Does shield affect bash?
Does shield affect bash?
Anyone tested bash with heavy(16+lbs) shields and light weapons(2-4lbs)?
Re: Does shield affect bash?
I've never seen any conclusive testing done, but it would be easy enough. Run a thousand or so bashes on a single target mob with the shield equipped, then keeping all things the same, put the shield in a pack and test again. My BMI testing was inconclusive, but just in case it does factor in, this would eliminate it as a factor.
That should give a yes/no answer. If it is found to affect bash, the extent could be tested with possibly two more tests. Let's assume you have some 2 lb weapon and a 16 lb shield. Since we know that some weapon types bash inherently better than others (clubs have a bonus, for instance) we'll want to make sure that all testing uses the same weapon type. A full test rundown could be:
1. Wield light weapon (2 lb?), keep heavy shield (16 lb?) in pack, 1000 bashes vs mob
2. Wield light weapon (2 lb?), wear heavy shield (16 lb?) wielded, 1000 bashes vs mob
-If a difference is found, then:
3. Wield heavy weapon (16 lb or same as shield), no shield equipped, 1000 bases vs mob
4. Wield heavy weapon (18 lbs or same as shield + light weapon), no shield equipped, 1000 bashes vs mob
In all cases keep your BMI the same by keeping your total worn/equipped weight equal.
Some potential concerns:
1. There may be some unknown minimum shield weight needed for the effect to show, so the heavier the shield the better for steps 1 and 2 above
2. If bash is some function of shield weight + weapon weight, then it may be desirable to run two separate sets of test for steps 3 and 4 above, the first with a large shield weight/weapon weight ratio, and the second with a smaller ratio, since if for instance their weights are just added, the effect of adding 2 lbs to a 16 lb shield may be very small and would require a larger sample size.
These are just some quick thoughts, others may have additional input. Hope this helps.
That should give a yes/no answer. If it is found to affect bash, the extent could be tested with possibly two more tests. Let's assume you have some 2 lb weapon and a 16 lb shield. Since we know that some weapon types bash inherently better than others (clubs have a bonus, for instance) we'll want to make sure that all testing uses the same weapon type. A full test rundown could be:
1. Wield light weapon (2 lb?), keep heavy shield (16 lb?) in pack, 1000 bashes vs mob
2. Wield light weapon (2 lb?), wear heavy shield (16 lb?) wielded, 1000 bashes vs mob
-If a difference is found, then:
3. Wield heavy weapon (16 lb or same as shield), no shield equipped, 1000 bases vs mob
4. Wield heavy weapon (18 lbs or same as shield + light weapon), no shield equipped, 1000 bashes vs mob
In all cases keep your BMI the same by keeping your total worn/equipped weight equal.
Some potential concerns:
1. There may be some unknown minimum shield weight needed for the effect to show, so the heavier the shield the better for steps 1 and 2 above
2. If bash is some function of shield weight + weapon weight, then it may be desirable to run two separate sets of test for steps 3 and 4 above, the first with a large shield weight/weapon weight ratio, and the second with a smaller ratio, since if for instance their weights are just added, the effect of adding 2 lbs to a 16 lb shield may be very small and would require a larger sample size.
These are just some quick thoughts, others may have additional input. Hope this helps.
Re: Does shield affect bash?
What kind of mob would be the right one for this kind of test? Bash is level dependent right? Saplings too easy... Mountain lions too difficult... but thats not all level right? Some just have more db than others? Or is level only factored in on the side of the person doing the bashing?
Re: Does shield affect bash?
In many ways mobs function the same as characters, in that their derived stats are based on level. So yes, a higher-level mob will have higher OB, DB, and PB than a lower-level.
Different mob types differ in certain ways, however. It is well known that Tree-type mobs have lower defense than others, though the exact mechanism for this has not yet been tested. Saplings are level 10, and mountain lions level 25, but the difference in defense between the two is probably greater than levels alone would suggest, since Animals don't suffer (to my knowledge) the same defensive malus that Trees do.
On the other hand, the various humanoid mobs are not only level-dependent, but can also add eq bonuses just like players if they are wearing items.
For simplicity and ease of access, I would try testing vs something like ancient trees (level 25). They should be easy enough to bash that it won't take an inordinate amount of bash attempts to get statistically significant pass rates, but high enough level that you will probably miss enough bases to get a valid fail rate. The most important thing is just keeping all things the same.
Different mob types differ in certain ways, however. It is well known that Tree-type mobs have lower defense than others, though the exact mechanism for this has not yet been tested. Saplings are level 10, and mountain lions level 25, but the difference in defense between the two is probably greater than levels alone would suggest, since Animals don't suffer (to my knowledge) the same defensive malus that Trees do.
On the other hand, the various humanoid mobs are not only level-dependent, but can also add eq bonuses just like players if they are wearing items.
For simplicity and ease of access, I would try testing vs something like ancient trees (level 25). They should be easy enough to bash that it won't take an inordinate amount of bash attempts to get statistically significant pass rates, but high enough level that you will probably miss enough bases to get a valid fail rate. The most important thing is just keeping all things the same.
Re: Does shield affect bash?
The stats teacher in me was curious to see just how many bashes you'd need to get a decent estimate of a bash probability.
The number of bashes = .9604/(margin of error). (Assuming worst case that the probability is 0.5, and a 95% confidence that we are right). So, for an estimate that is likely within 1% of the true probability, we'll need 9604 bashes. But, for an estimate within 5% of the true probability, we'll need only 385 bashes. 1000 bashes will allow you to estimate the true probability to within about 3%.
So if in your 1000 bashes, you find that you bash 390 times without the shield (p = 390/1000 = .39) your margin of error would be around plus or minus 3%. If you bash say 410 times with the shield, you won't have good evidence yet of a difference in bashing.
Now that my nerdiness just leveled up, I'm going to go write a HW assignment for my students using this as an example.
Edit: All of this was assuming that you follow Thuvia's description of running a proper experiment. Without that, any numbers are of course meaningless.
The number of bashes = .9604/(margin of error). (Assuming worst case that the probability is 0.5, and a 95% confidence that we are right). So, for an estimate that is likely within 1% of the true probability, we'll need 9604 bashes. But, for an estimate within 5% of the true probability, we'll need only 385 bashes. 1000 bashes will allow you to estimate the true probability to within about 3%.
So if in your 1000 bashes, you find that you bash 390 times without the shield (p = 390/1000 = .39) your margin of error would be around plus or minus 3%. If you bash say 410 times with the shield, you won't have good evidence yet of a difference in bashing.
Now that my nerdiness just leveled up, I'm going to go write a HW assignment for my students using this as an example.
Edit: All of this was assuming that you follow Thuvia's description of running a proper experiment. Without that, any numbers are of course meaningless.