Just in case anyone wanted to continue this discussion, which is exactly like beating a dead horse, and has been shown time and time again that there is no TDP gap...

Some additional data analysis then.

I took 63 barbarians ranging from 10th to 150th and averaged their circle, total ranks, and total tdp's. Here are the results:

Average Circle 80.4516129
Average Ranks 11291.04839
Average TDP's 23209.30645

I took 56 moonies ranging from 8 to 150th and did the same thing.

Average Circle 80.40350877
Average Ranks 9127.333333
Average TDP's 21177.82456

53 clerics ranging from 10 to 131:

Average Circle 73.88888889
Average Ranks 8361.018519
Average TDP's 17173.7963

54 warmies ranging from 18 to 150:

Average Circle 71.74545455
Average Ranks 8781.254545
Average TDP's 17230.25455

Sorting the Total TDP's data from largest to smallest and deleting the records at the bottom of those lists until the average circle was roughly 90 for each guild yields the following:

Barbarians: 50 records ranging from 45th circle to 150th

Average Circle 90.23529412
Average Ranks 12828.39216
Average TDP's 27086.07843

Cleric: 36 records ranging from 50th to 131

Average Circle 90.10810811
Average Ranks 10379.75676
Average TDP's 22278.59459

Moonies: 48 records ranging from 32nd to 150th

Average Circle 90.6122449
Average Ranks 10403.55102
Average TDP's 24353.81633

Warmies: 32 records ranging from 60th to 150th

Average Circle 90.0
Average Ranks 11656.48485
Average TDP's 24161.51515

I'm not a math major, nor a statistician, so I'm sure my methods are flawed in some small way, but across the board, I'm not seeing a "tdp gap"




________________________________________

Clerics are on the sectual radar.

Just to be clear - I didn't do it. Not sure who did, but it wasn't me.

- GM Raesh

Not worth discussing, which is why this is once again in the equine cemetary.

The GM's have tested and shown there is no gap, my experience with 6 barbarians, 2 warmages, 2 moonies has shown there is no tdp gap. Data taken from actual characters other than my own have shown there is no tdp gap.

Even though I circle chased my barbarian and my moonie in TF to 150th, my moonie got there first... 13 months for my moonie and 15 months for the barbarian, but my barbarian had more tdp's.

I understand that a lot of young to mid-range barbarians THINK there is a tdp gap because they can't sit at the warmie guild and script magics all day long, but there isn't. Some of the higher level barbarians have chimed in that they think there is a gap also. Meh... believe what you want to believe. I know there isn't one.

Barbarian:

Total ranks gained: 19321
Total TDPs gained from ranks: 35914

Moonie:

Total ranks gained: 15381
Total TDPs gained from ranks: 35010

A little over a year after I reached 150th on the barbarian, and about a year and a half after I hit it with my moonie.

________________________________________

Clerics are on the sectual radar.

Just to be clear - I didn't do it. Not sure who did, but it wasn't me.

- GM Raesh

>>The GM's have tested and shown there is no gap, my experience with 6 barbarians, 2 warmages, 2 moonies has shown there is no tdp gap. Data taken from actual characters other than my own have shown there is no tdp gap.

Allow me to illustrate the problem.

http://www.italian-renaissance-art.com/image-files/raphael_plato_aristotle.jpg

-Armifer
"In our days truth is taken to result from the effacing of the living man behind the mathematical structures that think themselves out in him, rather than he be thinking them." - Emmanuel Levinas

>>http://www.italian-renaissance-art.com/image-files/raphael_plato_aristotle.jpg

Dibs on Plato.

>>DGUTHRIE2, where did you get that data? If it was on the Stat comparison list that Mazrian? put together you would have to exclude duplicate entries of the same character otherwise it would be scewed by that one character. Which that list doesn't do and reports false readings.<<

Yes, this data was compiled using Mazrian's sheet. No, I did not exclude multiple records of the same character because in most cases, those characters were checking in at different circle levels.

