Curse

heavenlight · May 08, 2011, 06:45 AM // 06:45

I have read many threads regarding hero builds about elite x being crappy because there are better options or about build y being superior because it can clear mobs efficiently. The argument seems to always end up with: If you think you can do better, run your build and see if it's faster.

Although equating fast with good is arguable (I, for one, do not agree and I'm of the opinion that most players have their own set of criteria for a good build, and being fast is just one of them, but let's not debate that here), running time is an objective and quantifiable measure. So for the sake of future comparisons, I propose that we have a set of benchmarks to judge how fast a build is.

To develop the benchmarks, I propose we do the following:
1) Choose about 3 to 5 vanq/missions/dungeons as the benchmarks.
2) For each chosen area, get a few establish players to run through them with their solid builds to determine what constitutes an excellent completion time (speed clear removed, see post #23). Consumables are not allowed of course.

Once we have the excellent completion time, in the future, anyone wishing to claim to have an efficient build only need to post the times for completing these areas. Small tweaking of a few skills for each area is allowed.

For the areas to be representative of PvE contents
1) Ideally, the chosen areas should be a mix of vanquishing, missions, dungeons, and maybe one high-end elite area. Completing them should preferably take less than one hour.
2) If an area is chosen to be vanquished, to reduce the luck factor, the mobs should have a narrow patrol area so that the area can be vanquished surely in a systematic way without missing any mobs.
3) If a mission/dungeon is chosen, mob skipping using running skill is not allowed. One can go in the path of least mobs but all mobs encountered must be killed before moving on.
4) The areas should have a wide enough variety of foes.
5) At least one area should feature extended fights (high hp boss, extra huge group of mobs, etc.).
6) At least one area should have pop-ups.
7) Any other suggestions?

If everyone agrees, we can start with the nominations for vanq/missions/dungeons/high-end area.

Rules for valid completion time
1) You're supposed to complete the area in the normal way by killing all foes encountered.
1) No consumables are allowed.
2) Tactics like mob-skipping, using necrotic traversal to skip a large section of the area, etc. are not allowed.
3) To avoid trolling about your build, you can choose to blank out your skill bars. But if an area allows for certain tactics to be used, the relevant player and heroes skill bars must be shown to show that the tactics are not used.
4) Video submissions are not required but one with it are preferred.
5) To encourage participation, if you completed an area not in the benchmarks list, it can still be submitted, and I will include the times for reference and future use.

Finally, let me repeat this: This is not a speed clear contest. It is about finding what constitutes an excellent time for completing an area to serve as a basis for future build comparison. You can view this as an effort to establish what is the equivalent of Faction Missions Master's Reward time for the chosen area in the 7-hero era.

As such, since no video submission is required, if you want to cheat by doing mob-skipping, exploit tactics, etc. by all means you can do it, but there won't be a prize nor a hall of fame for it. At the end of the day, only a cutoff time is going to be shown. For instance, if you submit a 7 minutes completion time for Majesty's Rest, you have my thanks for participating, but the established cutoff time of 10 mins will not be changed, unless sufficient people do it to show that 7 minutes is not an extreme outlier.

Areas chosen and the corresponding excellent completion time
1) Majesty's Rest --- <10 mins.
Note: Majesty's Rest is biased towards single-target damage (most groups of foes are 1-3 each), stress test and endurance (Rotscale with 20k hp, and tough group of accompanying mobs)
2) Vloxen's Excavations --- <25 mins
3) Tombs of the Primeval Kings --- (not final) <33 mins
4) ??
5) ??

Areas not in benchmarks list with submissions
1) Bloodstone Caves --- 13 mins

My special thanks to the people who have participated so far:
EFGJack, LexTalionis, Mugen, Essence Snow, traeskapa, Dzjudz

Improvavel · May 08, 2011, 09:47 AM // 09:47

Times will always favor cannon glass builds.

One thing time of completion doesn't show is completion/failure rate.

