Black Mage Sanctuary - A Guide to DPS

Not had chance to check your spreadsheet, but have you taken into account the differing gains for spellspeed for Fire 4/B4? (I.e. you get more gain out of it on a 3 second cast than a 2.5 second cast)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HaroldSaxon

Not had chance to check your spreadsheet, but have you taken into account the differing gains for spellspeed for Fire 4/B4? (I.e. you get more gain out of it on a 3 second cast than a 2.5 second cast)

---

I'm not sure if it matters, but isn't it percentually the same reduction for both? 200 SS reduces cast time by the same X% for F1, F4, Flare, and so on.

I'd assume Spell Speed is 16.6% better on F4 since it's 3 secs versus regular 2.5 seconds.

And yes, I do believe 31 Speed + 68 Det > 102 Crit.

Because 26.5 Speed is 0.01 for F1 and I'm pretty sure 0.01 sec on Fire IV is 23 Spell Speed or around that. I jsut don't believe in Crit. BLM gets nothing extra from Crit.

Crit gives Spell Speed on SMN, can't say anything about BRD. Everybody has Internal Release, BLM is stuck with vanilla Crit and without Battle Literaly crit feels really week x.x Just my personal opinion. We don't have stat weights but it's probably Spd > Crit > Det

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aikaal

I'd assume Spell Speed is 16.6% better on F4 since it's 3 secs versus regular 2.5 seconds.

---

It's still proportional. If you add on enough spell speed to knock 2% off your F1 cast, you'll knock that same 2% off your F4 cast, not 2.4%.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Waliel

I'm not sure if it matters, but isn't it percentually the same reduction for both? 200 SS reduces cast time by the same X% for F1, F4, Flare, and so on.

---

It is. There is no difference in impact between spells.

The biggest difference is in DPS structure, where with a longer rotation more spell speed gives you some more flexibility. But that's entirely discrete and nobody's really done anything to consider it.

Or in other words:

(Warning, math)

DPS can be calculated as follows:

Let R = potency per second from your rotation
Let P = Damage per potency
Let C = Crit multiplier

And the DPS is basically R*P*C. Really simple.

R is a little weird. It has two components- the length of the GCD and the spells you can get away with using (because of the shortented GCD). Lets just further divide these into two components S and G

G = 2.5/GCD. Pretty simple.
S = The spells you cast in your rotation's potency per second assuming a 2.5 GCD (a little counter intuitive, but think about it like this: you can cast 3 Fire IV's under a 10 second Astral Fire with a 3.0 timer. With a 2.5 timer, you can fit 4 in. In this case, S would be 4*280/3. Even if that implies you have a 12 second astral fire, we separate this because it's much harder to calculate than the GCD which is known to us).

Crit is easy to describe, but I want our multiplier to include the rate and the bonus because both are modified by crit. You have a 1-Crit chance% chance to not crit and a Crit chance % to crit. A crit does D extra damage per noncrit damage. So you have a 1-crit chance% chance to do 1 damage and a crit chance% chance to do 1 plus D damage. This simplifies to 1+(Crit Rate%)(Bonus Damage)

P is regressed and in the spread sheet.

This refines the formula to S(SS)*G(SS)*C(Crit)*P(WD,Int,Det).

We don't know much about S, and we know enough about G,C and P to regress formula for them. One thing to note about S is that it has the property S(X) <= S(X+1). So for short term, we assume S is constant and just calculate G*C*P. A higher value here suggests your spells do more damage per second. So for simplicity I set S to be the value it would be for blizzard spam (easy to understand) and say it's analogous to your DPS if we assume S(X)=S(X+1). This is why my model absolutely undervalues Spell Speed, though it may not be by a significant amount. One thing to note is that S needs to also consider that you will always be spending a static amount of time regenerating mana. You can list out the rotation and say "oh here it is" but for accuracy you need to include probability, mana ticks and a host of other nonsense.

So yes. Technically you can say that with longer spells, spell speed gives more benefit. However this is only in terms of S so unless you're giving me accurate potency per second per rotation values depending on spell speed in a way that includes procs and the fact that the time you spend in umbral ice is NOT dependent on spell speed, then for all intents and purposes the DPS calculator doesn't care about it and for any practical application SS doesn't care about the cast time.

