Dev Tracker - News, Discussions
Dev Tracker - news, discussions
I still have to find 1 instance where i wish i had less dmg to avoid some tp moves. Next, just because you cant ws doesnt make mnk white dmg superior to other jobs, it may look that way but probably because of parses, lower ws dmg makes white portion look bigger. Sc's are also no problem when you can spam the 2 more broken ws in game.
Darksparksnot said: »
I still have to find 1 instance where i wish i had less dmg to avoid some tp moves. Next, just because you cant ws doesnt make mnk white dmg superior to other jobs, it may look that way but probably because of parses, lower ws dmg makes white portion look bigger. Sc's are also no problem when you can spam the 2 more broken ws in game.
Quote:
Tier II NM: Brimboil
It will split if it takes over a certain amount of damage(~3500) in a single hit. Each copy has less HP than the NM and but also splits in the same manner. Each will cast Meteor when the main Brimboil does.
It is recommended that physical DDs auto-attack and don't use weapon skills and for magical DDs to use only low tier nukes.
It will split if it takes over a certain amount of damage(~3500) in a single hit. Each copy has less HP than the NM and but also splits in the same manner. Each will cast Meteor when the main Brimboil does.
It is recommended that physical DDs auto-attack and don't use weapon skills and for magical DDs to use only low tier nukes.
[+]
Leviathan.Vedder said: »
So....... Is anyone actually talking about what the thread means or are we all measuring *** and getting mad at others ***?
[+]
Black Belt
Leviathan.Comeatmebro said: »
Code
Line 3296: [10:07:11.138] Kin readies Stygian Sphere. Line 3317: [10:07:22.716] Kin readies Target. Line 3331: [10:07:30.517] Kin readies Stygian Cyclone. Line 3356: [10:07:42.586] Kin readies Stygian Cyclone. Line 3365: [10:07:50.308] Kin readies Interference.
<25% on my Kin today using RUN x3. A mob with reduced cast delay compared to standard, and still TPing in 8-12 seconds each time. MNKx3 takes 30 seconds to feed 3000 TP. If a mob with extra frequent casts can TP every 12 seconds or more frequently, how do you figure MNK is unable to double length between TP moves?
If my numbers are wrong, show where. If they aren't, that means that the WARs are getting TPed every 8-12 seconds when factoring mob's other AI and the MNKs cannot possibly be getting TPed any more often than every 30 seconds. That's more than double the time between TPs.
I've used MNK. I've talked with others who have used MNK. The difference is there, the math supports it. You're being obstinate, because you're too heavily invested in the idea that 'MNK BAD HURR DURR'. Make a logical argument or let it go.
Umm your kinda agreeing with me ... and then pretending not to.
Asura.Saevel said: »
NMs tend to do TP move every 9~12 seconds because their AI has them casting spells in between and then another 3s lockout time after the spell.
Leviathan.Comeatmebro said: »
The mob the WARs are fighting has 3000 tp every 6.1 seconds, guaranteeing it can WS every 7 seconds and will have full ftp each time.
Leviathan.Comeatmebro said: »
That's assuming 3 DPS. 3 MNKs giving 33 tp each will still take 10 seconds to get the mob to 1000 tp, and you can't use a range if you aren't allowing the MNKs the same courtesy. If mob isn't casting when it gets tp, that's a WS every 7 seconds for the WARs. So, it's either 7 seconds vs 10 or 7-9 vs 10-12.
If you use 2 MNKs, you're going 15 seconds vs 2 WARs still getting a WS every 7 seconds.
If you use 2 MNKs, you're going 15 seconds vs 2 WARs still getting a WS every 7 seconds.
You went from "WSing every 7 seconds" to "WSing every 9~12 seconds". That is a 30~70% difference then your predicted number. Again, TP accumulated past 3000 doesn't count, that is why the 9~12s per WS acts as a floor and the ceiling is somewhere around 30~45 seconds. You invalidated your own numbers, after all you predicted "every 7 seconds" and got values much different from that.
NM's can only do TP moves when their AI scripts get to a decision point, all the time in between that decision point doesn't matter. We'll call this is the NM WS cycle
[0s] NM does TP move, TP now 0
[2s] Required wait time passed, NM now checks if it has enough TP (3000/1000) and if so readies another TP move, if not then start casting a spell.
