Doubleshot vs Ranged Power

[woq]

Just phrase it as "Epics in 10s, give it a moment for debuffs to stack up first" so then it's a cooperative goal instead of a competitive one.

Works great IME; they get to see bigger numbers, moments get synched better, and you get your time to build a bit of buffer

Also feels really bad to click your boosts and get knocked down for 8s b/c the idiot next to you pulled the boss...

Coordination, in my mmo?

Nyehh!

 

[Marshal_Lannes]

I encourage you (and everyone) to do the math for yourself (which you clearly didn't do).

90% of people don't do math. 90% of people actually hate math. Thankfully, there is an invention that has made human math obsolete. There is a subset of players on the forums who were good at math and then think they have some authority. They don't. AI is better at math than they are. I have already demonstrated this. The very purpose of this thread shows there is no consensus among humans on RP vs DS. For my build, and I started by saying everyone should put in the work and use the tools that eliminate the need for math, I have solved the problem. If you still want to whistle past the graveyard, be my guest. You don't understand the Socratic method. I encourage you to ask AI and engage in a conversation with it so you can.

The reason so many companies underachieved expectations with AI is a failure to do exactly that.

This is a fascinating topic beyond the scope of this thread. In a one-sentence summary, many companies appointed someone to "get them up on AI". Usually, that person had no idea what they were doing, generated some graphs that showed they were AI invested (mostly through incorporating Copilot into emails) and the upper managers nodded their heads because they don't understand AI either.

I think AI coming up with a better build for you personally is a reasonable goal that seems very achievable. Expecting it always be right is kind of a ridiculous expectation.

AI is always correct when given proper data. We are in the frontier stage when that data is being inputed and intrepreted by AI. AI has been ridiculously helpful to me in many games (Hearts of Iron IV, Manor Lords, DDO, Crusader Kings, World of Warships Legends, to name a few.)

 

[Oliphant]

Even if you don't like numbers, consider reasoning at least.

 

[DBZ]

Even if you don't like numbers, consider reasoning at least.

You expect logic and reason here whoahh

 

[Ozz]

For some gear options,

Essence of Dark Diversion is a popular augment option for -20% Enhancement (or -22% Enh via Ring of Unnatural Accuracy if Dex-based), Epic Quiver of Alacrity has Stealth Strike for -15% Insightful as well (also Miserable Rebellion as well for -25% Ins if ya have it).

Thanks, just made the dark diversion so now have -80 which with a good tank should be enough

 

[SpartanKiller13]

Coordination, in my mmo?

Nyehh!

The other thing I do is keybind "assist target" and use it on the raid boss to see who the current aggro target is whenever there's a switch (I recommend all raid leaders to do so, and raiders in general TBH). After the second time pulling I'll start naming names "hey XYZ did you remember to turn off your defender stance?", and after the third I get real sarcastic like "aight since XYZ is pulling, make sure to not stand next to them so you don't get squished by the boss" lol

Ideally you end up with a Y-shape where the top two legs are the tank & the puller, and the rest of the party is at the opposite side XD

90% of people don't do math. 90% of people actually hate math. Thankfully, there is an invention that has made human math obsolete. There is a subset of players on the forums who were good at math and then think they have some authority. They don't. AI is better at math than they are. I have already demonstrated this. The very purpose of this thread shows there is no consensus among humans on RP vs DS. For my build, and I started by saying everyone should put in the work and use the tools that eliminate the need for math, I have solved the problem. If you still want to whistle past the graveyard, be my guest. You don't understand the Socratic method. I encourage you to ask AI and engage in a conversation with it so you can.

PEMDAS is 5th-grade math from what I can tell, I'm pretty sure a lot more than 10% of D&D/DDO players can handle that much (somewhere around 72% of US adults 16-65 are at or above the Numeracy level 2 per the PIAAC, and I expect a disproportionately higher percentage of MMO players to be represented there for obvious reasons).

