So why do we have the worst Espells?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Demon6324236

snip

---

http://ipagos.org/applause-gif-tumblr-47.gif

When comparing Enspell tiers, I challenge you to assume the RDM is not using any form of DW.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Llana_Virren

When comparing Enspell tiers, I challenge you to assume the RDM is not using any form of DW.

---

And yet its still a downgrade in some parts, meaning it should either not be called an En-II spell, or it should be fixed to represent a proper upgrade.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Demon6324236

And yet its still a downgrade in some parts, meaning it should either not be called an En-II spell, or it should be fixed to represent a proper upgrade.

---

Assuming no DW, please explain how it is a downgrade.

Double Attack from Temper, Triple Attack from gear, no damage on the extra hits where there should be. Also if your single wielding an Excalibur, which both I and Iocus have, then En-IIs are also worthless because they do not stack with the additional effect which is much more potent so long as you keep your HP up. The fact the spell does not work with a trait that RDM gets natively is a flaw that should be corrected. Also, if your thinking along the lines of what a RDM without a DW sub has, then En-Is should be no different. The fact that En-Is lost features and effects going from tier I to tier II is the flaw most people see in the spells, and they are correct.

The additional effect has a 7% proc rate. Excalibur's additional effect is only more powerful than Enspell Is if you consistently have more than 1715 HP.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Llana_Virren

Assuming no DW, please explain how it is a downgrade.

---

We just explained this about ~3-6 posts ago.

Not when only using a weapon in your main hand so far as I know, which is what I was told to assume.

What does it feel like when you double attack with Enspell 2s up? Like you just got cheated.

Joyeuse was darn good for a long time on RDM and 2 out of 4 Prestige weapons suffer complications because of how Enspells are setup (3 if you count the poison effect on Mandau). Enspells are a sloppy mess. SE has the ability to fix RDM so that it could be competent, but they choose not to or they aren't aware of how unattractive mechanics play out and affect their player base. We all understand that would take time and resources away from whatever else is being done, but this doesn't just affect RDM. It also affects PLD, DNC, and DRK. I'm pretty sure reversing the priority order of additional affects as stated by sweet idealism is the best we've gotten out of this discussion so far. It makes a lot of sense because it gives better preference to party synergy and would help jobs that aren't very desirable while not hurting jobs that are doing fine already.

Enspell 2s are a reflection of our problems and is one of the biggest reasons we are where we are. Bad choices that were poorly designed with little to no insight for the future. We have Shield Mastery with no shields worth giving up dual wield. Higher Tier Enspells that don't stack with additional attacks. Temper that doesn't have synergy with Enspell 2s. It's like they didn't actually give us any good direction to go. At least if Enspell 2s did more damage than Enspell 1s in all situations, we would deal more damage.

What is the point of being decent at a lot of things if devs pick all the stupid stuff that doesn't work with each other? You'd think they would give us the one trait that covers both magic and melee, Occult Accumen. But nope, that some how didn't make it on the list with Shield Mastery of things that RDM should get past 75, much less improvements to enspells in the vein of Enlight and Endark.

Please rework additional affects in general and enspells for RDM. Both could be better.

Maybe people aren't actually informed on how Enspell IIs work, so I'll lay out the details.

Enspell Is are very simple. The higher you enhancing, the more damage your enspells will do. @500 Enhancing your Enspells will natively do 30 damage per swing.

Enspell IIs are affected by enhancing gear per hit, instead of automatically applying the Enhancing gear on cast. This means you have to use Enhancing gear as a TP set if you wish to use Enspell IIs with full potency. Furthermore, Enspell IIs are affected by the first hit of your mainhand only. Not multihits, not dbl/tpl attack hits. Only the first hit.

Now back at 75 cap we had Joyuese, a high proc multihit weapon. Enspell IIs were obviously not ideal for this. Now we're off of Joyeuse and other multi-hit weapons because we have Temper and Double/Triple Attack gear. Players can easily get 30% Double Attack from Temper, Atheling Mantle, Brutal, and Calmecac Trousers, which also gets 3% Triple Attack. You can also get capped haste rather easily in this game if you work for it, which allows for increased chances for double attack and triple attack to proc.

I'm not a FFXI mathematician, but logic states that the more you get Double/Triple attack to proc, the less value Enspell IIs have. If you don't have Double/Triple attack, obviously Enspell IIs win, but that's impossible because we have Temper. And even if we didn't have Temper, we'd be using OAT swords.

