage that's important, it's the variance of the damage range that's important.

Good point. In general the damage ranges of very slow weapons back in SOA were also spread wider than the faster weapons. It was generally true, but does not have to be so i should not have linked them without explaining why i did.

Originally Posted by dhatcher1

Since all weapons are now the same, it doesnt matter.

Skill sequences, including fast and immediate skill use for overriding, are now what distinguish high DPS from low DPS, not weapons. This whole thread should be de-stickied as its obsolete given the new mechanics.

Also a good point.

Originally Posted by dhatcher1

Since all weapons are now the same, it doesnt matter.

Skill sequences, including fast and immediate skill use for overriding, are now what distinguish high DPS from low DPS, not weapons. This whole thread should be de-stickied as its obsolete given the new mechanics.

For the most part, that's true, but there's still some merit to the discussion when considering 1h vs 2h weapons. Take champs for example, where you can dual-wield two quick 1handers or one slow 2hander. Granted, there are differences in skills based on which way you go, but that still essentially the same discussion.

While you're probably right about this thread needing to be de-stickied because much of it is outdated, there's still some applicable information here.

Ok I was bored so i did some number crunching...

Originally Posted by Shannong

Let's be clear about fast versus slow. Over the course of a *long* fight, there is no difference between a fast versus a slow weapon, provided they have the exact same DPS. But it's been proven time and time again that for *short* fights, a faster weapon is superior overall. Yes it's counter-intuitive so here's an example. Say you have two players of equal level with weapons that are equal DPS. Player A has the fast weapon and it hits for 10 damage every second. Player B has the slow weapon and it hits for 30 damage every 3 seconds. Both players have 70 hit points.

• Player A needs to connect with 7 hits to kill player B. This could happen as quickly as 7 seconds with a 100% hit rate.
• Player B needs to connect with 3 hits to kill Player A. This could happen as quickly as 9 seconds with a 100% hit rate.
• If both players experience a 25% miss rate (75% hit rate) here's how long it takes each player to kill the other.
  • Player A needs 10 attacks (2-3 will be misses); that's 10 seconds.
  • Player B needs 4 attacks (1 will be a miss); that's 12 seconds.

Can you see how in all cases, Player A has the advantage? Regardless of the miss rate, Player A will win the "race" because their misses "hurt" a lot less. Missing one big attack puts you behind in the race. This has been proven time and again. And remember, this applies to *short* fights only--that's where faster weapons always have the edge. Statistically, your odds to "win the race" are better with a faster weapon.

First attack
First of all, there is a large mistake in the above. Both weapons will swing when combat starts... the slow weapon will not wait 3 seconds before swinging. So the slow weapon COULD win as quickly as 6 seconds with a 100% hit rate gaining 90 damage. The fast weapon Could win in 6 seconds also, but it needs to hit with all 7 attacks.

Probability
As was mentioned earlier, this is a drastically oversimplified view of what is going on. Every fight will not go to the most likely number of attacks. Here is this fight in a table showing the Cumulative probability of doing at least 70 damage:

Code:

             fast                    slow
time	attacks	probability	attacks	probability
0	1	0		1	0
1	2	0		
2	3	0		
3	4	0		2	0
4	5	0		
5	6	0		
6	7	0.133483887	3	0.421875
7	8	0.367080688	 	
8	9	0.60067749		
9	10	0.775875092	4	0.73828125
10	11	0.885373592		
11	12	0.945597768		
12	13	0.975709856	5	0.896484375

This table shows the probability that the fast or slow weapon will get at least 70 points of damage at a certain time stamp. So we see that the slow weapon has a very good chance of hitting all three attacks (about 42%) While the Fast weapon has almost no chance of hitting all 7 (13%).

But again, you cant just look at one possibility, you must look at all of the possibilities. Sometimes the fight will go on for 15 seconds, sometimes 10..

It is difficult to us the probabilities to compare the Odds of one of the two weapons winning. You can use the distribution to see the probability of each one reaching a target in a certain number of trials, but trying to figure out which would win a fight to a morale target (not a time target) is difficult. This is why i built a simple excel sheet.

Experimental
The random number generator in Execl is used to determine whether each attack hits. The fast weapon attacks every turn while the slow weapon attacks every 3rd turn. I assume they do their average damage for each hit (as is done above). Each row of the table is a turn, so i can simulate one entire fight on an excel sheet. I then tally how many turns it took to get to the target of 70 and declare a winner. So the page basically shows me one Auto attack fight.

I then use the circular tool in EXCEL to increment the wins counter for Fast or slow. By then pressing F9 I can run the sheet thousands of times. This is basically an experimental way to find the probability of the fast or slow weapon winning.

So for the example given by Shannon, the odds are almost exactly even (10,000 fights were simulated):
Fast 43.9%
Slow 43.8%
Tie 12.3%

But it should be noted that 70 is only one morale target, and 25% is only one miss chance. by varying these parameters you get a better view of which is more likely to win.

Hit Chance
If the hit chance goes higher, it helps the Slow weapon, as the chances of it hitting all its attacks goes up dramatically. Until you get to 100%, then it is always a tie at 70 or always a slow win at 80 or 90. So basically the higher the hit chance, the better the slow weapons are..

Morale Target
By varying the morale target the weapon damage will come in and out of synch with it. So on values like 70, the slow weapon is very much out of synch. The slow weapon will exactly hit 60 and 90 since it does 30 damage, but overkills 70. it turns out 70 is about the worst morale target for the slow weapon in this example. Even 65 is not as bad as you might think since it puts the fast weapon off its interval. The fairest morale target is one that puts both weapons in the middle of their natural interval. In this case, a target of 75 morale would be appropriate. This "wastes" only 5 points of damage for the fats weapon, while still wasting 15 points of the slow weapon.

