E-Bow.. Worth it?

[poweryoga]

god, are you on a mission to disprove everything I say?

But how can you say this? This is my point. In exactly the same way that you can argue that maybe E-bow can still outdamage Musketeer's, I can argue that maybe Shigeto (with higher DMG and similar RATK) or MC (with higher DMG and more ACC) can outdamage E-bow.

I already told you, E-bow outdamages M.Cst in exp party, PERIOD. This is from personal experience from exping at lvl 70-72. M.Cst has higher accuracy, THAT'S IT. It gives good damage on barrage, possibly 100-200 damage more on average than E-bow, but that's all I'll give credit for. But i've seen M.cst miss completely on a barrage too.

Shigeto's, with its huge delay AND lower base damage than the M.Cst, would have less damage output simply because it can't shoot as fast. Shigeto's +1 is simply out of reach for any of us, as I've never seen it anywhere on midgard other than the 2 people that sold it to themselves, and thus makes it impossible to buy. Not to mention its LESS accurate unless you're a samurai, so chances of it missing/screwing up a barrage are much higher.

Give it a rest already, though I'm sure you'll find some minute detail to pick on no matter what I say.

[Spider-Dan]

Originally posted by poweryoga
I already told you, E-bow outdamages M.Cst in exp party, PERIOD. This is from personal experience from exping at lvl 70-72.

Did you log this, or is this just from your impression?

If you have the logs, I would be interested in seeing the difference.

[Hisdon]

60 secounds longer isn't really a huge delay...Shigato's looks very appealing to me, the non-Windurstrain as a nice alternative to E-Bow, but personally I think I'll be using Crossbows/Guns more...I just really, REALLY like the option of using 3 different weapons as a RNG

[poweryoga]

E-bow has delay of 490, Shigeto's has delay of 600. That's a big enough difference for rangers since all we do is shoot, and some melee for TP. Higher base damage with lack of accuracy in a bow is not what I'm looking for. When I go bow, I want all of my barrage to hit, not act as another shot. However, if you're not windurstian, I agree Shigeto > M.Cst.

For E-bow and M.Cst bow... I don't keep logs. I see my M.Cst does routinely 100-105 damage without Zerk, and I see E-bow doing 100-110 withotu zerk, and the Weapon skills with e-bow are generally more powerful with sidewinders being in the 1300-1400s and arching nearing the 800 mark (with zerk on.) I shouldn't have to accumulate 70 pages of data and parse it to know that E-bow is more powerful with it damaging nearly every aspect of M.Cst (minus barrage).

Normal damage can be considered marginal really, I'm not impressed with a 5 damage increase but I am impressed with a good 200 damage increase on weapon skills.

I shouldn't have to find a parser, post 70 pages of log, borrow an e-bow from whoever, post up a whole bunch of crap just to satisfy your curiosity. i've already satisfied my own curiosity and telling you what I found, and if you're not gonna believe me....

do it yourself.

[Spider-Dan]

Originally posted by poweryoga
For E-bow and M.Cst bow... I don't keep logs. I see my M.Cst does routinely 100-105 damage without Zerk, and I see E-bow doing 100-110 withotu zerk, and the Weapon skills with e-bow are generally more powerful with sidewinders being in the 1300-1400s and arching nearing the 800 mark (with zerk on.) I shouldn't have to accumulate 70 pages of data and parse it to know that E-bow is more powerful with it damaging nearly every aspect of M.Cst (minus barrage).

All of the above totally fails to take into account MC's other main advantage (better accuracy). This is why I asked if you had a log.

I shouldn't have to find a parser, post 70 pages of log, borrow an e-bow from whoever, post up a whole bunch of crap just to satisfy your curiosity. i've already satisfied my own curiosity and telling you what I found, and if you're not gonna believe me....

do it yourself.

Judging from the results of this thread, even if you saw a log with MC outdamaging e-bow, you'd just say "doesn't count" and wave it off.

Sorry if you have no interest in actually finding out which bonuses make the better real-world difference.

[poweryoga]

All of the above totally fails to take into account MC's other main advantage (better accuracy). This is why I asked if you had a log.

If i'm hitting 90% of my shots with a Onthius bow (-7 accuracy in comparison to E-bow), why the fuck would I care about 7 extra accuracy on an M.Cst. Bow? Barrages every 5 minutes doesn't offset 200 extra damage on skill chains every other round. If there was ANY significant accuracy decrease I'd have already noticed it.

Judging from the results of this thread, even if you saw a log with MC outdamaging e-bow, you'd just say "doesn't count" and wave it off.

I already KNOW it does more damage. Maybe you are just too stubborn to believe it. Keep wandering in your dream world where you are always right. It does more damage in my hands from switching back and forth between M.Cst and E-bow, so that's all the evidence I need.