In other words, even when Single-Wielding, the only way that Enspell IIs are stronger than Enspell I is if your gear is absolutely terrible.

Thesis : When single-wielding, Enspell II damage > Enspell I damage.

-Obviously, if you are dual-wielding, Enspell I damage is going to win every time, no contest.
-If you are dual-wielding, you are using /NIN or maybe /DNC.
-If you are using /NIN, you are either solo, or using DW3 to maximize your melee DoT.
-If you are attempting to maximize your melee DoT, you are minimizing your casting to the absolute bare essentials.
-If you are minimizing your casting as such, there's really no reason you shouldn't be on another job for better results.
-Even if you insist on playing RDM in this role, one must admit that a RDM that is attempting to cast the fewest spells possible really isn't contributing anything to the party beyond damage, which is better facilitated by other jobs, and therefore it is silly to be upset with other players for not choosing said RDM over another melee job.
-Therefore, the only time RDM is truly useful in today's metagame is when playing a true combat-caster role; meleeing when possible, but providing support to the party via Healing, Enhancing, and Enfeebling magic.
-In order to facilitate this role, /SCH and /WHM tend to be the best choices, which prevent the use of Dual-Wield.
-So, logic concludes that maximizing one's damage while single-wielding should be the RDM's goal in today's game.

On to gear:

xxx/Colossus's/Augmenting/xxx
Duelist+2/Duelist+2/xxx/xxx
Estoqueur/Olympus/Portent/Estoqueur+2

Enhancing 404 + 16 = 420 base skill, 26 base damage on both enspell tiers; casting Enspell I with +84 in gear gives you 30 damage per strike.

Melee gear:

Brisk or Brego/Portus/Suppa/Brutal
Shedir/Dusk+1/Rajas/Ambuscade
Atheling/Phasmida/Calmecac/Eurus

26% Haste, 17% DA, 2% TA ; add Temper @ 500 skill for 37% DA, 2% TA, which gives you 1.37 attacks per round.

Let's assume Almace for our purposes: delay 224. Let's say 58 delay ~ 1 second for this weapon.

Both Enspells are cast with Composure and Enhancing duration + gear, giving a duration of 702 seconds.

And now, math!

-Delay 224 weapon with 40% haste becomes 134, which works out to 2.3 seconds per attack round, which gives you about 305 attack rounds for the duration of either spell.

-Enspell II will require 26 rounds to reach full potential of 52 damage per round. Enspell II will deal 1053 damage over those 26 rounds, while Enspell I will deal... 1068 damage over this period as well (30 damage * 26 rounds * 1.37 attacks per round).

-279 attack rounds remain for the duration, so simple math shows us that Enspell I will deal 11,466 damage (30 damage * 279 rounds * 1.37 attacks per round), while Enspell II will deal 14,508 damage (52 damage * 279 rounds).

-This brings our grand total to 12,534 damage for Enspell I, and 15,561 damage for Enspell II. Enspell II will result in 24% more damage.

Now, let's discuss the other variables involved and how they would influence these numbers:

-As is clearly obvious by the above arithmetic, you need 1.73 hits per round for Enspell I to overtake Enspell II for damage; guaranteed while dual-wielding, essentially impossible while single-wielding.

-Casting load is going to be the same regardless, so it is not a variable in this case.

-We are assuming that Enspell I and II have the same accuracy in this case; there is no evidence to suggest magic accuracy for Enspell II varies beyond initial casting, but even if it does, the difference in skill is too small to make more than a negligible difference vs. anything RDM should be meleeing.