[2s] Starts casting Firaga IV
[6s] Casts Firaga IV
[9s] Required wait time passed, NM now checks if it has enough TP (3000/1000)
[9s] Starts readying TP move
[11s] Finish's charging and resets TP back to 0
The only points in time the NM can start reading a TP move are either after the 2s post-TP move, or after the 3s post-spell. It's not likely to have sufficient TP 2s after it use's it, so the real decision point is after the spell + lockout. Any amount of TP over 3000 is lost and any TP given during the TP charge time is also lost. This is why we can take four to six highly buffed DD's and just crush it without fear of constant TP move spam, we're feeding it 8000~10000 TP but because of those waits it doesn't matter.
My point, that you've sidestepped and straw-maned, was that mixing jobs like MNK / NIN with heavy DD's to "reduce the TP spam" doesn't work because those jobs are already feeding more then 3000TP per NM WS cycle. That is why I said
Asura.Saevel said: »
Reducing it's TP per WS from 10000TP to 8000TP (20% reduction) means nothing when the cap is 3000TP
Pure MNK / NIN setups are different because there is no TP feeding DD going past the 3K per NM WS cycle to begin with.
Asura.Saevel said: »
Now if the MNK is by themselves or even with another MNK or NIN, then it's a different story.
Asura.Saevel said: »
TP reduction only matters in small group situations.
6 man party = small group.
Hell you even agreed with me, and then misconstrued my argument to attack me.
Leviathan.Comeatmebro said: »
To elaborate, that means people claiming you won't reduce TP moves are correct in large groups.
The problem with your original theory was that you assumed the NM is sitting there waiting for you to give it TP, not doing anything else, and will immediately use that TP regardless of what's going on. And I said that's not true, the AI is such that TP only matters at specific times. Using six heavily buffed DD's doesn't yield a WS rate of 3~4 seconds but the same WS rate of 9~12s as the three heavily buffed DD's.
Leviathan.Katriina said: »
If you have to choose between a MNK/NIN/DNC to join your party in the current meta of endgame to create TP inhibition with other DDs wouldn't it be more viable to use already established jobs like DNC?
I always advocate using subtle blow in smaller groups and I consider NIN/DNC the way to go since it makes it so much easier on healers with [Migawari/Shadows/No Occult Acumen to NMs/Steps/Waltz/Clim] but this narrative is highly discouraged amongst players and only during this month it got some highlights.
MNK would be a great option as well yet when you factor DPS some people might reconsider.
If there was a rating here to use this feature: DNC>NIN>MNK
Also not many people understand how insane MNK's white damage is in situations where you can't SC or WS.
I believe the way people take sides here can be paralleled with the argument of (Zerg Fest vs SC Coordination) and since the latter takes more coordination people tend to overlook it.
In conclusion, maybe the dispute revolves around who wants to put more effort during a fight vs who wants to chill and spam.
I always advocate using subtle blow in smaller groups and I consider NIN/DNC the way to go since it makes it so much easier on healers with [Migawari/Shadows/No Occult Acumen to NMs/Steps/Waltz/Clim] but this narrative is highly discouraged amongst players and only during this month it got some highlights.
MNK would be a great option as well yet when you factor DPS some people might reconsider.
If there was a rating here to use this feature: DNC>NIN>MNK
Also not many people understand how insane MNK's white damage is in situations where you can't SC or WS.
I believe the way people take sides here can be paralleled with the argument of (Zerg Fest vs SC Coordination) and since the latter takes more coordination people tend to overlook it.
In conclusion, maybe the dispute revolves around who wants to put more effort during a fight vs who wants to chill and spam.
It depends on how big the group is and what the focus is. Heavy DD's are used because of how much damage they can dish out in a short period of time. After a certain point, which I outlined above, TP feeding ceases to matter. SC setups don't scale with group size since only one SC can be in process at any point in time.
This divides fights into a few different categories for melee's and the fight mechanics combined with group composition determine which one to use.