And that's the theory behind why I decided to use Blizzard spam short term. I could have waited, given myself time to figure out how best to calculate your rotation's potency per second with respect to spell speed. But I didn't because you're spending your esoterics, your gordian pages on gear *right now* and I wanted to give the community something useful so that we can make educated decisions on what to purchase.

Forgive me if I missed this topic in this thread, but I can't seem to find it. What are some recommendations for BLM AOE rotations for 3.0?

Currently I am using Lay lines>raging strikes> Fire 3>Flare>convert>swiftcast>Flare>Transpose>Fire 3>Fire 2>Fire 2>Flare>Transpose>repeat and wait for cool downs. Is this still and effective AOE rotation?

Are there any others that get more DPS that someone could recommend to me? Thank you for your time. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Waliel

I'm not sure if it matters, but isn't it percentually the same reduction for both? 200 SS reduces cast time by the same X% for F1, F4, Flare, and so on.

---

I don't know the formula for it which was why I was asking. I just don't have the time to theorycraft as much as I once did without dropping raidtime. There are other things like fitting extra spells in a rotation (Under Ley Lines, F4, TC*+Swiftcast, F4, F4, F3* is fun during a cooldown rotation).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Xenitan

It is. There is no difference in impact between spells.
So yes. Technically you can say that with longer spells, spell speed gives more benefit. However this is only in terms of S so unless you're giving me accurate potency per second per rotation values depending on spell speed in a way that includes procs and the fact that the time you spend in umbral ice is NOT dependent on spell speed, then for all intents and purposes the DPS calculator doesn't care about it and for any practical application SS doesn't care about the cast time.

---

Regarding Ice phase, it can allow you get into Fire phase quicker. In 2.x, we have T1+B1, using the B1 as filler if we needed a GCD due to a slow mana tick. Quite often, we wouldn't need the filler spell, with Thunder 1 sufficing.

If we get a slow mana tick now, we use B4+T1/B1 (or T1/B1+B4) as a filler if needed. B4 is a longer cast than T1. So immediately there are scenarios where you gain in ice phase.

On top of that, depending on Enochian timers, remaining thunder dot and thundercloud procs, B4+T1 (or T1+B4) would be improved with spellspeed and maybe even preferred to compared to just B4 when getting a quick mana tick. (depending on what part of the rotation you are in).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HaroldSaxon

Regarding Ice phase, it can allow you get into Fire phase quicker. In 2.x, we have T1+B1, using the B1 as filler if we needed a GCD due to a slow mana tick. Quite often, we wouldn't need the filler spell, with Thunder 1 sufficing.

If we get a slow mana tick now, we use B4+T1/B1 (or T1/B1+B4) as a filler if needed. B4 is a longer cast than T1. So immediately there are scenarios where you gain in ice phase.

On top of that, depending on Enochian timers, remaining thunder dot and thundercloud procs, B4+T1 (or T1+B4) would be improved with spellspeed and maybe even preferred to compared to just B4 when getting a quick mana tick. (depending on what part of the rotation you are in).

---

I feel that as we progress in 3.0 with gear, eventually we'll get to a point where T1/B1 + B4 will be required. I'm actually even wondering if by the end of 3.0 with the spell speed we'll have, if T1 + B1 + B4 we'll be a necessity. Or switching to thunder 2

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Garotte14

I feel that as we progress in 3.0 with gear, eventually we'll get to a point where T1/B1 + B4 will be required. I'm actually even wondering if by the end of 3.0 with the spell speed we'll have, if T1 + B1 + B4 we'll be a necessity. Or switching to thunder 2

---

I very much doubt it. You would need to save a GCD's worth in 2 casts in ice phase AND get a slow mana tick to do T1+B1+B4.

Thunder 1 over Thunder 2? Gut feeling (with nothing to back it up) is I don't think the extra 1 dot tick will be worth delaying Fire phase by the extra time (especially with enochian), and if you get a thunder proc, chances are you will overwrite the DoT.

Would be interesting to see some math done on Thunder 2 vs Thunder 1, and the math to see if using T1 is worth it if you get a fast mana tick.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HaroldSaxon

Regarding Ice phase, (spell speed) can allow you get into Fire phase quicker.