I mean if the math AI did was correct your statement might be useful, but the math is very easy to check. And checking shows the AI produced the wrong result. The AI is wrong, I have demonstrated this. Thus, it's not better than anything lol.

The tools do not eliminate the need for math if the tools produce a factually incorrect result.

Not sure what pattern-matching you want other than a "you're right! Let me explain further" response like an AI, but I'm pretty sure I nailed the Socratic method to disprove your argument. Whistle all ya want lol.

AI is always correct when given proper data. We are in the frontier stage when that data is being inputed and intrepreted by AI.

A lot closer to true, but this is exactly the issue with AI used for DDO. There is insufficient data and too much inaccurate data (both obsolete and from threads like this) to accurately model DDO.

AI has been ridiculously helpful to me in many games (Hearts of Iron IV, Manor Lords, DDO, Crusader Kings, World of Warships Legends, to name a few.)

AI has been ridiculously helpful to me to (for editing documents etc) but that doesn't make it a one-stop full solution to everything everywhere.

Thanks, just made the dark diversion so now have -80 which with a good tank should be enough

Just be careful with Inexorable Advance and with bad tanks XD

 

[Marshal_Lannes]

A lot closer to true, but this is exactly the issue with AI used for DDO. There is insufficient data and too much inaccurate data (both obsolete and from threads like this) to accurately model DDO.

There is insufficient data to generate a "give me a SWF Barbrian with a hand ax build". We've already established that. My math is correct. I told you, I already know what is better between RP and DS. It has been solved. Thanks for your input.

 

[Ozz]

Just be careful with Inexorable Advance and with bad tanks XD

Even with a bad tank I can usualy servive but I normaly only run guild raids so I know how good our tanks are

 

[LurkingVeteran]

...

AI is always correct when given proper data. We are in the frontier stage when that data is being inputed and intrepreted by AI.

Wow, that is optimistic. The high end of AI models are usually less bad at mathematical modeling than the average person, but they do make mistakes. Usually the problem is usually that they overly simplify or mistunderstand the problem (as they did here), but they can also make calculation errors.

LLMs are stochastic models, maybe you should read up on that, because supervising AI output is key to using them effectively.

 

[norriskwondo]

Whenever I plan to play a ranged character I've always assumed that Doubleshot and Ranged Power were of equal value when working out the build. But I wanted to ask if this was actually the case. If they aren't of equal value, could you also explain why you think one is better than the other?

I craft double shot into my ranged weapons so there's that

 

[Frieling Slyhand]

90% of people don't do math. 90% of people actually hate math. Thankfully, there is an invention that has made human math obsolete. There is a subset of players on the forums who were good at math and then think they have some authority. They don't. AI is better at math than they are. I have already demonstrated this. The very purpose of this thread shows there is no consensus among humans on RP vs DS. For my build, and I started by saying everyone should put in the work and use the tools that eliminate the need for math, I have solved the problem. If you still want to whistle past the graveyard, be my guest. You don't understand the Socratic method. I encourage you to ask AI and engage in a conversation with it so you can.

This is a fascinating topic beyond the scope of this thread. In a one-sentence summary, many companies appointed someone to "get them up on AI". Usually, that person had no idea what they were doing, generated some graphs that showed they were AI invested (mostly through incorporating Copilot into emails) and the upper managers nodded their heads because they don't understand AI either.

AI is always correct when given proper data. We are in the frontier stage when that data is being inputed and intrepreted by AI. AI has been ridiculously helpful to me in many games (Hearts of Iron IV, Manor Lords, DDO, Crusader Kings, World of Warships Legends, to name a few.)

For AI to do what you claim, it woujd need to know the underlying game mechanic and system, something only the Devs know. Otherwise all AI is doing is skimming past posts of the people in this thread and a few others and then making guesses. I would rather listen to people like Ying than some knock off robot trying to be Ying but with absolutely no real game experience. You learn the game by experimenting and seeing what works or doesn’t and seeing how various build choices work together.