Spiritz · May 08, 2011, 01:03 PM // 13:03

if i can add a humourous comment - make no5 vq of err the zone with rotscale - hes got a huge amount of hp - that would be worth seeing results for

timbo_3101 · May 08, 2011, 01:41 PM // 13:41

A worthwhile thread, thank you

However, when this was proposed recently on GWguru, there were one or two clear winners; many other players who had criticised them were subsequently silent, presumably because their builds/techniques/ability were not the equal of their negative statements and personal opinions.

Rotscale is said to have around 20,000hp; Duncan is said to have around 50,000hp. Just a light comment, but just two Rt heroes are required (as per spiritway, either h/h or 7h team) to kill Duncan HM in approximately 2min, with the human player contributing the occasional YMLaD or FH. (Credit to Jeydra for popularising this technique from his elementalist-based thread.)

The Josip · May 08, 2011, 02:04 PM // 14:04

Quote:

Originally Posted by Improvavel

Times will always favor cannon glass builds.

One thing time of completion doesn't show is completion/failure rate.

Exactly. Not only that, but most GW players don't want to play a strategy game. Some builds that people posted are glass cannon strategy builds, where you're playing all 8 characters instead of just 1. Of course that such a team will be slightly faster, it's supposed to be. But it's a different category from C+space builds that many use these days to complete titles.

hunter · May 08, 2011, 03:08 PM // 15:08

Clear speed does not show consistency and does not prove overall efficiency of builds

Speed clears for certain areas will favor specific hero builds (ie frozen soil and/or holy dmg) which go against the concept of a benchmark for a hero build.

What you are asking is a general build for heroes that can work anywhere. Looking for clear speeds goes against that.

heavenlight · May 08, 2011, 04:06 PM // 16:06

My motivation to start the thread is
1) I'm sick and tired of hearing people say "When I run my build z, everything just explodes and I faceroll through pve contents" without solid numbers backing up their claim. Just think about how much more credible EFGJack's claim about his build will be if he provides run times for the zones he tested his build at.
2) At the same time, I'm sure many forum lurkers are curious how their hero builds compare to other players.

To the posts above, that's why I mentioned I don't agree with equating fast with good since there are other criteria like reliability. But fast is definitely one criteria to judge the worthiness of a build.

So I repeat here: My sole point here is to provide a point of comparison for judging how fast a build is and I do not care about other factors that are hard to measure.

The suggestion of having a few areas is so that it is representative of PvE content. At the same time, tactics/luck should be eliminated/reduced to be as objective as possible.

The point of having speedclears to each specific area is so that we can judge how much extra time is needed for the build. The extra time needed should provide enough info for the players to weigh the risk/reward factor of running the build.

To be clear, let me illustrate with an example. Suppose the 5 chosen areas are Shards of Orr, Hell's Precipice (bonus required), Morostav Trail, Majesty Rest, and Vloxen's Excavations and the fastest running times are 40 minutes, 20 minutes, 25 minutes, 10 minutes, 25 minutes.

Now anyone who has a build to test, be it EFGJack advanced warrior build or Lex's Dwaynaway, could take their builds to these areas and run them to get the times. Suppose I take my overly-defensive build into these areas and get a time 1 hr 20 minutes, 25 minutes, 35 minutes, 20 minutes, 40 minutes. These numbers will tell me how much time is lost by being overly-defensive. If I think the extra reliability provided is far outweighted by the time loss, then I can tweak my build to have more offensive power.

mugen · May 08, 2011, 04:24 PM // 16:24

my 2 cents : why not make a full movie of a hard run.
everyone will see
- if it works
- how it works
- how many time is needed
- speed killing
etc.

also 1)
btw we are talking about heros builds. I dont think the main goal is too speed clear anything or make records...but finishing zone /quest is nice (for example : doa/uw/fow..) I dont care if itake 5 * more time than a assa/5* envs build.. just finishing it with hero is nice enough for me. (you may lol at me, but i dont think yet anyone and any build can enter, clap their hand , and win , easy - even in normal mode)

and 2)
well for example, i dont care my build make 40 minute @t Majesty Rest instead of 20...
if with my build i can clean tomb and maybe drop a glob of ectoplasm, smoother than with other "fastest" ones... same remark.