I reworked the data, excluding duplicate character entries and taking only the latest update. Here are the results:

Barbarians: 29 records. 10th to 150th

Avg Circle: 78.93
Avg Ranks: 10054.43
Total TDP: 22039.03

Clerics: 23 records. 35th to 131st

Avg Circle: 77.67
Avg Ranks: 9168.42
Total TDP: 18944.54

Moonies: 43 records. 10th to 150th. *Top 3 moonies are from TF*

Avg Circle: 78.99
Avg Ranks: 9145.86
Total TDP: 20652.70

Warmies: 31 records. 42nd to 150th

Avg Circle: 78.78
Avg Ranks: 9463.97
Total TDP: 19922.16

Just trying to debunk that myth that keeps popping up every now and then about this fictitious, non-existent, TDP gap.


________________________________________

Clerics are on the sectual radar.

Just to be clear - I didn't do it. Not sure who did, but it wasn't me.

- GM Raesh

>>The GM's have tested and shown there is no gap, my experience with 6 barbarians, 2 warmages, 2 moonies has shown there is no tdp gap. Data taken from actual characters other than my own have shown there is no tdp gap.

The GM's test does not include time. Many 100+ Barbarians spent 10+ years getting to where they are because they spent extra time getting there. The GM test was only based off circle and tdps. How can you put forth a valid test of tdps based on circle without calculating time? Although it's of extremely little importance to me right now, that's the major flaw I see when people just throw this test around to prove an invalid point.

You cannot compare an already established 100+ Barbarian's tdp's to a 100+ War Mage's tdps especially when (and many are forging Barbs) those Barbs spent wayyyy longer to get there and thus, their tdps are able to match those gained from the magic user. 100th circle in 4 years vs 100th circle in 10 years? Assuming both did an equal amount of training it's pretty much a no-brainer that the 10 year one would have more tdps regardless of guild.

TF can be an entirely different beast since time is not much of a factor when you can stay combat scripting 24/7. When you play in TF you have to consider the differences.

Many 'average' Barbarians don't script 24/7 in combat like a TF Barb would. They participate in events. They get married and spend time with their spouse/family. They train other non-combat skills. They quest. They hang out in social areas. These are all activities done that slow their advancement with tdps, whereas Bob the magic user still has 3+ magic skills locked indefinitely through out a lot of social activities.

I wouldn't have even posted in this thread if it wasn't for this:

>>Some of the higher level barbarians have chimed in that they think there is a gap also. Meh... believe what you want to believe. I know there isn't one.

I'm just tired of seeing these same examples with the same flawed concept. I went over this entire scenario with you before and you admitted that your testing was flawed because of scripting non-stop in TF, where Barbs DO eliminate a tdp advantage by remaining in combat (omg really? all because of combat???).

---

Individuals, families, countries, continents are destroyed at the heavy hand of Vinjince.

-GM Abasha

>>The reason large groups of magic-training mages are deathly silent and nearly unresponsive isn't because they're all AFK.

Okay now I'm curious, why are they silent and nearly unresponsive then?

I've trained more than a few little magic using characters and have never had a problem being perfectly social while my script chugs along.

---

Ogdaro
"Take chances and see what you can get away with, it only costs you a favor or two if you mess up." -Issus

Thanks DGUTHRIE2 for running that test again, it does look like it pulled in the numbers quite a bit which is what I would think it would do.

Vinjince does have a good point that probably a few or even more than a few Barbarians train specifically for forging (myself included) which can scew the results. It's a difficult test to run fairly...I'm not worried about it as I think it's up to the individual to decide how efficient they want to train to gain more TDPs.


Forged Weapons:
http://www.elanthipedia.com/wiki/User:Codiax

Vinjince, those numbers are not my numbers from TF. There were only 2 barbarians from TF included. I understand your vehemence. I understand the concept of time spent training. The data is what the data is. I can't change it, I can only work with what's available. I know you won't be convinced, and I don't really care if you or anyone else is. If you would like to prove there's a tdp gap, then do so. The problem is, you can't.

The biggest advantage that barbarians have while training is the fact that nearly ALL of their skills they train in combat are either primary or secondary. Warmies also have a large combat requirement, but shield, armor, and evasion are all tertiary skills for them. This is why there is no tdp gap. Skillset placement.

Sorry you're so frustrated with my assertions, but just because you can't gain ranks in magic skills doesn't mean that you're losing the tdp battle against a warmage.