In any case, assuming the 75% hit rate here is a table showing the odds of fast or slow winning to various morale targets (sampling only 2000 fights in this case):

Code:

Target	% ties	% Fast win	% slow win
60	7.8	18.3		74.1
65	11	45.3		43.8
70	12.3	43.9		43.8
75	9.6	33.8		56.7
80	8.5	31.6		60
85	8.5	23.4		68.2
90	6.8	23.4		69.9

So the slow weapon actually wins the majority of the time. and even wehn it loses, it barely loses.

Analysis
I included 90 morale since it is the next interval from 60 for the slow wepaon. It is interesting to note that at 90 morale target the odds even out compared to at 60. In fact the longer the fight goes the more the odds even out. I ran the tests out to a morale target of 210 morale (exactly hitting the heavy weapons interval) and the win chance went down to 63% for the slow weapon.So slow weapons are only an advantage in Short figths (if you do not consider Critical hits).

Conclusions
So in contrast to Slower bigger weapons misses "Hurting" a lot more, the fact that they need less hits to acheive a target makes it more likely they will do so in a short fight with reasonbly high Hit rates. Logically, If one weapon only needs 3 or 4 hits While another needs 7 to 10, it makes sense that the slow one will hit all of its attacks pretty often.

*this is only for auto attacks, and does not consider criticals, DW, skills, etc.

Just for "fun" I wanted to look at the Probability issue.
Is a slower weapon really more likely to win just because it needs fewer hits?

Removing the first hit "bonus"

I have already stripped out criticals and other factors. It is relatively easy to strip out the only remaining other factor, which is the first hit benefit slow weapons get. The slow weapon jumps into an immediate lead due to both weapons hitting at time 0. So I adjusted my model to have the Fast weapon swing at time -0 and then the slow weapon swings at time =1. This means that for the three "ticks" of time between slow swings, the fast weapon will be ahead one, then they are tied for one, then the slow weapon is ahead for one.

Like this:

Code:

slow-.x..x..x.
fast-xxxxxxxxx

So the damage would look like this (assuming no misses):

Code:

Slow - 00 30 30 30 60 60 60 
fast - 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Note that each weapon is in the lead for one of the three ticks, and they are tied ont he third.

Model

So i turn back to my model. using our old weapons of 10 damage every second and 30 damage every 3 seconds..and a morale target of 75, which I determined is "fair" and a hit chance of 75%

Recall that the previous run which did let both weapons attack at time 0:

% tie 9.6
% fast win 33.8
% slow win 56.7

Now with the first hit "bonus" removed from the slow weapon we have (2000 fights):

% tie 12.2
% fast win 39.5
% slow win 48.4

So the slow weapon still has an advantage even though it waits a second to start swinging. This should have removed all factors of difference between the two weapons. So I attribute this win to the "bonus" of needing less hits, which results in a higher probability to get those hits faster than a faster weapon.

As expected the Fast weapon now handedly wins at morale targets of 65, and 70. But the slow weapon still wins at 60, 75, 80, 85, (and of course 90, which is similar to 60). The closest point is now at the 80 morale target, with the slow weapon winning about 47% to 43% over the fast weapon. But on the whole the slow weapon still wins at most morale targets.

Mathematical

But if you dont trust the model I made of a fight, just use an extreme example and calculate it through.

Slow weapon does 100 damage every 100 seconds.
Fast weapon does 1 damage every 1 second

They are both 1 DPS, assume 75% hit chance. we will set a morale target of 150. this wastes half of the slow weapons damage, and none of the fast weapons.

To demonstrate the first hit "bonus" we can see that the slow weapon has a 75% chance to jump to 100 points by hitting its first swing. but lets carry on....

The odds of the slow weapon hitting its first hit at 0 seconds and the next at 100 seconds is 56% (.75^2)
At 100 seconds, the fast wepon cannot even get to 150 damage. in fact even at 200 seconds (and 201 swings) the fast wepon only has a 59% probability of getting 150 damage.

So lets take out the first swing advantage...
We will let the slow weapon take its first swing at 50 seconds in. I will put it in table form rather than describe it:

Code:

	fast		slow
Time	cumul. %	cumul.%
0	0		
50	0		0
100	0		0
150	~0		56
200	59		56
250	~100		84

So at 150 seconds in, the Slow weapon has a 56% chance to hit both swings and win the fight by getting 200 damage on the target while only needing 150. The fast weapon would have had to hit all but one of the 151 swings it took.

This is an extreme example but it demonstrates the effect.

Conclusion

It simply comes down to the fact that a weapon is very likely to get 2 or 3 or 4 hits in a row at 75,85,95% hit chance. While it is much more unlikely to hit 10 or 15 or 20 times in a row. After a long while the odds will even out and there is no advantage, or if the to hit % is much lower. Assume a to hit of 25% and this is all reversed with the small sample size ruining slow weapons chance to get to the morale target in time.

i can't find the speed in the tooltip of any weapons. How do i figure out a weapons speed?

Originally Posted by Bereg-Strongbow

i can't find the speed in the tooltip of any weapons. How do i figure out a weapons speed?

This guide is a relic from a past age. Different weapons (dagger vs sword, 2-H club vs Halberd, etc) used to have different speeds which mattered very much. They made all 1-H weapons have the same speed and all 2-H weapons have the same speed. Weapon choice is now a matter of racial (or class) bonuses, inherent weapon type bonuses, and aesthetics...

Seriously outdated and confusing for newbies who stumble upon it, please remove this.

Should out-of-date posts like this remain stickies?

Oups, haven't seen the date !
2007 ...
It's 2012 know
Sticky ?

I tried reporting this thread a while back to get the attention of the moderators and to get it unstickied. No action.