TP zerg fest
Coordinated SCs
Minimal TP feed
I actually use my Chango more then my various GS's because I prefer doing the SC method. My favorite setup is
(RUN / PLD)
WAR
DD COR
GEO
BRD
WHM
The WAR and COR coordinate a Upheaval -> Savage Blade -> Upheaval SC that can be augmented with other WS's if need be. Can fit a BLU in instead of the COR for CDC/Expac -> Upheaval -> Savage -> Upheaval but it's all generally the same.
I've always said MNK's melee damage is ridiculously powerful, they are basically wielding DMG200+ daggers, hitting super fast for really solid numbers. The issue with MNK is the horrible WS damage leading to horrible SC damage. When so much of our damage is coming from WS's, having a weak WS is a death sentence for any DD in serious content, outside of some very niche and "for show" setups.
[+]
For those wanting to see what a NM cycle looks like when they are casting a faster spell
[0s] NM use's TP move, TP now 0
[2s] Required wait time passed, NM now checks if it has enough TP (3000/1000) and if so readies another TP move, if not then start casting a spell.
[2s] Starts casting Holy
[3s] Casts Holy
[6s] Required wait time passed, NM now checks if it has enough TP (3000/1000)
[6s] Starts readying TP move
[8s] Finish's charging and resets TP back to 0
Usually there is another 1~1.5 second wait tossed in for their attack round since they can't start readying a TP move or casting a spell if their in the middle of an attack animation.
[0s] NM use's TP move, TP now 0
[2s] Required wait time passed, NM now checks if it has enough TP (3000/1000) and if so readies another TP move, if not then start casting a spell.
[2s] Starts casting Holy
[3s] Casts Holy
[6s] Required wait time passed, NM now checks if it has enough TP (3000/1000)
[6s] Starts readying TP move
[8s] Finish's charging and resets TP back to 0
Usually there is another 1~1.5 second wait tossed in for their attack round since they can't start readying a TP move or casting a spell if their in the middle of an attack animation.
Asura.Saevel said: »
Want to know what else causes NM's to do less TP moves, killing them quicker.
We all figured this out more than a decade ago on Kirin, Nidhogg and other RoZ/vanila end game NMs.
Abyssea peeps still catching up with their "theories".
[+]
Blazed1979 said: »
Asura.Saevel said: »
Want to know what else causes NM's to do less TP moves, killing them quicker.
We all figured this out more than a decade ago on Kirin, Nidhogg and other RoZ/vanila end game NMs.
Abyssea peeps still catching up with their "theories".
That's a false equivalence though; Cadence/frequency of TP moves absorbed has a significant impact on survivability. Something like Ou, which if pushed too fast has a tendency to unload a sequence of high lethality moves back-to-back being a classic example of where steady, controlled dps is preferable to zerging.
Blazed1979 said: »
Asura.Saevel said: »
Want to know what else causes NM's to do less TP moves, killing them quicker.
We all figured this out more than a decade ago on Kirin, Nidhogg and other RoZ/vanila end game NMs.
Abyssea peeps still catching up with their "theories".
There are many ways to get to the destination, and faster kills are always better then slower kills. If I was building for a "minimal TP feed" strategy I wouldn't use MNK but DNC or NIN instead. Both have comparable reduction in TP feed while also sporting much stronger WS and SC options.
It also kills you faster. Don't know how many times had groups try to zerg and end up the mob zerging them.
Ragnarok.Inx said: »
Blazed1979 said: »
Asura.Saevel said: »
Want to know what else causes NM's to do less TP moves, killing them quicker.
We all figured this out more than a decade ago on Kirin, Nidhogg and other RoZ/vanila end game NMs.
Abyssea peeps still catching up with their "theories".
That's a false equivalence though; Cadence/frequency of TP moves absorbed has a significant impact on survivability. Something like Ou, which if pushed too fast has a tendency to unload a sequence of high lethality moves back-to-back being a classic example of where steady, controlled dps is preferable to zerging.
clearlyamule said: »
It also kills you faster. Don't know how many times had groups try to zerg and end up the mob zerging them.
Those examples don't really apply to discussion of Subtle Blow. Ou, for example, will perform those high lethality moves regardless of TP--they are triggered at certain percentages of HP. Another example are Wyrms or Cerberus... If Hate is pulled from the rear, enjoy the resulting flail (which is more or less dangerous now, depending upon the specific NM).