Sorry if you have no interest in actually finding out which bonuses make the better real-world difference.

Sorry if I have no interest in wasting my time merely to satisfy your ego or my own. You can go lvl your rng to 71 and find out yourself that E-bow is better. I already have from my experiences, and if you refuse to believe me, go test them yourself.

[Spider-Dan]

Originally posted by poweryoga
If i'm hitting 90% of my shots with a Onthius bow (-7 accuracy in comparison to E-bow), why the fuck would I care about 7 extra accuracy on an M.Cst. Bow?

And how do you know you are hitting "90%" without a log parser? You mean to say that you aren't hitting 84%, not hitting 93%... nope, it happens to be exactly 90%.

If you can hit 85% with one weapon and 95% with another, that in itself is a significant total difference that you would assuredly NOT catch by eye. This is why log parsers are necessary to compare weapons with different accuracy!

Have you ever wondered why everyone says "Sarnga sucks, my War Bow+1 does just about the same damage but doesn't have the ridiculous delay," yet everyone who actually logs the damage comparison ended up saying, "Hmmm, Sarnga actually did slightly more total damage"?

Note that I'm not even saying that MC is necessarily BETTER than E-bow! I'm just trying to see if someone knows the actual difference in total performance (that includes accuracy) between the two... and you're fighting me tooth-and-nail the whole way. Why is it that when E-bow loses log comparison to gun, the cry is, "More testing needs to be done", yet when E-bow beats MC by default (with not a log in sight) the response is, "I already KNOW it does more damage"? Some consistency, please?

Why are people so fanatically devoted to this damn bow?

[Hisdon]

since when are we comparing Shigato's to E-Bow? We were talking Master Caster's when that was brought up...I'd rather have my 2 less base dmg and +18 attack (and personally I like weapons with longer delays for more TP return) than the 2 more base dmg that Master Caster's would give me

[greysenn]

If you can hit 85% with one weapon and 95% with another, that in itself is a significant total difference that you would assuredly NOT catch by eye. This is why log parsers are necessary to compare weapons with different accuracy!

Or you could just be having an off night with whatever weapon you're using and have it be called a margin of error. Ru posted 10% higher hit rate than the other guy with the E-bow with just 3 more Racc.

[poweryoga]

Oh, didn't know you were comparing M.Cst bow. /slap hissy :D

I'd personally go with Shigeto over M.Cst. bow because the damage/accuracy isn't significant enough at lvl 70+ for a ranger, but it sure looks a hell of a lot cooler. Not to mention there's no choice if you're not a windurstian.

And how do you know you are hitting "90%" without a log parser? You mean to say that you aren't hitting 84%, not hitting 93%... nope, it happens to be exactly 90%.

Why are you nitpicking on wording? Obviously I just threw in a number for example's sake. The point is that its accurate enough for me to not notice a difference.

"Oh yes, I hit 93.525% of my shots on Windsday, 01:56 Waxing crescent, with the wind blowing SE at 2 Mph with the bow tension at blah blah blah blah".

And how do you know you are hitting "90%" without a log parser? You mean to say that you aren't hitting 84%, not hitting 93%... nope, it happens to be exactly 90%.

when I notice that almost none of my arrows miss (ok, say maybe I miss 10 shots) over the course of a hour exp party, that's fair enough comparison for me. I would have noticed if I have been missing 3-4 arrows a fight instead of the normal 1-2. That alone is enough to see the difference. (minus blink if there's any on weapons).

Are you going to nitpick on 95% vs 96% now too? save yourself the trouble and don't. Anything within 10% is pretty much within a good error margin.

Have you ever wondered why everyone says "Sarnga sucks, my War Bow+1 does just about the same damage but doesn't have the ridiculous delay," yet everyone who actually logs the damage comparison ended up saying, "Hmmm, Sarnga actually did slightly more total damage"?

Actually, pre lvl 60 the warbow +1 does more damage. Post 60 Sarnga does more damage because of its accuracy.

Why is it that when E-bow loses log comparison to gun, the cry is, "More testing needs to be done", yet when E-bow beats MC by default (with not a log in sight) the response is, "I already KNOW it does more damage"? Some consistency, please?

When a log shows up there's always problems with consistency. Note its 2 players, not 1. That's not even controlled data, but for the sake of simplicity i'll leave that out. Also, That's the only log that I know of. You don't come to conclustions based on 1 test, by 1 person.

E.Bow doesn't "beat MC by default". I've done testing with it and it wins just from my experience. I'm not going to load up a parser for you, I'm not going to beg my friend to borrow his/her e-bow just for you. I'm not going to go through the trouble of lvling when I don't want to just for you.

