Haste Is NOT Exponential...
Haste is NOT exponential...
Tiger is actually right on this one, 25% haste is 33.3% not 50% more attacks.
looks like 25% haste = like 31.8 % more attacks
Quote:
0% haste of 500 delay = 500 delay
500/60 = 8.3 secs per attack.
in 60 seconds you swing 7.23 times.
================================
25% haste of 500 delay = 375 delay
375/60 = 6.25 secs per attack.
in 60 seconds you swing 9.6 times.
500/60 = 8.3 secs per attack.
in 60 seconds you swing 7.23 times.
================================
25% haste of 500 delay = 375 delay
375/60 = 6.25 secs per attack.
in 60 seconds you swing 9.6 times.
By your own *** calculations
9.6 attacks vs 7.23
9.6/7.23 = 32.7% increase
32.7, is that closer to 33 or 50%?
Yes, lowblow. Around that.
Based off the 60 second model.
And veg, we're talking about 50% haste being twice as fast... What page are you on? o.O
Based off the 60 second model.
And veg, we're talking about 50% haste being twice as fast... What page are you on? o.O
God damn, I cannot believe how stupid this is getting. 'vessa, please stop talking.
Sylph.Vincentius said:
God damn, I cannot believe how stupid this is getting. 'vessa, please stop talking.
Says the man who never began to follow or understand any of the math, or understand any of the core concepts being spoken here.
Stop reading?
Haste is absolutely positively not exponential. It itself is a factor used to make adjustments to delay. Delay determines your attack speed. Haste is just an alteration to the delay that determines the amount of attacks you'll make. Haste has a 100% linear relationship when reducing delay. It's the delay/60 formula that makes delay reduction exponential. Without that part of the formula, there would be 0 increasing returns. Thus the entire concept of exponential returns is netter from DELAY. Does haste lower delay? Yes... So does dual wield. But they both lower it in a linear fashion. Haste's actual values are 100% constant. Delay's, however, are not.
Still there? Do you understand? If not... shut up and leave.
I understand that you're annoying, isn't that enough?
Yeah, it is for me. Now back to the person who you can't prove wrong, don't let me distract you from making an idiot of yourself.
Yeah, it is for me. Now back to the person who you can't prove wrong, don't let me distract you from making an idiot of yourself.
Core concepts? You just said 25% haste if 50% faster than 0% haste
Sylph.Vincentius said:
I understand that you're annoying, isn't that enough?
Yeah, it is for me. Now back to the person who you can't prove wrong, don't let me distract you from making an idiot of yourself.
Yeah, it is for me. Now back to the person who you can't prove wrong, don't let me distract you from making an idiot of yourself.
The ones making the fools of themselves aren't me. Lol
The ones who are doing so are the ones who believe the BG-idiots and their claims. They're blindly running around plastering up completely wrong terminology everywhere by stating haste itself is exponential when it's merely a variable within an equation.
And wrong veg, i said 50% haste is 2 times faster than 0.
Would rather have someone who doesn't understand a "core concept" and can do the actual in game math that counts correctly than someone who thinks 25% haste is 50% more attacks.
None of the BG posters here have called it exponential, by the by.
Carry on, this is amusing.
Carry on, this is amusing.
@'vessa
Not going to beat my head on a brick wall, I'll just stand back and watch.
And yes, you're the brick wall. You never back down, even when you've been shown wrong. I've been reading, and you clearly have not.
Not going to beat my head on a brick wall, I'll just stand back and watch.
And yes, you're the brick wall. You never back down, even when you've been shown wrong. I've been reading, and you clearly have not.
Btw, no you didn't. Way to ninja edit your *** wrong information.
Sylph.Vincentius said:
Not going to beat my head on a brick wall, I'll just stand back and watch.
And yes, you're the brick wall. You never back down, even when you've been shown wrong. I've been reading, and you clearly have not.
And yes, you're the brick wall. You never back down, even when you've been shown wrong. I've been reading, and you clearly have not.
But everyone else has been shown wrong ;)
Everybody knows haste lowers delay and spell casts in a linear fashion. EVERYBODY.
Delay is the exponential factor here. the /60 formula makes increasing returns possible. That formula does not include haste. It is merely your total delay AFTER haste and dual wield are factored. At that point, delay is an entirely different entity.
What they argue is that the more haste you stack the more the curve goes up. This isnt haste's doing directly by any means though. Its the lower DELAY. It's the fact that DELAY is not a linear variable. HASTE is, though.
They are right that the lower your delay the higher the exponential return is. I've stated that clearly myself many times. BUT it's the effect of delay/60. They're merely blindly overlooking this very important factor and chalking it up to purely hastes doing, which is incorrect.
And when you're a two-handed weapon user, what other than haste causes your delay to get lower? Hmm?
Dual wielders can claim direct delay reduction, but what about those who aren't?
Dual wielders can claim direct delay reduction, but what about those who aren't?
Quote:
And wrong veg, i said 50% haste is 2 times faster than 0.
(Why the hell aren't quotes working?)
Duvessa said:
0% haste of 500 delay = 500 delay
500/60 = 8.3 secs per attack.
in 60 seconds you swing 7.23 times.
================================
25% haste of 500 delay = 375 delay
375/60 = 6.25 secs per attack.
in 60 seconds you swing 9.6 times.