So, there are target behaviors that discourage out-of-control zerging. Oddly enough, Ou ends with a zerg or reset...
WAR/SAM/DRK aim for x-hits, meaning they get the TP needed to unload on a target in fewer strikes than a MNK or DW job would, also. You can achieve the same slow-and-steady approach, if needed, by just having better performing DPS jobs turn around and exchange withheld damage for slower TP feed to give a WHM time to take a breath, WC or chase a bat out of their bedroom (it has happened). That is essentially what the argument for MNK is... Drop DPS in exchange for slower TP feed. Any DD can do that just by getting the TP they need (in fewer hits) and then turning around.
This is precisely why the section on BGWIKI devoted to Monster TP gain notes:
This is why low delay weapon users are typically given Subtle Blow and other tools to mitigate their own TP fed, and it is also why one shouldn't assume that a Ninja with 100 delay Katanas (after 50% Dual Wield) and 50 Subtle Blow is feeding less TP/sec than a Warrior with a 482 delay weapon.
This is all to be considered before the lock-outs Saevel has already detailed and Comeatmebro's data has time-stamped.
Ou does certain moves based on HP remaining, but also reacts to TP feed, so its not an either/or case. You need to plan based on both!
Ou's one of the best designed NM in the game though; I hope its used as the model for new Dynamis bosses as it both baits zerging (with Fu's Ebullient), punishing the reckless if they go too hard, then actually demands a hard push to avoid reset at the end.
Omen bosses on the whole are great examples of how to bypass AC zerging without requiring nerfs. But I digress...
Speed-killing in my view is for xp/cp-ing; NM fights, HNM especially are goal orientated and should be about getting the win above all else. Speed killing is anathema to good mechanics like proc-ing for enhanced results, (abyssea-style, or just stacking TH), it shouldn't be the holy grail.
Ou's one of the best designed NM in the game though; I hope its used as the model for new Dynamis bosses as it both baits zerging (with Fu's Ebullient), punishing the reckless if they go too hard, then actually demands a hard push to avoid reset at the end.
Omen bosses on the whole are great examples of how to bypass AC zerging without requiring nerfs. But I digress...
Speed-killing in my view is for xp/cp-ing; NM fights, HNM especially are goal orientated and should be about getting the win above all else. Speed killing is anathema to good mechanics like proc-ing for enhanced results, (abyssea-style, or just stacking TH), it shouldn't be the holy grail.
[+]
Ragnarok.Inx said: »
Ou does certain moves based on HP remaining, but also reacts to TP feed, so its not an either/or case. You need to plan based on both!
Ou's one of the best designed NM in the game though; I hope its used as the model for new Dynamis bosses as it both baits zerging (with Fu's Ebullient), punishing the reckless if they go too hard, then actually demands a hard push to avoid reset at the end.
Omen bosses on the whole are great examples of how to bypass AC zerging without requiring nerfs. But I digress...
Speed-killing in my view is for xp/cp-ing; NM fights, HNM especially are goal orientated and should be about getting the win above all else. Speed killing is anathema to good mechanics like proc-ing for enhanced results, (abyssea-style, or just stacking TH), it shouldn't be the holy grail.
Ou's one of the best designed NM in the game though; I hope its used as the model for new Dynamis bosses as it both baits zerging (with Fu's Ebullient), punishing the reckless if they go too hard, then actually demands a hard push to avoid reset at the end.
Omen bosses on the whole are great examples of how to bypass AC zerging without requiring nerfs. But I digress...
Speed-killing in my view is for xp/cp-ing; NM fights, HNM especially are goal orientated and should be about getting the win above all else. Speed killing is anathema to good mechanics like proc-ing for enhanced results, (abyssea-style, or just stacking TH), it shouldn't be the holy grail.
Agree with you. Speed-killing steps in when 30min timers + HP Scaling + RNG Mechanics like WoC or additional time restrictions are in play like Steadfast tonic durations vs ilvl Kirin or Lullaby durations vs Vini/Albumen raise their ugly heads. Interestingly, Omen does not have HP Scaling, another plus for the overall design.