-Sambas do proc on double/triple attacks, even with Enspell II active, giving Enspell II an even larger advantage if a DNC or /DNC is present.

~~~~~

There, mathematical proof of my thesis. Anyone care to attempt an intelligent rebuttal, or are we going to stick to the usual "You're stupid, you don't play RDM, I melee'd Aura Statues in 2005" retorts?

Sooo what about multi-hit weapons?

And Temper?

And Double/Triple Attack traits? I didn't see any of those mentioned.

-Multi-hit weapons are universally garbage.

-Temper is factored into the above numbers.

-10 DA from /WAR is not going to increase your attacks per round from 1.37 to 1.73.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vicious

Thesis : When single-wielding, Enspell II damage > Enspell I damage.

-Obviously, if you are dual-wielding, Enspell I damage is going to win every time, no contest.
-If you are dual-wielding, you are using /NIN or maybe /DNC.
-If you are using /NIN, you are either solo, or using DW3 to maximize your melee DoT.
-If you are attempting to maximize your melee DoT, you are minimizing your casting to the absolute bare essentials.
-If you are minimizing your casting as such, there's really no reason you shouldn't be on another job for better results.
-Even if you insist on playing RDM in this role, one must admit that a RDM that is attempting to cast the fewest spells possible really isn't contributing anything to the party beyond damage, which is better facilitated by other jobs, and therefore it is silly to be upset with other players for not choosing said RDM over another melee job.
-Therefore, the only time RDM is truly useful in today's metagame is when playing a true combat-caster role; meleeing when possible, but providing support to the party via Healing, Enhancing, and Enfeebling magic.
-In order to facilitate this role, /SCH and /WHM tend to be the best choices, which prevent the use of Dual-Wield.
-So, logic concludes that maximizing one's damage while single-wielding should be the RDM's goal in today's game.

---

I tackled this 2 pages ago. And I feel like it's the REAL point of this discussion. I wish I had more to add but I already said my piece on it... 2 pages ago.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vicious

-We are assuming that Enspell I and II have the same accuracy in this case; there is no evidence to suggest magic accuracy for Enspell II varies beyond initial casting.

---

Except for observation, and the fact that we know it calculates damage on strike, and that enspells use enhancing skill for accuracy as well. So when you KNOW for a fact that the damage is calculated on strike, and you can SEE it getting resisted more often, it's not a huge leap to also assume it's recalculating accuracy on strike as well. leaving you with about -80 skill worth of acc. Ignore that at your own risk.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vicious

There, mathematical proof of my thesis. Anyone care to attempt an intelligent rebuttal, or are we going to stick to the usual "You're stupid, you don't play RDM, I melee'd Aura Statues in 2005" retorts?

---

Happy now? Because I think I've been having a respectful discussion here this whole time, (at least as respectful as you're gonna get on the internet) or is it just more fun to play the martyr?

-I also tackled it '2 pages ago,' I simply felt it was worth restating my entire line of thought for context.

-Whose observation are we basing this on, the RDMs on this forum who've been screaming that Enspell IIs are total garbage, worthless, worse than Enspell I? I'm going to stick with my parser, thanks. However, for the sake of argument, lets factor in resists and do some calculations, shall we? I'm going to stick to 1/2 resists only for the sake of napkin math:

Enspell I damage : 12,534 damage
Enspell I damage at capped magic accuracy (95%) : 12,221 damage

Now, let's solve for Enspell II magic accuracy to equal Enspell I damage:

Enspell II damage : 14,508 damage

Solve for x = magic accuracy

(305*52x)+[305*26(1-x)] = 12,221
15860x + [7930(1-x)] = 12,221
x= .54

Given that 1/4 resists and lower are going to drive the results slightly lower, I'm comfortable bumping this result up a few notches to 56%

Highest magic accuracy possible on Enspell II for Enspell I to break even = ~56%

Granted, there hasn't been any conclusive testing on the subject, but the notion that 80 Enhancing skill is going to make a 39% difference in magic accuracy is pretty ridiculous. I can tell you that in every event I've brought RDM to be useful and melee(read: not Legion, NNI), I've never parsed less then ~80% magic accuracy on my Enspell IIs. Then again, I'm sure you guys are gonna believe whatever you want to believe regardless of math or facts.

Also, how can you posit that "if damage is determined upon strike, then so must accuracy" when half this thread has been spent bitching how ridiculous it is that Enspell 2 are (seemingly) worse than Enspell I, on account of there being a 'II' in the name of the spell? I've gotta say, that's some Romney-tier flip-flopping, bravo.

~~~~~

Quote:

---

Happy now? Because I think I've been having a respectful discussion here this whole time, (at least as respectful as you're gonna get on the internet) or is it just more fun to play the martyr?

---

That was largely directed at Carth, not you, so you tell me; is it fun playing the martyr? /eyeroll

I have to say this is hilarious.

