Having found a way to suppress my base INT even further, I increased the difference between the two INT "treatments" to 60 (54 INT and 114 INT). As the resist rate for 121 INT could have been floored (presumably at 5%), maybe a 7-INT decrease would result in some increase in resist rate. The following dot plots summarize the distribution of the observed data visually:
The criterion I used last time to determine a difference between two cases, the number of Drain values set "far enough" apart from the bulk of the data (over the total number of samples in each case), doesn't quite work this time, in part because it is kind of difficult to define the "bulk" of the data for the 54-INT case. (It appears that there are more resists in general by an alternative criterion of number of Drain values below 144, though, and more for the 54-INT case than the 114-INT case.)
Instead, I probably am better off relying on the two-sample t-test to demonstrate statistical significance. The sample means for 54 INT and 114 INT are 154.28 and 191.33, respectively, and the 95% confidence interval for the difference of means is (12.213, 61.898), so the evidence, taken together (including that in the last post), provides strong support for the contention that INT affects Drain accuracy (provided that all the assumptions I stated last time hold, and why wouldn't they?), specifically that increasing INT increases its accuracy (in the form of fewer resists).
The most obvious practical implications of this finding is that the "conventional wisdom" that holds prioritizing dark skill above magic accuracy above recast reduction for Drain (and Aspir by close analogy) should incorporate INT, arguably before recast reduction. Where the benefit of reducing recast timers for Drain and Aspir is not fully realized (more often than you think) and the resist rate is suspect, the opportunity cost of recast reduction is usually additional INT, and it might not be a cost worth incurring depending on the actual trade-off.
No comments:
Post a Comment