[+]
Ragnarok.Inx said: »
Speed-killing in my view is for xp/cp-ing; NM fights, HNM especially are goal orientated and should be about getting the win above all else. Speed killing is anathema to good mechanics like proc-ing for enhanced results, (abyssea-style, or just stacking TH), it shouldn't be the holy grail.
Agree 100x
I hate zergs so much atm
Bismarck.Nickeny said: »
Ragnarok.Inx said: »
Speed-killing in my view is for xp/cp-ing; NM fights, HNM especially are goal orientated and should be about getting the win above all else. Speed killing is anathema to good mechanics like proc-ing for enhanced results, (abyssea-style, or just stacking TH), it shouldn't be the holy grail.
Agree 100x
I hate zergs so much atm
The plethora of AC SMN's killing everything says otherwise.
The faster something dies the less chance of it pushing the "I Win" button.
Then you would of died regardless, you can't fix stupid.
I get it, you guys want MNK to be more useful and to have it *fixed*. That's not going to happen by blowing sunshine up each others ***'s. Your not going to fool anyone by changing definitions around. Nothing short of SE fixing H2H WS's will make people use or respect MNK.
I get it, you guys want MNK to be more useful and to have it *fixed*. That's not going to happen by blowing sunshine up each others ***'s. Your not going to fool anyone by changing definitions around. Nothing short of SE fixing H2H WS's will make people use or respect MNK.
[+]
Asura.Saevel said: »
The plethora of AC SMN's killing everything says otherwise.
The faster something dies the less chance of it pushing the "I Win" button.
The faster something dies the less chance of it pushing the "I Win" button.
Just mashing through Escha T4's is the exception that proves the rule because they are fights almost entirely without interest other than for credit towards Aeonics. So getting them out of the way in the most expeditious manner is total no-brainer.
But again, as I've repeated ad nauseum, if your goal is to create as many aeonics as possible in a timely manner, you do these fights at alliance scale, precluding the use of AC-zerging in the process.
Alliances just use more smns. They don't change strats.
Asura.Eiryl said: »
Alliances just use more smns. They don't change strats.
You have no clue what you're talking about.
Ragnarok.Inx said: »
Asura.Eiryl said: »
Alliances just use more smns. They don't change strats.
You have no clue what you're talking about.
No other setup can say that. Need more than 4 melee? You need an additional GEO and WHM. Need more than 4 BLM? You need an additional GEO, and you get your damage directly reduced by MB patch if you don't have enough RUNs. More than 4 RNG? Additional GEO and COR.
More than 4 SMN? Join the party, the more the merrier.
[+]
Because everyone has a SMN geared sufficiently well to deal adequate damage... Seriously if you are going to pull hypotheticals out your ***, please make them half-way convincing.
The problem with an alliance full of summoners is actually having smns that do good damage and are geared well, ill give an example:
On the last WoCs and Koryus i did with my set, we were usually 4 plus 1 carried person, sometimes we carried 2 and it was kind of close but lets say you just carry 1 as a freeloader (can be a friend with no chances of an aeonic or if u sell clears).
Now elevate this to alliance level under the same principle, you got a RUN, GEO, carried person and then the rest smns, the smns must be geared well and not scrub level and you need to find >14< of them lol, im not sure you'd find this many in asura let alone the smaller servers so you have to to use what, 4-5 smns and use wild card.
SMN burns are only optimal with low amounts of people right now because of population, if this was 2007-2010 then i guess it would be another story.
On the last WoCs and Koryus i did with my set, we were usually 4 plus 1 carried person, sometimes we carried 2 and it was kind of close but lets say you just carry 1 as a freeloader (can be a friend with no chances of an aeonic or if u sell clears).
Now elevate this to alliance level under the same principle, you got a RUN, GEO, carried person and then the rest smns, the smns must be geared well and not scrub level and you need to find >14< of them lol, im not sure you'd find this many in asura let alone the smaller servers so you have to to use what, 4-5 smns and use wild card.
SMN burns are only optimal with low amounts of people right now because of population, if this was 2007-2010 then i guess it would be another story.
Leviathan.Comeatmebro said: »
Ragnarok.Inx said: »
Asura.Eiryl said: »
Alliances just use more smns. They don't change strats.
You have no clue what you're talking about.