I looked over the math myself and calculated the delay, as well as TA/DA added on together. There's some nitpick mistakes such as there's 312 attacks total instead of 305, attack average is 1.40 instead of 1.37, Delay is 2.25 seconds instead of 2.3 seconds. However, I call that nitpicking because I came very close to the same number Vicious got (1.238; ~24% rounded up). I have not decided to go into resist rates as it's beyond me at the moment, and it doesn't really matter in the grand scheme of things.

So bravo, Vicious, you proved that Enspell II is better for Single Wielding.

So....Dual Wield with /NIN and Enspell 1s is still better and you're still not contributing to a discussion about why we have the worst Enspells in the game.

Stay on task. No one is interested in discussing why a RDM should be

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vicious

second-classing yourself before you even leave your MH.

---

If you really don't want to contribute to that discussion, then you don't have to post. Any logic that dictates the use of Enspell 2s over Enspell 1s because it's improper for a RDM to dual wield has absolutely no bearing. Plenty of RDMs can and do use Dual Wield because it contributes a meaningful increase to their total damage. RDMs have received such poorly planned buffs to their native job that the best way to increase their power is to look outside of their native job for the best possible damage solution. Until you can find legitimate damage calculations for how Enspell 2s single wield > Enspell 1s dual wield, there is no reason for you to waste your breath on that subject, since it would be off topic.

I'm sure the notion is not lost on you that we are all playing a video game. And in that video game, we are given the decision of which jobs we play. You point out that a dual wield RDM is a second-class job, but the rest of us are aware that RDM is a second-class job in its entirety. There is no proper way to play RDM that is mathematically more significant than any other job in the game that is designed to do what a RDM is doing. For those of us that continue to play a broken and outdated job that has no perceivable future, we like to ask questions, like 'Why do we have the worst Enspells in the game?' because we would honestly like someone that can contribute to that subject either as a forum poster or game dev representative that is good enough to satisfy us.

Why is it acceptable for RDM, much less any job, to be weaker than other jobs? People that play those jobs pay just as much money for their monthly services and it's not unrealistic for us to want to have just as many nice things as other people. Video games are about escapism and having fun in a world that was designed to be fun. Why would you want to intentionally make people not have fun by neglecting the things they enjoy about your game? The best answer I have is that devs just don't understand what makes some of their jobs fun and meaningful. RDM is pretty fun, even though it is sub par, but it would be significantly more fun if it were up to snuff. The game has, in many ways, devolved into a damage race between DDs with very little else valued because of a broken hate system and foolish NMs that lack intelligent design. Why not give jobs the ability to survive in harsher conditions instead of making a handful of jobs good and the rest of them barely hobbies?

'Why can't RDM be played seriously and significantly?' is at the back of every forum post in the RDM forums and it's getting rather old that devs don't seem to understand why we are so adamant that we need to be buffed into something that actually looks like a job in a Final Fantasy game.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vicious

Enspell II are designed to be used in situations where you are meleeing and casting in roughly equal amounts. The damage increases with each swing to encourage you to keep swinging; the maximum damage is set higher to compensate for lost damage while casting; it only applies to the first swing to prevent them from being used purely for the damage; the magic evasion reduction is there to increase the accuracy of your spells since you're not using a staff; the damage is calculated each swing instead of at cast because... nope, I got nothing.

In other words, the reason you don't like Enspell II is because it does not fit your playstyle, not because they are terrible; they could use some work though, I'll be the first to admit.

---

The only use Enspell IIs possibly have is DNC or /DNC being present and gaining access to Haste Samba, or in situations where Genbus shield is nice to have to reduce AoE physical or direct physical in solo situations. That is it.

Otherwise the spells are garbage. Even in periods of casting. Losing an attack round is not made up by the damage in the next attack round, it is gone regardless. If I cast with an EN2 and the cast haste on someone, I miss an attack round, for sake of argument lets say I lose 50DMG from my sword, and 50DMG from my enspell. My next attack after the Haste is 50 damage for my sword, 51 damage for my enspell.

1 damage gained from casting a spell. 1/100 = 1%. 1% of my damage returned from my missed attack round.

They need to be fixed in some way. Personally id rather see debuffs attached to them that slowly increase in value the more you hit. Something like the Elemental Debuffs that target mobs stats. Instead of decreasing though they increase until at max level.

EnfireII INT
EnBlizzard AGI
Enaero VIT
Enthunder MND
Enwater STR
enStone DEX

Progress from 1-25 and remain capped until the spell is recast, or falls off.