---

Not really. I think we can both agree that we're looking to get two ticks, each of which happen 3 seconds apart from each other. So we're guaranteed to be locked in for at least 3 to 6 seconds no matter how much spell speed you have.

(Even more math, Black Mage DPS is such a fascinating topic)

There are 3 "rotations" for Black Mages that I want to bring up.

1) You cast, in quick succession, Blizzard 3, Blizzard 4, Fire 3
2) You cast, in quick succession, Blizzard 3, Blizzard 4 but then have to wait a period of time before casting Fire 3
3) You cast, in quick succession, Blizzard 3, Blizzard 4, a filler spell and then Fire 3.

At some point during your Blizzard 4 cast you will know how long you will need to spend at a minimum in umbral ice on that 3-6 line.

To optimize DPS we want to understand when you should be doing either of the the three rotations. We understand rotation 1 is the highest DPS of them all and so from 3 to a point A on the 3-6 interval we cast rotation 1 where A is the point early enough to where you can get two ticks of mana even while chain casting your ice spells.

We understand that, given an infinitely small but still positive value e, At the point A+e Rotations 1 and 2 are indistinguishable. Given that Rotation 1 is greater than rotation 3, this yields the fact that Rotation 2 is greater than rotation 3 on some interval on this line. We need to find B the break even point where rotation 2 and 3 are equal.

This is actually easier to find than you'd think. When you cast Blizzard you are "assigned" the length of time you'll need to spend in ice. When you finish blizzard you are given the option of waiting W seconds or casting the filler spell. If you cast the filler spell, you will have spent a length of time longer than necessary in umbral ice equal to that spell's cast time minus W. The question you ask is if that value is worth the extra potency you'd get from the filler spell. In other words, we're considering that spell in two parts: the part you'd be obligated to wait anyway (where you produce 0 potency) and the extra time. We want to find the potency per second value of that spells potency over that spell's extra time. If it is equal to the expected potency per second of rotation 1, that's the break even point. It can lie anywhere from A to a value beyond 6 (that value meaning you never cast a filler).

Spell speed messes with all these values, obviously. But it doesn't do so at the same rate so we don't factor these values into the direct multiplier for DPS you get from spell speed. It can increase DPS in this way, but this way is much harder to quantify (and, in fact, we haven't). But it is only in this hard to quantify way that spell speed is "better" on longer partitions of time for rotations. What it doesn't do is affect how often you spend as little time as possible in Umbral ice. What it does do, if anything, is make you more likely to spend more time in Umbral Ice.

My biggest concern is that Piety or Max Mp is a huge factor. The opener I am currently using on single target only leaves enough mp for a Blizz3 after my F4's. Getting to that quicker with SS will not affect your damage output. My point is Max MP and Refresh Rate of Umbral Ice are fixed and not affected by SS. My current theory is that for us BLM, we will have a "SS Cap" much like an Acc Cap, a floor that is necessary to maintain our current rotation. Other then that it seems SS will only give us some flexibility to catch up if we need to move, etc. Now I don't discount the importance of this flexibility, but in reality will not improve our dps as much as a stat that makes the fixed number of casts hit harder (det/crit) I think SS is going to drop in value.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Darkwand

My biggest concern is that Piety or Max Mp is a huge factor. The opener I am currently using on single target only leaves enough mp for a Blizz3 after my F4's. Getting to that quicker with SS will not affect your damage output. My point is Max MP and Refresh Rate of Umbral Ice are fixed and not affected by SS. My current theory is that for us BLM, we will have a "SS Cap" much like an Acc Cap, a floor that is necessary to maintain our current rotation. Other then that it seems SS will only give us some flexibility to catch up if we need to move, etc. Now I don't discount the importance of this flexibility, but in reality will not improve our dps as much as a stat that makes the fixed number of casts hit harder (det/crit) I think SS is going to drop in value.

---

It is true that max mp is a huge factor (makes me wonder would people invest into peity melds in the future)but I feel that increased spell speed can warrant a different approach to our rotation. I won't claim that other methods of refreshing AF are currently optimal, but if the spell speed were available to try them out maybe we could make a more flexible/mobile rotation that trades a bit of burst dps for a better sustained dps.

Call me idealistic, but in the long run i would expect spell speed to become a BiS for a different type of sustained rotation due to the piety restrictions, though the rotation itself maybe really long and drawn. Just my two cents.