Do it your self and see. Load up the parser yourself and see. I don't want to waste time to prove you wrong, you can do that yourself when you hit lvl 71. I KNOW it does more damage because I've used both damn bows in a party. Several others that have used both have said the same thing. Its not like I'm pulling it out of John Kerry's ass.

Why are people so fanatically devoted to this damn bow?

I don't know why you're trying SO hard to prove that this isn't the best bow. I'm not fanatically devoted to this bow, I don't even want one at this point. You're just bringing up wild accusations and nitpicking on the smallest thing. I've already tested this myself and know that it is indeed better than M.Cst. The only thing holding me back from getting this bow is that its 5 mil, and I'm not wasting 5 mil on this bow when I can get a subpar bow that's slightly worse for 120k.

I'll say this again. If you're not satisfied with word of mouth, test it yourself.

[Hisdon]

Originally posted by poweryoga
Oh, didn't know you were comparing M.Cst bow. /slap hissy :D

I'd personally go with Shigeto over M.Cst. bow because the damage/accuracy isn't significant enough at lvl 70+ for a ranger, but it sure looks a hell of a lot cooler. Not to mention there's no choice if you're not a windurstian.

that's what I was saying the whole time =/

[Spider-Dan]

There are two major points that are remaining, IMO.

1) If you have markedly less accuracy over a significant number of attacks (1000+ shots is certainly significant) then you didn't have "an off day." You had worse accuracy and you were beaten because of it. Small differences in accuracy rating can make a big difference in net accuracy. There are enough other examples of this (e.g. you can hit a mob more consistently after gaining one level) that I don't think this is in dispute.

2) If you don't have a log, then you don't know you outdamaged any other weapon. There really is no way to get around it. If one is tracking accuracy by eye, then any comparison of accuracy vs. damage per hit on remotely similar weapons will always end up with the higher damage-per-hit weapon winning in one's mind, because "I think I hit just as much." But if you don't know how much damage that extra accuracy (even if small) translates to, then how can you know who won in total damage?

The statement that WB+1 beats Sarnga pre-60 but loses post-60 is an excellent example of this. Since Sarnga is a LV59 weapon, how do you know Sarnga loses at LV59 (for exactly one level) but then wins as soon as you level up?

If you don't want to use a log parser, fine. Nobody is holding a gun to your head. But if you don't use a log parser, then you cannot know the net difference that more accuracy makes. If you think 10% net accuracy advantage (85% vs. 95%) is nothing, you're crazy. If you are at a 10% accuracy handicap, not only would you have to do 10% more damage per hit, but your WS would have to do MORE than that (seeing as how you have 10% less TP and will have an even greater handicap on WS accuracy).

[Caspian]

OT: How do I run a parser, is there something in-game that allows me to do it, or do I need to run an outside program?

[greysenn]

1) If you have markedly less accuracy over a significant number of attacks (1000+ shots is certainly significant) then you didn't have "an off day." You had worse accuracy and you were beaten because of it. Small differences in accuracy rating can make a big difference in net accuracy. There are enough other examples of this (e.g. you can hit a mob more consistently after gaining one level) that I don't think this is in dispute.

I don't buy it. I've had at least as much of 10% difference on the same mobs, on different days of playing easily. Since I noticed it, it had to have been more than that. Sidewinder is particularly notorious of this. Just that alone can account for your damage going from good to crap. (Particularly if you're a chain closer.)

Furthermore, while any added accuracy is in no doubt useful, I think the mob level in relationship to you is even more signficant than that.

The statement that WB+1 beats Sarnga pre-60 but loses post-60 is an excellent example of this. Since Sarnga is a LV59 weapon, how do you know Sarnga loses at LV59 (for exactly one level) but then wins as soon as you level up?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but a lot of the mobs you fight in the 60's have gimp defense. If this is the case, it would put the sargnas added damage to maximum effect, even if the hit rate remained similar.

[Spider-Dan]

Originally posted by greysenn
I don't buy it. I've had at least as much of 10% difference on the same mobs, on different days of playing easily. Since I noticed it, it had to have been more than that.

Are you really taking eyeballed estimates of accuracy and saying that it's "10%" difference? /sigh

If what you are saying is true, and people can just have "bad days" (meaning, specifically, that you do significantly worse for no reason at all) then you are essentially saying that the game is so random that no matter how much data you gather, any results you get boil down to dumb luck; the corollary of this argument is that there is no point in getting quality equipment because your performance is going to be controlled by good day/bad day anyway!

We are talking about a difference in accuracy over a huge sample (1000+ shots). If you cannot get meaningful data from a sample that large, there is just no point in trying to understand how this game works, period.