Finally, most really good and complex questions do not have a simple answer. There are too many variables. That’s where a human again is better because we can appreciate nuance in ways a computer program cannot. It can’t live in ambiguity the way we can.

AI can give a beginner some direction and help them build a serviceable player—certainly better than the pre-made paths, but not anything OP

 

[Marshal_Lannes]

Executive Summary​

This analysis examines the optimal investment between Ranged Power (RP) and Doubleshot (DS) for an imbue-heavy ranged build in Dungeons & Dragons Online. Using a baseline of 40 imbue dice, with high RP and DS values, the study considers both normal damage and the impact of critical hits, including variations in crit range and multiplier.

Key Findings:

1. Early investment: RP provides the strongest marginal return until its value roughly equals DS.
2. Late investment: Once RP ≥ DS, DS provides higher marginal returns for imbue damage.
3. Critical hits: Increasing crit range, crit chance, or crit multiplier does not change the RP vs DS breakpoint; crits scale both stats proportionally.
4. Crossover point: For imbue-heavy builds, the exact mathematical break-even occurs when:
   
   RP ≈ DS

This provides a clear rule of thumb for prioritizing stats in late-game ranged builds.

---

Mathematical Analysis​

Damage Model​

Let:

• ID = number of imbue dice
• RP = Ranged Power (as % damage increase)
• DS = Doubleshot (as % projectile increase)
• p = crit chance (0–1)
• m = crit multiplier

Expected imbue damage per projectile:

D=ID×(1+RP/100)×((1−p)+p⋅m)D = ID \times (1 + RP/100) \times \big((1 - p) + p \cdot m\big)D=ID×(1+RP/100)×((1−p)+p⋅m)
Including Doubleshot (extra projectiles):

Effective Imbue Damage (eID)=ID×(1+RP/100)×(1+DS/100)×[1+p(m−1)]\text{Effective Imbue Damage (eID)} = ID \times (1 + RP/100) \times (1 + DS/100) \times [1 + p(m - 1)]Effective Imbue Damage (eID)=ID×(1+RP/100)×(1+DS/100)×[1+p(m−1)]

---

Marginal Gains​

1. +1 RP:

∂eID∂RP∝(1+DS/100)⋅[1+p(m−1)]\frac{\partial \text{eID}}{\partial RP} \propto (1 + DS/100) \cdot [1 + p(m-1)]∂RP∂eID∝(1+DS/100)⋅[1+p(m−1)]

1. +1 DS:

∂eID∂DS∝(1+RP/100)⋅[1+p(m−1)]\frac{\partial \text{eID}}{\partial DS} \propto (1 + RP/100) \cdot [1 + p(m-1)]∂DS∂eID∝(1+RP/100)⋅[1+p(m−1)]

1. Breakpoint Condition: Set the two marginal gains equal:

(1+DS/100)=(1+RP/100)⇒RP=DS(1 + DS/100) = (1 + RP/100) \quad \Rightarrow \quad RP = DS(1+DS/100)=(1+RP/100)⇒RP=DS

This condition is independent of crit range, crit chance, or crit multiplier.

---

Illustrative Examples​

Baseline:​

ID	RP	DS	eID
40	200	100	400

+50 RP:​

40×(1+250/100)×(1+100/100)=480 eID40 \times (1 + 250/100) \times (1 + 100/100) = 480 \, \text{eID}40×(1+250/100)×(1+100/100)=480eID

+50 DS:​

40×(1+200/100)×(1+150/100)=500 eID40 \times (1 + 200/100) \times (1 + 150/100) = 500 \, \text{eID}40×(1+200/100)×(1+150/100)=500eID
Observation: At high RP, DS gives the larger marginal gain.

---

Effect of Crit Profiles​

• Crit Range: e.g., 17–20 vs 19–20
• Crit Multiplier: ×4 vs ×5
• Crit Chance: 20–40%

All of these scale the term [1 + p(m-1)], which multiplies both RP and DS equally.