Mp does not affect Spell Speed until Enochian isn't up after 3 rotations which I'll assume it will never happen.

PIE got a huge nerf in the expansion; to get enough MP for an extra F4 in the rotation would take an extra what, 180+ PIE now?

Something like that. I actually sinned today, although I bought multiple fantasias. I went Duskwight Elezen to get more Intelligence for A4S. That's how much DPS you need. I feel you need to be in the range of 1200-1300 DPS as a DPS. I lucked out pretty hardcore in my group and I'm iLevel 206 and it still feels it is not enough.

There is nothing to be done with Piety really.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aikaal

I went Duskwight Elezen to get more Intelligence for A4S. That's how much DPS you need.

---

The 2 INT and 41 HP isn't worth looking that damn ugly.

I tried my best to look decent, that,s what I got. Sadly 2 Int can be a factor. To be honest, I would be an Elezen if they had proper neck and head.

http://i.imgur.com/suoyujK.jpg

Also, look what I did with the weapon and gloves :3 I'm proud of myself.

wow aikaal, whats wrong with you. Meanwhile im elezen... wildwood

http://puu.sh/jIHph.png


fakes get out

Hate to derail the discussion but I had a real quick question regarding card priorities with astros. To keep it simple arrow or balance? I understand there is a lot of things to be taken into consideration but I'm just looking for the quick dirty answer if there is one. Thanks

I would prefer Balance. Simply because with Ninja and Bard, our damage goes to 1 * 1.2 Voiced Foe * 1.1 TA * 1.2 from RS * 1.05 from Enochian. That's a total of 1.6632 multiplier. If you have an extended Balance (15%) That card is actually 24.948% for a total of 191.268% damage boost. So a F4 that is usually 504 Potency (260 Potency * 1.8 from Astral Fire III), you have spam nuke spells of 963.99072 Potency.

Right now I can hit for 12k my Fire IV without Astro if I crit. With Balance empowered, I'd be close to 14k per spell.

Spell Speed is nice but I would prefer an extra damage boost from my 20 seconds opener over making it quicker. Also, if you are asked to Balance another job than BLM, he is a complete idiot. BLM has the highest opener burst atm. The closest I saw was Machinist and that's to take account the Machinist didn't provide me Foe and I was still doing more burst. People may argue about this but to me it's obvious a Balance card that isn't on a BLM is a wasted card for a raid DPS parse. This is also why I dislike Astrologian so much; Astrologian mainly buffs 1 person. The buff will be better on your best DPS. If you were in a group with the best DRG in the world and an average BLM, the most logical action would be to give that Balance card to the Dragoon.

Also, I don't think you are derailing the conversation. Astrologian support does include us, BLMs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SaucepanKaoz

wow aikaal, whats wrong with you. Meanwhile im elezen... wildwood

http://puu.sh/jIHph.png


fakes get out

---

Weren't you a Midlander? I can't help it. Needs everything possible to beat A4S x.x

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aikaal

Weren't you a Midlander? I can't help it. Needs everything possible to beat A4S x.x

---

Nope, never was. I just don't look very elezen i guess


I'm also hella geared, 205. Just missing head and earring. (and weap upg)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SaucepanKaoz

Nope, never was. I just don't look very elezen i guess


I'm also hella geared, 205. Just missing head and earring. (and weap upg)

---

Currently iLevel 206. Didn't upgrade my chest yet. Didn't get thew pants yet either. Get to my level bro :[

I'm missing Pants from A3S and Chest + Weapon from A4S xD I get 1450 DPS 4mins parses now.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aikaal

Currently iLevel 206. Didn't upgrade my chest yet. Didn't get thew pants yet either. Get to my level bro :[

I'm missing Pants from A3S and Chest + Weapon from A4S xD I get 1450 DPS 4mins parses now.

---

I'd rather be 205 with the pants =/
8 pages? fuck that

Got bored and decided to crunch some numbers. Here's what I came up with so far. Some of these formulas have been established before.