But focusing on increasing the damage, please. No one is going to bring a RDM for damage, unless we start swinging Blizzard 4's at the enemy for 7.5 minutes.

Quote:

---

So any option your not taking here your failing for. I can not think of any slot you could ever put Enhancing Magic in without losing out on something, and most of the time from relatively easy gear to get.

---

Hollow Earring is about it, and outside of Abyssea (where enspells represent a larger portion of damage done) it actually competes very well with Brutal Earring. At 75 It was slightly ahead overall in total damage done. I would imagine the same holds true today, with the diminishing value of DA as a % of total damage.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ManaKing

So....Dual Wield with /NIN and Enspell 1s is still better and you're still not contributing to a discussion about why we have the worst Enspells in the game.

Stay on task. No one is interested in discussing why a RDM should be


If you really don't want to contribute to that discussion, then you don't have to post. Any logic that dictates the use of Enspell 2s over Enspell 1s because it's improper for a RDM to dual wield has absolutely no bearing. Plenty of RDMs can and do use Dual Wield because it contributes a meaningful increase to their total damage. RDMs have received such poorly planned buffs to their native job that the best way to increase their power is to look outside of their native job for the best possible damage solution. Until you can find legitimate damage calculations for how Enspell 2s single wield > Enspell 1s dual wield, there is no reason for you to waste your breath on that subject, since it would be off topic.

---

I'm sorry, where was the discussion about RDM having the worst enspells in the game? I was under the impression that this was simply yet another thread where the usual suspects congregate and moan about how horrible RDM is, mostly due to their collective cluelessness about such things as game mechanics and balance and confusing the shining ideal of the Red Mage in their minds with what is actually possible in the confines of a MMORPG.

But hey, I don't wanna be that guy that rambles off topic, so here you go: RDM does not have the worst enspells in the game; that honor belongs to DRK and Endark, by a loooooooong mile.

Before anyone makes the mistake of refuting this, I implore you to do a little research as to why I might say such a thing, or at the very least, ask a DRK that doesn't TP in full Bale+2, as to avoid further embarrassment.

Now that that's out of the way, there will be no further need to post here. Requesting a moderator to lock to prevent further off-topic posting.

Thats not enhancing magic gear either, the only possible choice would be the neck because other than Portus and Rancor there are not many good necks, and in a situation where you need HP, Rancor is bad, so that left Portus which is a pain to get. Earring should never have enhancing, Hollow is not bad however its not enhancing so I did not count it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vicious

-I also tackled it '2 pages ago,' I simply felt it was worth restating my entire line of thought for context.

-Whose observation are we basing this on, the RDMs on this forum who've been screaming that Enspell IIs are total garbage, worthless, worse than Enspell I? I'm going to stick with my parser, thanks. However, for the sake of argument, lets factor in resists and do some calculations, shall we? I'm going to stick to 1/2 resists only for the sake of napkin math:

Enspell I damage : 12,534 damage
Enspell I damage at capped magic accuracy (95%) : 12,221 damage

Now, let's solve for Enspell II magic accuracy to equal Enspell I damage:

Enspell II damage : 14,508 damage

Solve for x = magic accuracy

(305*52x)+[305*26(1-x)] = 12,221
15860x + [7930(1-x)] = 12,221
x= .54

Given that 1/4 resists and lower are going to drive the results slightly lower, I'm comfortable bumping this result up a few notches to 56%

Highest magic accuracy possible on Enspell II for Enspell I to break even = ~56%

Granted, there hasn't been any conclusive testing on the subject, but the notion that 80 Enhancing skill is going to make a 39% difference in magic accuracy is pretty ridiculous. I can tell you that in every event I've brought RDM to be useful and melee(read: not Legion, NNI), I've never parsed less then ~80% magic accuracy on my Enspell IIs. Then again, I'm sure you guys are gonna believe whatever you want to believe regardless of math or facts.