Daesu · May 08, 2011, 04:59 PM // 16:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by heavenlight

My motivation to start the thread is
1) I'm sick and tired of hearing people say "When I run my build z, everything just explodes and I faceroll through pve contents" without solid numbers backing up their claim. Just think about how much more credible EFGJack's claim about his build will be if he provides run times for the zones he tested his build at.

First of all, EFGJack is not your typically PUG warrior player.

EFGJack can clear an area with his own build, which he knows the exact key combinations to micro it with, in X minutes while your average PUG warrior player who doesn't even bind a key press to his hero flags may take X+5minutes with the exact SAME build. Replace all mention of "your average PUG warrior player" with "most GW players".

Timing is subjective based on who is playing it. I prefer the video suggestion above.

heavenlight · May 08, 2011, 05:26 PM // 17:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daesu

First of all, EFGJack is not your typically PUG warrior player.

EFGJack can clear an area with his own build, which he knows the exact key combinations to micro it with, in X minutes while your average PUG warrior player who doesn't even bind a key press to his hero flags may take X+5minutes with the exact SAME build. Replace all mention of "your average PUG warrior player" with "most GW players".

Timing is subjective based on who is playing it. I prefer the video suggestion above.

Of course I know that EFGJack is an advanced player. I also agree timing indeed depends on who's playing it but again, had EFGJack provides some timing information to his test runs, the numbers, together with the fact that EFG is an advanced player, will provide me with a more comprehensive view to judge his build.

Back to the example, suppose EFG completed Majesty's Rest in 12 minutes vs my overly-defensive build's 20 minutes. Taking into account the difference in EFG's skill level and mine, I can make a rough estimate that if I run EFG's build, I might be able to complete it in say 15 minutes and have a 20% higher fail rate. So when deciding which build to run, the whole exercise will provide me a better view of the risk/reward factors.

NerfHerder · May 08, 2011, 05:26 PM // 17:26

The main problem in setting a benchmark is player skill. Microing, flagging, and tactics used by an experienced player who knows what to expect is going to get a far better time than a less skilled player. A screenshot doesnt show this, so the only way to know would be a video of the full run, like mugen said. Even with videos there will be no way to prove how many attempts were made and you can bet on players submiting thier best time.

My suggestion would be to have at least two different catagories. One for the micro'd and optimized builds for the area, and one for generic builds that you can set and forget, C+Space gogogo. The latter, while not fully eliminating it, would be one way to help take player skill out of the equation. The micro'd catagory is also necessary to show what a build is capable of in an optimal situation.

To even further complicate things, your primary profession must also be considered. A physical character's team build may vary greatly from a caster's. Catagories would need to be set up for physical and caster.

At a minimum, there should be a micro'd and non micro'd catagory, each with a physical and caster subset. Which all require a full video with a display of thier builds.

If your going to use VQ as a proving ground, the player should also display thier quest log to show they do not have any quests that effect the area. The VQ in question should be fairly small, have a minimal amount of patrols, and provide a healthy mix a different mob types. That being said, variable spawns and patrols will change the overall outcome regardless. Making VQ problematic for testing.

EFGJack · May 08, 2011, 05:43 PM // 17:43

That's an accurate estimate there, Heavenlight. I decided to go and vanq Majesty's Rest with a slightly modified "Glass build". This was the only run there. I'm sure I can shave off a few minutes now that I know what to expect from Rotscale's Posse.

builds with offensive spirits and elementalists will surely be able to beat this build in this specific zone as this build barely does any single target DPS. I can run Majesty's Rest with my balanced, sturdy build for comparison.