No other setup can say that. Need more than 4 melee? You need an additional GEO and WHM. Need more than 4 BLM? You need an additional GEO, and you get your damage directly reduced by MB patch if you don't have enough RUNs. More than 4 RNG? Additional GEO and COR.
More than 4 SMN? Join the party, the more the merrier.
Its also the only job that can cover the additional HP it brings to the PT +1 to 2 other leeches. Any competent SMN that parses knows this. Any Group that sells drops also knows this.
@Phuoc - what was our record carry/sale in terms of leeches? I recall we did a schah with 3 leeches and 2x smns? or was it 3x smns and 3x leeches?
Ragnarok.Phuoc said: »
The problem with an alliance full of summoners is actually having smns that do good damage and are geared well, ill give an example:
On the last WoCs and Koryus i did with my set, we were usually 4 plus 1 carried person, sometimes we carried 2 and it was kind of close but lets say you just carry 1 as a freeloader (can be a friend with no chances of an aeonic or if u sell clears).
Now elevate this to alliance level under the same principle, you got a RUN, GEO, carried person and then the rest smns, the smns must be geared well and not scrub level and you need to find >14< of them lol, im not sure you'd find this many in asura let alone the smaller servers so you have to to use what, 4-5 smns and use wild card.
SMN burns are only optimal with low amounts of people right now because of population, if this was 2007-2010 then i guess it would be another story.
On the last WoCs and Koryus i did with my set, we were usually 4 plus 1 carried person, sometimes we carried 2 and it was kind of close but lets say you just carry 1 as a freeloader (can be a friend with no chances of an aeonic or if u sell clears).
Now elevate this to alliance level under the same principle, you got a RUN, GEO, carried person and then the rest smns, the smns must be geared well and not scrub level and you need to find >14< of them lol, im not sure you'd find this many in asura let alone the smaller servers so you have to to use what, 4-5 smns and use wild card.
SMN burns are only optimal with low amounts of people right now because of population, if this was 2007-2010 then i guess it would be another story.
This is just plain wrong. You can win with 6 (COR, GEO, RUN, SMNx3). Thus, you need 1 good SMN for each two party members. An alliance would need 9 good SMNs. If your SMNs are maxed, it's less. Looking at prime's example it's noticably less. 3 smns carrying 2 leeches, so i'm assuming smn smn smn geo run leech leech.. thats equivalent to 7.7 SMNs in an alliance of 18.
Let's not forget all you need is a nirvana and about 80m of AH gear to be within 10% of max possible damage. It's not exactly a crushing requirement.
Leviathan.Comeatmebro said: »
If your SMNs are maxed, it's less
That's on Albumen though.
It also fails to account for the ridiculous lag that having that many avatars out generates and the difficulty of seeing which pet is your own in an indistinguishable group.
Then you need to synchronize conduiting with Odyllic use, and pray that noone mis-times stuff or is laboring under the misconception that their pet isn't going to whiff badly on things like Albumen just because they have a Nirvana and have neglected the rest of their build.
Its simply not worth the bother if you have the manpower. The alternatives are far more reliable because literally one SMN not performing to peak means the attempt is toast.
Then you need to synchronize conduiting with Odyllic use, and pray that noone mis-times stuff or is laboring under the misconception that their pet isn't going to whiff badly on things like Albumen just because they have a Nirvana and have neglected the rest of their build.
Its simply not worth the bother if you have the manpower. The alternatives are far more reliable because literally one SMN not performing to peak means the attempt is toast.
Ragnarok.Inx said: »
It also fails to account for the ridiculous lag that having that many avatars out generates and the difficulty of seeing which pet is your own in an indistinguishable group.
Ragnarok.Inx said: »
Then you need to synchronize conduiting with Odyllic use, and pray that noone mis-times stuff or is laboring under the misconception that their pet isn't going to whiff badly on things like Albumen just because they have a Nirvana and have neglected the rest of their build.
Ragnarok.Inx said: »
Its simply not worth the bother if you have the manpower. The alternatives are far more reliable because literally one SMN not performing to peak means the attempt is toast.
[+]
All FFXI content and images © 2002-2024 SQUARE ENIX CO., LTD. FINAL
FANTASY is a registered trademark of Square Enix Co., Ltd.