Also, how can you posit that "if damage is determined upon strike, then so must accuracy" when half this thread has been spent bitching how ridiculous it is that Enspell 2 are (seemingly) worse than Enspell I, on account of there being a 'II' in the name of the spell? I've gotta say, that's some Romney-tier flip-flopping, bravo.

~~~~~



That was largely directed at Carth, not you, so you tell me; is it fun playing the martyr? /eyeroll

---

Ok first off, Enhancing magic has been established to represent .9 or 1 MACC (the fractional resist rates throw a cog into precise pinpointing.) So 80 ENH Skill is worth either 72 MACC (36% Hit Rate) and 80 MACC (40% hit rate) the Average is a 38% Hit Rate.

This means your lowest possible match point is 57%.

Now Enhancing MACC is directly related to a Mobs MEVA which we know is the term for Resistance, and is effectively a C skill neutrally. AT 75 cap mobs had 1 strong element, 1 weak element, and 6 neutral elements based on their crystal association. Ie. Fire Mobs were strong in fire, weak to water, and neutral to everything else. There is no reason to assume this model has changed and I personally can attest to that conclusion.

However the variance is relatively unknown at 75 it was a B- > D system which resulted in a 30 point spread. Or a 15 point increase on either side of neutrality. (7.5% land rate.) This may have changed I do not know, but it is easier for RDM to over cap this now due to skill progression differential. (D skills progressed less than B skills post Abyssea) because of this unknown element I will continue my post using C skill as the basis for discussion (keep in mind that using the strong enspell to the mobs element will result in more MACC, and the weak enspell in less, I just leave them out because the numbers are not really known because of skewed progression.)

Lets Assume we are facing a mob of level 99 and Even Match.

RDM MACC = 399 (AVG of both .9 and 1 systems)
MOB MEVA = 373 (C rank skill)

Because the mob is Even Match our ability to effect the mob is 75% (the basis of all ACC and MACC calculations begins at 75% and either increases or decreases depending on MACC, MEVA relations)

(MACC-MEVA)/2 = 13% Land rate.

Effectively we have a land rate on a neutral mob of 89% for EN2's.
EN1's have 38% more Land rate, putting them at Cap 95%.

Now lets look at a level 107 MOB an IT to a 99
(this is kind of where we hypothesis)
Assuming the skill progression remains constant past 99, said mob now has

373 + 8*7 = 429 Skill.
RDM still 399.

MACC-MEVA = (399-429)/2 = -15% 75-15 = 60%

The Enspell 1 set up has 38% to play with. Still capped.
The Enspell 2 set up is now at 60% MACC.

Now lets look mob at level 110. An arbitrary number, but most HNM's back in the day were 10-15 levels higher than players, so lets assume similar progressions post abyssea.

MEVA = 373 + 11*7 = 450
MACC = 399

MACC-MEVA = 399-450/2 = -25.5

Enspell 2 is now at 49.5MACC
Enspell 1 is now at 75+38-25.5 = 87.5%

or if you are keeping track, 38% more accurate than Enspell II.

In the end ENII's will average the same damage as EN1's in a single handed scenario.

Unless of course that single hand weapon is a Multi Attack weapon. (EN1s win in every case.)

This is why ENII's suck for damage on anything that matters. Even if you factor in Merits, the 7.5% Caps EN1's and leaves EN2's at that magical number of 57%

38% difference is the break point, not 39%.

But ya the MACC data has been around for a long time. So long that I am shocked I had to type all that out.

Outside of regular content, the difference in damage is equal. They essentially provide the same damage, the only thing ENII's offer is the MEVA reduction, which is neglible at best.

Quote:

---

Lyltia: RDM SCH BLM WHM NIN SMN BLU PLD
Aegis 95 Kannagi 90 Almace 90 Hvergelmir 90

---

Somehow I am not surprised.

Quote:

---

I'm sorry, where was the discussion about RDM having the worst enspells in the game? I was under the impression that this was simply yet another thread where the usual suspects congregate and moan about how horrible RDM is, mostly due to their collective cluelessness about such things as game mechanics and balance and confusing the shining ideal of the Red Mage in their minds with what is actually possible in the confines of a MMORPG.

---

The ironing they say is delicious.

Quote:

---

Now that that's out of the way, there will be no further need to post here. Requesting a moderator to lock to prevent further off-topic posting.

---

:rolleyes:

Ya because you were proven wrong, the thread is off topic. funny how you always run off from a discussion after looking like a fool.

See you on Alla!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Demon6324236

Thats not enhancing magic gear either, the only possible choice would be the neck because other than Portus and Rancor there are not many good necks, and in a situation where you need HP, Rancor is bad, so that left Portus which is a pain to get. Earring should never have enhancing, Hollow is not bad however its not enhancing so I did not count it.