I'm not a big one to do any testing, mainly because I just don't care. I also know there are others out there like Copernicus and Hanryu that thrive on crunching numbers and testing stuff. I play the game to have fun, and not to figure out what my pulse size is if I raise my intel instead of wisdom, or figure out what the crit rate is on a halberd vs. a pike. I do like to track my tdp's and ranks though, which is why it bugs me when people think because barbarians can't learn magics that they are somehow short changed.

Sorry for rambling, and sorry to disappoint so many fellow barbarians. I won't bring it up again since it appears we'll have to agree to disagree.

________________________________________

Clerics are on the sectual radar.

Just to be clear - I didn't do it. Not sure who did, but it wasn't me.

- GM Raesh

>>No, I can. It'll just take an unnecessary amount of effort and time. However, what I have proven with just logic is that the GM stat sheet can't be used for this argument. Agreed?<<

I don't think I can agree. I don't know what the GM stat sheet is, but the data that Mazrian collected I believe is valid data. This is also part of the reason why I don't do any testing. Really, I just don't care enough to bother.

10 years in DR isn't really 10 years anyway. It's absolutely a function of how many hours were spent actually training. As has been stated before, some people can play 2 hours every day, some can only play 2 hours once or twice a week. Some have the luxury of playing while at work, or while in school, or whatever, so I understand your argument that it all boils down to TIME. This is why I can get my barbarian to 150th circle in just over a year. Nobody gets to 150th in prime without spending an extraordinary amount of time training. Hours, not years.

Every character in every guild is completely and totally different based on how much time they spend, how well they learn how to script, how well the player understands the circling requirements, how efficient they want to be, what the character emphasis is going to be... is it numbers or is it roleplaying that doesn't necessarily lead to circles, tdp's, etc?

There are no means available to the user by which we can track the total amount of time logged into DR. Simutronics might have those records, and if you could actually get your hands on that kind of thing, you'd still see wide variances based on some of the variables I mentioned above.

________________________________________

Clerics are on the sectual radar.

Just to be clear - I didn't do it. Not sure who did, but it wasn't me.

- GM Raesh

I made a post but forget it, this would go on and on. It's not that big of a deal for us, and new systems are coming out anyway. Regardless of how everything is, I think Barbs are a great guild and I'll always enjoy playing them. :D

---

Individuals, families, countries, continents are destroyed at the heavy hand of Vinjince.

-GM Abasha

<< DGUTHRIE2

Basing TDPs on circle, and claiming there is no 'gap' is one of the most dishonest ways of trying to make that claim.

The GMs have made 'circles' to be as close as they can across the board, to try to make it fair. They've done a fairly decent job of it. So seeing a big difference based on circles isnt going to happen, unless you have people that dont actively train to circle. Those would be your outliers anyway.

If you want to do something more accurate, compare time played. Take 5 different guilds, run them each for 6 months straight in TF, non-stop scripting. Then compare. Then do it again at 1 year.

Your point is moot otherwise.

Falker

>>As a quick aside, currently Moon Mages need to be in combat to learn PM, since PD is the only spell that trains it decently.<<

At over 1400 PM, I've never used PD with my moonie because he's never been in combat. SOD and Shadowling are the only spells I've used since 500 ranks or so.


________________________________________

Clerics are on the sectual radar.

Just to be clear - I didn't do it. Not sure who did, but it wasn't me.

- GM Raesh

>>If you want to do something more accurate, compare time played. Take 5 different guilds, run them each for 6 months straight in TF, non-stop scripting. Then compare. Then do it again at 1 year.<<

I agree. It would be an interesting test. I just don't have the desire to do it. I run 3 accounts in TF as it is, and I'll probably be going down to 2 accounts in the near future.

There would be a couple of issues involved with a test such as this. Primarily, the experience and scripting ability of the player. I could script a barbarian, warmage, empath, and paladin very easily, having played each of those guilds to well over 100th circle. I could not script a cleric, ranger, or thief well at all, even though I've played those guilds. I scripted a moonie to 150th, but I definitely wouldn't want to attempt that in this kind of test as I am the world's worst moon mage ever. I know nothing about the guild except how to travel the ways and open moongates.

AS Vinjince mentioned earlier, a test such as this would take too much time and effort. Having different people run the different characters may be a solution, but there would have to be clearly defined rules and training plans to follow to compensate for differences in scripting ability.