Conclusion: Changes to crit profile do not move the RP vs DS breakpoint.

---

Conclusion​

1. Early-game / low RP: Prioritize Ranged Power; increases per-projectile damage dominate.
2. Late-game / high RP: Once RP ≈ DS, additional Doubleshot produces higher marginal gains for imbue-heavy damage.
3. Crit scaling: Do not alter the relative value of RP vs DS for imbue scaling.
4. Strategic guideline: For an imbue-focused ranged build:
   • RP is the initial priority stat
   • DS becomes optimal after RP ≥ DS

This provides a mathematically rigorous and crit-inclusive rule for optimizing stat investment in late-game DDO ranged builds.

 

[vryxnr]

That AI breakdown seems to be including crits in imbue damage, when in reality imbues do not crit (other than very specific imbues procced from spells/eldritch blasts, which then scale via spellpower).

 

[akiraproject24]

I pulled the boss of a tank this weekend on a shuri thrower.

I'm sitting at -127% ranged threat.

I ran like a scared cat. In circles.

I too went beyond -100 and was informed that -100 is actually better than -117 or any number higher into the negative.

When I asked why, I was told because DDO. I trust said individuals knowledge on game mechanics.

I know there are plenty of smarty pants on here too. Can you guys elaborate on this maybe?

 

[vryxnr]

...
Can you guys elaborate on this maybe?

Threat reduction, even when it states it is for all sources, does not actually apply to all sources of damage. Early in the introduction of imbues, there was much guesswork. One of those guesses was that negative threat rolled over after -100 so that anything beyond that was actually generating again. Very few actually did detailed testing, but some did.

I was one who did detailed testing, knowing how much threat a tank created with a single intimidate and not doing anything else to generate more, then with -100% reduction, and with more, doing basic damage only with no extras to ensure it worked as a baseline (exceeding the effective intim threat in damage by 2 orders of magnitude so as to eliminate the possibility of 99% reduction instead of 100%), then resetting the instance to eliminate any contamination, and one by one adding other sources back in to see how each worked, with a reset between each new source, and keeping track of damage vs intim effective threat to see if/when aggro would be stolen, etc, etc, etc.

I did not notice any rollover when past -100% threat.

Threat reduction works fully on base damage.
Threat reduction works fully on sneak attack damage.
Threat reduction works fully on special attacks that do/multiply base damage

Threat reduction does not seem to apply at all to imbues.
Threat reduction does not seem to apply at all to extra damage procs from ED stances like Prism
Threat reduction does not seem to apply at all to extra damage or procs from epic moments like Inexorable Advance.
Threat reduction does not seem to apply at all to extra weapon damage such as Holy +6d6 good, etc.
Threat reduction does not seem to apply at all to extra damage from special attacks.
Threat reduction does not seem to apply at all to item procs (dripping with magma, etc)

Thus even with -100% or more negative threat, builds with lots of imbue dice, and/or during bursts with epic moments in full swing, still generate threat and can potentially pull aggro.

My initial testing was done over a year ago, and I spent a few hours doing it, yet still didn't test every possible scenario. I have not noticed any major changes since then, but that doesn't mean there haven't been any (sometimes things change and are not mentioned in release notes). Because doing tests like this can take so long to do, so I'm not inclined to re-test unless/until some major changes happen.

 

[misterski]

AI is always correct when given proper data. We are in the frontier stage when that data is being inputed and intrepreted by AI. AI has been ridiculously helpful to me in many games (Hearts of Iron IV, Manor Lords, DDO, Crusader Kings, World of Warships Legends, to name a few.)

FFS hallucinations are a well known "feature' of LLMs, even with the best data.

 

[Lacci]

90% of people don't do math. 90% of people actually hate math.

85% of people claiming such percentages just make up these numbers to reinforce their point.