Just to be clear for those who were not following the math, because you are measuring the change in # of swings you actually have to subtract the first value from the second one before dividing, so:
9.6 - 7.23 = 2.37 swings
dividing by the base value (because your starting number is the 7.23) gives you the % increase in swings:
2.37/7.23 = 0.328
or 32.8% more swings from your 0% to your 25% haste model
Duvessa said:
0% haste of 500 delay = 500 delay
500/60 = 8.3 secs per attack.
in 60 seconds you swing 7.23 times.
================================
25% haste of 500 delay = 375 delay
375/60 = 6.25 secs per attack.
in 60 seconds you swing 9.6 times.
Just to be clear for those who were not following the math, because you are measuring the change in # of swings you actually have to subtract the first value from the second one before dividing, so:
9.6 - 7.23 = 2.37 swings
dividing by the base value (because your starting number is the 7.23) gives you the % increase in swings:
2.37/7.23 = 0.328
or 32.8% more swings from your 0% to your 25% haste model
Why does Photobucket have to be such a piece of crap? I had a great F5 .gif for this thread.
Sylph.Vincentius said:
And when you're a two-handed weapon user, what other than haste causes your delay to get lower? Hmm?
Dual wielders can claim direct delay reduction, but what about those who aren't?
Dual wielders can claim direct delay reduction, but what about those who aren't?
You truly are a retard, aren't you?
Haste. As i've been saying since what, page 2? Lowers your delay DIRECTLY. Every 1% haste has the exact same effect as the last 1% added. It linearly effects delay. Then DELAY's formula for transferring over to attack speed becomes an exponential factor. The lower it gets, the more attacks netted.
It isn't because of haste that you net more attacks per delay reduction, its because of the delay formula itself. Haste ISNT the exponential factor here as haste ONLY reduces delay and spells. And it does so in a linear manner.
@ faye, easier just to do 9.6/7.32 x 100 = 132.8%, which is 32.8% increase from 100%
And has anyone actually said that Haste itself was the cause? I didn't see that myself.
The GAINS from Haste, are however, exponential. Cause and effect there 'vessa.
PS... I like how you resorted to a personal attack when I made a good point. Will I be a dipshit this time? Or even better... A cuntwaffle?
Please do go on. I'd have popcorn, but I'm all out. =(
The GAINS from Haste, are however, exponential. Cause and effect there 'vessa.
PS... I like how you resorted to a personal attack when I made a good point. Will I be a dipshit this time? Or even better... A cuntwaffle?
Please do go on. I'd have popcorn, but I'm all out. =(
Simply put, it is entirely incorrect to say Haste is exponential. It may be acceptable to say haste's effect on delay contributes to exponential returns, but it is plain and simply stupid to say that haste itself is exponential. It nets no exponential returns per % added. That is very clearly the result of Delay.
And the people on these forums, such as veg, have stated haste is exponential. Mainly the BG'ers who come here, though. Cuz they read it there and use it as their own idea.
And the people on these forums, such as veg, have stated haste is exponential. Mainly the BG'ers who come here, though. Cuz they read it there and use it as their own idea.
Quote:
Simply put, it is entirely incorrect to say Haste is exponential.
I never gave a ***about your semantics game. I said adding haste is not linear in terms of damage percentage increase. Don't put my name in that ***.
Sylph.Vincentius said:
I understand that you're annoying, isn't that enough?
Sylph.Vincentius said:
God damn, I cannot believe how stupid this is getting. 'vessa, please stop talking.
Sylph.Vincentius said:
PS... I like how you resorted to a personal attack when I made a good point. Will I be a dipshit this time? Or even better... A cuntwaffle?
Waaaah ; ;
Someone can't take what he can dish out.
So, you're saying that the gains from Haste are exponential due to what they do to your delay.
In layman's terms, it's exponential due to it's effect.
Thanks.
/Thread
In layman's terms, it's exponential due to it's effect.
Thanks.
/Thread
Sylph.Vincentius said:
So, you're saying that the gains from Haste are exponential due to what they do to your delay.
In layman's terms, it's exponential due to it's effect.
Thanks.
/Thread
In layman's terms, it's exponential due to it's effect.
Thanks.
/Thread
No? Did you read what i said at all? lol
Leviathan.Duvessa said:
Sylph.Vincentius said:
I understand that you're annoying, isn't that enough?
Sylph.Vincentius said:
God damn, I cannot believe how stupid this is getting. 'vessa, please stop talking.
Sylph.Vincentius said:
PS... I like how you resorted to a personal attack when I made a good point. Will I be a dipshit this time? Or even better... A cuntwaffle?
Waaaah ; ;
Someone can't take what he can dish out.
Wasn't complaining. I was flaming you to flame. I made a point, and you brought out an insult finally. Backpedaling much?
Leviathan.Duvessa said:
Sylph.Vincentius said:
So, you're saying that the gains from Haste are exponential due to what they do to your delay.
In layman's terms, it's exponential due to it's effect.
Thanks.
/Thread
In layman's terms, it's exponential due to it's effect.
Thanks.
/Thread
No? Did you read what i said at all? lol
Unless you're absolutely incompetent when it comes to actually conveying your message, I understood what you meant just fine. You just don't want to admit it's as simple as I've said.
All FFXI content and images © 2002-2024 SQUARE ENIX CO., LTD. FINAL
FANTASY is a registered trademark of Square Enix Co., Ltd.