It's a never-ending point of contention among many, which is why it's here in the Equine Cemetary.


________________________________________

Clerics are on the sectual radar.

Just to be clear - I didn't do it. Not sure who did, but it wasn't me.

- GM Raesh

>>Both of you are a lot more patient than me, then. Locking PM at 460+ ranks with SoD or Shadowling makes me want to pull my hair out.

Yeah I was about to say, PD does lock PM fast, but it locks TM slow. I use a variety of spells to achieve strong learning rates in all of my magic skills.

<<Locking PM at 460+ ranks with SoD or Shadowling makes me want to pull my hair out.

You are doing it wrong. Definitely wrong. Adjust your script a bit. If you're prepping, charging, focusing, casting try changing it up a bit. Do charge, focus, prep and cast instead. But you are clearly doing it wrong if you're having issues training PM with SoD at only 460+.

---

You hear the ghostly voice of Katralyn say, "I have plenty of idea."

You are Peak Destroyer Devoria Myth, Protector of Ilithi, an Elf.

>Much more than your Moon Mage has to be in combat to learn TM. Mine got to 350 TM without entering combat more than a handful of times. Just classes.

I promise you I can get a Barbarian to 350 weapon with just classes. I could even do it with a Barb with 200 defenses. Or zero.

>I'd like to see you get a Barbarian to 100th without entering combat.

I'd like to see you get a War Mage to 100th without entering combat. Since after all, they don't need it for TM and that's all that matters, right?

>They won't. Trust me on this.

They will, trust me on this. Tert skills will always be lower (thus pulling down the average) unless you intentionally stop training primary skills. Is a difference of 150 the magical cut off for making your point? Does it matter what the % difference is, or no? Next you may as well criticize Rangers for having more Evasion than TM.

>Citing examples of well-trained characters doesn't get you anywhere

It shows that player choice and skill is at least as important as guild. Which kind of gets me everywhere on this particular topic.

~ Kougen

<<I'd like to see you get a Barbarian to 100th without entering combat.

What on earth would be the point of this? Combat is hands-down the most efficient use of your training time. Sitting in classes at the WM guild getting taught TM is a terrible way to gain tdp's. Terrible, just terrible.

I don't know why you're even trying to contend that a script-o-mage sitting still can out-gain an efficient barbarian in TDP's. There's just noway.

I really doubt a script that doesn't include combat is going to compare with a script that does use combat. You can just move so many skills effectively by at least dipping into combat. I don't know if there's a gap or not, but I know whatever point Futility was trying to make about a mage being able to get to 100 without combat is stupid.

Also death isn't some great risk. You can depart in a script and get yourself up and learning some lore/survivals again 10 seconds later.

>>Vocals, FA, scholarship, teaching, climbing, swimming, foraging, perception(via foraging), appraisal, mech, and all 5 magic skills(one through teaching)

How do you train Scholarship, Teaching and that 1 extra magic skill(TM) realistically without having an alt grouped with you the entire time? Foraging, perception, appraisal and mech I'll give, but a lot of that stuff(especially climbing and swimming) are hard to train in tandem with each other because they're location based and can only be performed one at a time usually.

In contrast to combat where you're training defense skills(3) simultaneously with vocals(1) and as many armor skills(let's say only 4 out of the 7) as you like, in addition to both stealth skills(2), perception(1)/stalking via HUNT, all magic skills(5), appraisal(1), escaping(1)(in the case of some creatures) as many weapon skills as you can manage(let's say only 5), skinning(1), mech lore(1) if you're a pyramid junkie and also multi opponent(1).

3+1+4+2+1+5+1+1+5+1+1+1 = 26 skills that can be realistically trained in combat, 21 if you're an NMU(but then again if you're an NMU you'll probably pick up more weapons to compensate). These numbers can fluctuate from person to person because of training style and also because of guild choice, as some guilds have access to training different skills in combat even besides the MU vs NMU comparison. As an example, I usually keep at least one other instrument skill in high mindstates while in combat in addition to Musical Theory whereas a Thief would be able to train Backstab.

tl;dr Combat is still King :P

__
~Leilond
http://www.elanthipedia.com/wiki/Leilond
http://soundsoftime.bravehost.com