---

It directly increases Enspell damage, why would you not count it?

For EN1's its a 10% increase to damage, For EN2's it is an 11% increase falling to 5% at cap.

So you wrote an essay, cool. If I followed correctly, what you're saying is that RDM's melee damage is going to completely suck against anything above Even Match? And that against Even Match targets (or weaker), Enspell IIs will have an effective accuracy of higher than ~56% even when the accuracy of an Enspell I of the same element has just barely enough accuracy to reach 95%?

I'm flattered that you, of all people, spent so much time typing up such a long-winded assent of everything I've already posted in this thread. Thanks!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vicious

Now that that's out of the way, there will be no further need to post here.

---

Do you have the power to declare that? I don't think you do. While you proved your point with Single-wield Enspell IIs, you haven't proved anything else. The laughable melee in full enhancing gear idea, the incredibly situational high -PDT mobs where you blatantly dismissed Requiescat and nuking, and finally the terrible justification to your argument that was ripped straight out of 2005 to appease your want to make Enspell IIs look good.

You have absolutely no reason to be telling moderators to close this thread, because you've been most guilty of being off-topic if not more. Instead, if you don't have anything else to add, take your own advice and stop posting in this thread.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vicious

So you wrote an essay, cool. If I followed correctly, what you're saying is that RDM's melee damage is going to completely suck against anything above Even Match? And that against Even Match targets (or weaker), Enspell IIs will have an effective accuracy of higher than ~56% even when the accuracy of an Enspell I of the same element has just barely enough accuracy to reach 95%?

I'm flattered that you, of all people, spent so much time typing up such a long-winded assent of everything I've already posted in this thread. Thanks!

---

I didn't mention melee damage once in terms of the discussion. Everything I wrote was in relation to enspell damage. In terms of RDM's damage, it won't suck, but it won't be optimal. There is a difference, and there is only 1 event in the game that really requires optimal...for now.

Enspell II's have an effective MACC depending on the mobs level, the higher the level the worse they fare, unless you retain your Enhancing gear throughout the conflict.

Funny you say just enough to reach 95%. Ideally you want ACC or MACC capped at 95% so just enough is exactly right. Having 80 more MACC then you need is redundant.

Also I thought you were leaving this thread because the mouth breathers didn't agree that EN2's are better than EN1's (they are not fyi.) You should hurry along and spam Embrava before the nerf hits the live servers, it would be wise to leech your LS for as much gear as you can.



Also,
Hi Carth havent seen you around the internets for some time, hope all is well!.

Quote:

---

The laughable melee in full enhancing gear idea, the incredibly situational high -PDT mobs where you blatantly dismissed Requiescat and nuking, and finally the terrible justification to your argument that was ripped straight out of 2005 to appease your want to make Enspell IIs look good.

---

-So, if you're fighting a target that is, for whatever reason, taking zero damage from your melee swings, but is still taking damage from your Enspell II, it's laughable to remove attack and double attack gear (ergo, not haste gear) and replace it with Enhancing skill? How much damage is attack and double attack adding when you're hitting for zero? Not sure if serious!

-I never dismissed Requiescat; I simply acknowledge the reality of having 15 points to allocate between 14 different merit WS. You can't seriously expect somebody to 5/5 Requiescat for these, as you yourself put it, "highly situational -PDT mobs" when they might have MNK, THF, DNC, DRK, BST, DRG, SAM and/or COR leveled. As for nuking in those situations, that is also, as they say, situational; your MP may be better spent elsewhere, or casting may be less than feasible due to the longer casting time.

-My terrible argument is ripped from 2005? Last time I checked, RDM got booted from any and all parties in 2005 if they drew their sword past level 20. My argument is encouraging meleeing. Again, not sure if serious?

Quote:

---

You have absolutely no reason to be telling moderators to close this thread...

---

/sigh. Context is hard.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vicious

-So, if you're fighting a target that is, for whatever reason, taking zero damage from your melee swings, but is still taking damage from your Enspell II, it's laughable to remove attack and double attack gear (ergo, not haste gear) and replace it with Enhancing skill? How much damage is attack and double attack adding when you're hitting for zero? Not sure if serious!