 

[akiraproject24]

Threat reduction, even when it states it is for all sources, does not actually apply to all sources of damage. Early in the introduction of imbues, there was much guesswork. One of those guesses was that negative threat rolled over after -100 so that anything beyond that was actually generating again. Very few actually did detailed testing, but some did.

I was one who did detailed testing, knowing how much threat a tank created with a single intimidate and not doing anything else to generate more, then with -100% reduction, and with more, doing basic damage only with no extras to ensure it worked as a baseline (exceeding the effective intim threat in damage by 2 orders of magnitude so as to eliminate the possibility of 99% reduction instead of 100%), then resetting the instance to eliminate any contamination, and one by one adding other sources back in to see how each worked, with a reset between each new source, and keeping track of damage vs intim effective threat to see if/when aggro would be stolen, etc, etc, etc.

I did not notice any rollover when past -100% threat.

Threat reduction works fully on base damage.
Threat reduction works fully on sneak attack damage.
Threat reduction works fully on special attacks that do/multiply base damage

Threat reduction does not seem to apply at all to imbues.
Threat reduction does not seem to apply at all to extra damage procs from ED stances like Prism
Threat reduction does not seem to apply at all to extra damage or procs from epic moments like Inexorable Advance.
Threat reduction does not seem to apply at all to extra weapon damage such as Holy +6d6 good, etc.
Threat reduction does not seem to apply at all to extra damage from special attacks.
Threat reduction does not seem to apply at all to item procs (dripping with magma, etc)

Thus even with -100% or more negative threat, builds with lots of imbue dice, and/or during bursts with epic moments in full swing, still generate threat and can potentially pull aggro.

My initial testing was done over a year ago, and I spent a few hours doing it, yet still didn't test every possible scenario. I have not noticed any major changes since then, but that doesn't mean there haven't been any (sometimes things change and are not mentioned in release notes). Because doing tests like this can take so long to do, so I'm not inclined to re-test unless/until some major changes happen.

Impressive testing. In your opinion then, would you say there is then some benefit to going further reduction than -100?

I've found even my gimp inquisitive rogue could reliably pull aggro just as often as my "less" gimp divine inquisitive. I noticed in relentless ranged consistently pull aggro. I've been trying to give the tank a solid 10 secs to build threat, waiting on epic moment until about 1/2 of boss hp down, if aggro pulled, tumble/iud and make my way back to tank. It blows not being able to reliably put down the dps the character is capable of. Not even saying my characters are that incredible, just that generally speaking the mechanics don't allow for it. I live in random lfm world with occasional Uber guild raid runs due to a few old friends that don't mind having me along lol. Their tanks generally allow for less dps conservation but even then I see their own ranged pulling aggro quite a bit.

 

[misterski]

Impressive testing. In your opinion then, would you say there is then some benefit to going further reduction than -100?

I've found even my gimp inquisitive rogue could reliably pull aggro just as often as my "less" gimp divine inquisitive. I noticed in relentless ranged consistently pull aggro. I've been trying to give the tank a solid 10 secs to build threat, waiting on epic moment until about 1/2 of boss hp down, if aggro pulled, tumble/iud and make my way back to tank. It blows not being able to reliably put down the dps the character is capable of. Not even saying my characters are that incredible, just that generally speaking the mechanics don't allow for it. I live in random lfm world with occasional Uber guild raid runs due to a few old friends that don't mind having me along lol. Their tanks generally allow for less dps conservation but even then I see their own ranged pulling aggro quite a bit.

Meh, it's something you had to do in other games like Everquest. EQ raids had a role called the Main Assist, who would closely monitor the threat meter and then called when DPS could start DPSing and DPS classes had ways to instantly drop threat (eventually).

 

[Marshal_Lannes]

That AI breakdown seems to be including crits in imbue damage, when in reality imbues do not crit (other than very specific imbues procced from spells/eldritch blasts, which then scale via spellpower).

It does not say that. The reference to crit scaling is that it doesn't matter if your critical multiplier or range goes up, neither effects the RP/DS equation.