Mig Coconut · May 08, 2011, 06:17 PM // 18:17

Time by itself isn't necessarily the best measuring tool for a general hero build. Lots of people value reliability and ease of use. I think a lot of these problems would be solved if people simple gave their hero builds ratings in a few categories on an scale of 1-5.

Offense. Pure killing power. 1 takes a long time to kill mobs. 5 nukes them to oblivion.
Defense. Otherwise known as reliability. 1 your build can crumble easily if mis-managed. 5 you can survive over-aggroing and last prolonged fights.
Micro required. 1 you can c-space everything. 5 is intensive micro.

Additionally, a few notes should be made in:
Profession of player. Better for melee or caster profession?
Weaknesses. Prolonged fights or heavy enchantment strips a problem? Mention that here.
Variations. The poster should propose alternatives for a few hero bars if no corpses, high number of enemies, hex or condition heavy areas, etc.

EFGJack · May 08, 2011, 07:00 PM // 19:00

Okay, let me entertain you. I did Majesty's Rest for comparison with my old, sturdy balanced build. It's the dungeon build I have in the warrior forums brought to 7H level. I did one run with each build and I most likely won't run Majesty's Rest any more.

There's at least a three minute difference in favor of my old build. This is not news as I know the build is extremely potent and has a high survival rate. I just didn't get around to publish it.

My "Glass" Build

Offense: 4 ½
Defense: 2
Micro : 3

Built for a melee user
Weaknesses: exposure to damage when ST spirits are down
Several variations: Clamor Ritualist can be made into a pseudo-healer by taking off Spirit Rift, etc.

Versus my solid build

Offense: 4
Defense: 4
Micro : 2

Built for a melee user
Weaknesses: Energy Denial and heavy enchantment removal, interrupts
Extremely flexible: can clear any zone in the game on HM with minor modifications, I will not type them down here

Now you will probably wonder why I published the build that performs at lower levels than the build I've always run, well, the answer is that I've found the "Glass" build more enjoyable the past weeks and out of curiosity I brought it to the public as the approach is uncommon. Slightly off-topic here but I felt like an explanation was at place.

But there are zones where the fragile build out-performs the old build, but in general the solid build is miles above the glass one. (The solid build commonly has PDrain or Shatter Hex instead of WW/WD FYI)

heavenlight · May 08, 2011, 08:41 PM // 20:41

Quote:

Originally Posted by NerfHerder

The main problem in setting a benchmark is player skill. Microing, flagging, and tactics used by an experienced player who knows what to expect is going to get a far better time than a less skilled player. A screenshot doesnt show this, so the only way to know would be a video of the full run, like mugen said. Even with videos there will be no way to prove how many attempts were made and you can bet on players submiting thier best time.

My suggestion would be to have at least two different catagories. One for the micro'd and optimized builds for the area, and one for generic builds that you can set and forget, C+Space gogogo. The latter, while not fully eliminating it, would be one way to help take player skill out of the equation. The micro'd catagory is also necessary to show what a build is capable of in an optimal situation.

To even further complicate things, your primary profession must also be considered. A physical character's team build may vary greatly from a caster's. Catagories would need to be set up for physical and caster.

At a minimum, there should be a micro'd and non micro'd catagory, each with a physical and caster subset. Which all require a full video with a display of thier builds.

If your going to use VQ as a proving ground, the player should also display thier quest log to show they do not have any quests that effect the area. The VQ in question should be fairly small, have a minimal amount of patrols, and provide a healthy mix a different mob types. That being said, variable spawns and patrols will change the overall outcome regardless. Making VQ problematic for testing.

That's a very good suggestion. But after giving some thought to it, I think that complicates things too much. The more complicated and the more testing required, the harder it is to get things actually done in the end. Think of this as the construction of a complicated piece of software program. I'll take Firefox as an example. Did Firefox get to the widespread popularity it gets to in one day? Of course not, it started simple and useful features get added to it after many many iterations.