---

Yes you swap to an elemental magic set and hit it with T4 nukes....not sure if you're serious.

Quote:

---

-I never dismissed Requiescat; I simply acknowledge the reality of having 15 points to allocate between 14 different merit WS. You can't seriously expect somebody to 5/5 Requiescat for these, as you yourself put it, "highly situational -PDT mobs" when they might have MNK, THF, DNC, DRK, BST, DRG, SAM and/or COR leveled. As for nuking in those situations, that is also, as they say, situational; your MP may be better spent elsewhere, or casting may be less than feasible due to the longer casting time.

---

So now Enspell II's damage outweighs a WS that ignore phsyical defense, and Nukes which also ignore physical defense. Are you for real?

What of the players like me who have DNC, BRD, RDM, PLD, BLM, WHM, SCH leveled....4 of those might see melee combat...but its ok I took the club WS too. Christ almighty.

If you had ever soloed anything remotely difficult, you would realize that is not always an option!

so... you can't nuke it... and it is immune to physical dmg... and THAT is your justification for why enspell 2 doesn't need fixing?

EDIT: and also you can't be dual wielding while you're fighting it...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vicious

If you had ever soloed anything remotely difficult, you would realize that is not always an option!

---

LOL really situational Enspell success, and situational nuking success and situational Req success is now based on situational soloing....rocket science 101, situational shit is situational. LOL

There are plenty of solos that require /WHM, don't sound so shocked, it makes you look silly.

Yes, Enspell II doesn't need fixing, what's the point? As I've stated and proven, they have their niche. Why take away a spell when they could just as easily give us a third tier that does something different? Seriously, guys, think before typing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vicious

There are plenty of solos that require /WHM, don't sound so shocked, it makes you look silly.

Yes, Enspell II doesn't need fixing, what's the point? As I've stated and proven, they have their niche. Why take away a spell when they could just as easily give us a third tier that does something different? Seriously, guys, think before typing.

---

/WHM? Why not /SCH /WHM gives you nothing it doesn't. WTF is wrong with you Mrs. My LS is one of the top progressed in NA.

As for EN2's they are garbage. The only use they have is to get Haste Samba. Otherwise they are no different than EN1's.

(and I know I said otherwise earlier, but that was before I read your terrible MACC math and had to punch the numbers myself.)

Because casting status cures with /SCH requires Addendum: White, which requires 2 JAs and 2 seconds to activate. That 2 seconds can easily get you killed, and lord help you if you get paralyzed and lose any of those JAs to it.

You are such an adorable little tryhard <3

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vicious

Because casting status cures with /SCH requires Addendum: White, which requires 2 JAs and 2 seconds to activate. That 2 seconds can easily get you killed, and lord help you if you get paralyzed and lose any of those JAs to it.

You are such an adorable little tryhard <3

---

So activate it before you engage the mob?

If there's no need to ever cast black magic during the fight, you would have to choose between Auto-Regen, Banish, Flash, Divine Seal or Light Arts, Storms, Conserve MP, Max MP Boost. If I'm meleeing, pretty sure Flash, and therefore WHM wins it by a mile. If I'm not I'm nuking... and considering that status cures are linked to Strategems, and the Arts penalty on opposing magic, I'd still pick WHM.

Tryharder <3

LOL how situational are you going to go to try and save face here?

If you are meleeing /WHM you suck. Period. /DNC beats /WHM for melee, and that is the only time EN2's are better than EN1's. Haste Samba.

As for nuking cross arts...RDM can make the fast cast reduction look like a hummingbird flapping its wings regardless. The 32 MP for the nuke you are going to Cast saved in buffing, debuffing (relevant things), healing, status spells.

If you take WHM you suck and haven't soloed a thing.

/SCH is our best kite solo job
/DNC is our best melee but need support job
/BLU is our best melee but need defense job
/NIN is our best melee but can take a hit/nuke but can't get hit casting job.

Hell /NIN is better than /WHM more often than not

You truly, honestly can't think of anytime that having instant access to every relevant status cure would be beneficial over having a one-size-fits-all JA on a 15 second timer? This kind of stuff is why you'll always be second-rate. =(

What do you mean? You actually switch arts on SCH....why? The negative effects are negated for RDM. Unless you want to debate a fraction of a second.

You can't be serious can you?

then again you did try to say SCH is better at stunning then a RDM.

2/10, bad troll is bad =(