I'll adopt the same approach here. We start with a simple set of benchmarks and hopefully many players will find them useful and thus are likely to contribute when we want to develop a more extensive set of benchmarks.

As I mentioned before, completion time is the only objective measure being tested here and I of course know about other criteria such as reliability, etc. Look at this in the same way as the benchmarks for CPU graphics card. Various graphics card benchmarks exist to tell you about the performance of any brand of graphics card. But no benchmarks exist (correct me if I am wrong) that will tell you about the expected lifetime of the graphics card under different operating conditions (how hours of intense gaming or ventilation conditions affect its lifetime)

@EFGJack, I kinda expected the results. Your AoE-heavy build is of course going to fare worse in a mostly single-targeted area (and hence why we need to run it through multiple areas to truly gauge its effectiveness). And your second build has lots of holy damage to double damage the undead to even speed things up further. Nonetheless I'm impressed with your times and I'll bring my defensive team to Majesty Rest and see how it goes.

EFGJack · May 08, 2011, 08:59 PM // 20:59

I know, but holy damage doesn't earn three minutes in such a small area. in SoO - surely, but not in Majesty's. And Rotscale doesn't take double from Holy. If anyone gets a faster time in Majesty's - congratulations. I will not take part in a MRSC competition.

Edit: if anyone cares the accurate time of my MRVanq with the solid build is 9:47, at least according to the video file.

Dzjudz · May 08, 2011, 09:30 PM // 21:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by EFGJack

I know, but holy damage doesn't earn three minutes in such a small area. in SoO - surely, but not in Majesty's. And Rotscale doesn't take double from Holy. If anyone gets a faster time in Majesty's - congratulations. I will not take part in a MRSC competition.

Edit: if anyone cares the accurate time of my MRVanq with the solid build is 9:47, at least according to the video file.

Can you upload to Youtube? I'd actually like to see it.

EFGJack · May 08, 2011, 10:03 PM // 22:03

It's uploading over night. Check my channel in 3~ hours time. Good night.

edit> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aXXwPTry8YM - took a while longer than 3 hours. Connection timed out over night, at 98%.

Plutoman · May 09, 2011, 01:12 AM // 01:12

Do people realize that there may not actually be a 'best' hero combination for every area? I mean, really. It's fairly obvious that the best builds for areas are tweaked ones - and one's that fit with a player's playstyle.

That automatically means that there is no 'universal' build, because everyone plays differently to different levels of micro and flagging to different styles of personal bars and methods.

There's quite a few combinations of builds that serve plenty well for general content - and do it fast, too. A few minutes here or there won't make a difference, particularly when the difference is typically in the players.

Just realize that there are no 'universally best' builds. There's a lot of good builds, mediocre builds, great builds, but there's no best ones. The builds that complete the DoA in 20 minutes flat aren't ideal for other areas. The builds that complete Raisu in 8 minutes are ideal for other areas. The builds that complete both in reasonable times aren't 'better' than other builds that complete both in reasonable times.

heavenlight · May 09, 2011, 01:18 AM // 01:18

Alright I did the Majesty's Rest HM run with my defensive build. The first time I attempted it with my ST def rit and a heavily modified ER hero but it failed horribly because I didn't micro the rit properly. The second time I ditched the rit and just bought a HB monk instead and change the ER hero build back to the gwpvx version but with no infuse (yeap, dual backline). But it still ended up horribly because Rotscale was stuck at the top of the stairs and spirit attacks all count as obstructed. And the third time I finally did it. No micro at all, just rush in and kill. Much to my surprise...

Why are the skills bars blanked? Because I run a hero team build that if it ever gets posted here, numerous people here will bash it hard as suboptimal outright and then they will go "because there are always better options". And since this thread is not about my build, let's avoid it before it happens.

Back to the subject, I guess no one will object to using Majesty's Rest as a testing ground. Does anyone have any suggestions for a mission and EotN dungeon?