Average Spell Damage = (Potency * INT * (WD / 25 + 1) * ((DET - 218) / 5946.91 + 1) / 891 * Buffs
Cast Speed = Base Cast Speed * (1 - (Spell Speed - 354) * 0.1515 / 1000
Crit % = (Crit Hit Rate - 354) * 0.0233 + 4.9511233
Crit Damage = (Crit Hit Rate - 354) * 0.000233 + 1.448361
DET Damage = [(DET rating - 218) / 5946.91] + 1

Buffs include Magick and Mend II, Astral Fire stacks, etc.

Here's the spreadsheet if you want to play around with it.
I'm still trying to work out spell speed DoT coefficients for thunder.

Only got 1 drop since week 1, the rest I got from tokens + sand/oil. Though even at i198, I did 1182 on A1S this week(though I did get some lucky crits), it seems BLM will definitely be the best job on A1S for speedruns and pushing before 0.5 comes out. I wouldn't be surprised if the fastest speedrun comp was 2x BLM, 1 Brd and a DRG. I was above 2k after a minute xD

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Xenitan

Snip

---

You missed the point I was making. I was saying the minimum rotation we have to do in ice phase is B3, F3. If we get a slow mana tick, we are limited by time - but getting more spellspeed means that we can weave another spell in there as well as F3 (because you can "pre-cast" F3 just before the tick. Which is a dps increase because you are getting back into the phase quicker.

If you get lucky with your timings and get a quick mana tick, you are still going to be in ice phase longer than required in order to complete the single B4. If Thunder ends up being a DPS increase to use in that phase, then spellspeed is going to shorten your effective Ice Phase time.

Also, there is a 4th rotation if i'm being pedantic - B3, Filler, B4, F3.

In all of the rotation cases, if you get a quick mana tick, you are in the phase longer than you need to be for mana reasons. If you get a slow tick, then 3/4 will still gain because 3+2.5+1 is larger than 6. Puro quantified the DPS increase in his last spreadsheet, you can go take a look at how he did it.

And I would love to see the math regarding a B3, B4, Filler, F3 rotation with procs in the next fire phase vs B3, B4, F3 rotation

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Darkwand

My biggest concern is that Piety or Max Mp is a huge factor. The opener I am currently using on single target only leaves enough mp for a Blizz3 after my F4's. Getting to that quicker with SS will not affect your damage output. My point is Max MP and Refresh Rate of Umbral Ice are fixed and not affected by SS. My current theory is that for us BLM, we will have a "SS Cap" much like an Acc Cap, a floor that is necessary to maintain our current rotation. Other then that it seems SS will only give us some flexibility to catch up if we need to move, etc. Now I don't discount the importance of this flexibility, but in reality will not improve our dps as much as a stat that makes the fixed number of casts hit harder (det/crit) I think SS is going to drop in value.

---

Piety is not worth it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aikaal

Elves and levels

---

Rather Elezen than Lalafell if you ask me. Also, can I have your stuff? No caster loot this week, either.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Neophyter

DET Damage = ((DET - 218) / 9261.83) + 1

---

My math-fu isn't the strongest, but that seems quite a lot lower than DRG, BRD, MCH, which is DET/7290+1 or 74(?) for 1% increase.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HaroldSaxon

And I would love to see the math regarding a B3, B4, Filler, F3 rotation with procs in the next fire phase vs B3, B4, F3 rotation

---

It's very tight to fight a proc into the next phase after using B4, the only time it's feasible is on Faust.

Ignoring procs, Thunder is about 2/3 of the dps of the entire rotation, so it beats waiting 1/3 of a GCD. That means a GCD of ~2.05 seconds before there's a chance that it can be the same dps occasionally.

Blizzard is around 55% of the full rotation dps, so it would beat out waiting for more than 45% of a GCD. That takes a GCD of ~1.95 seconds to rarely not lower dps.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Waliel

My math-fu isn't the strongest, but that seems quite a lot lower than DRG, BRD, MCH, which is DET/7290+1 or 74(?) for 1% increase.

---

Yeah, it's the thing I noticed while I was crunching my numbers and I don't have much gear in order to verify. However, I don't agree with the formula used for DRG, BRD, and MCH because it means that even at 0 DET from gear, you get a 3% increase in DPS, which doesn't make sense to me. Also, I'm under the assumption that DET is a linear increase in DPS but that could change once we get higher ilvl gear.

Took replacing 2 healers and 2 dps to finally get a group that works. Would be that we clear on my sloppiest run ever lol XD

A1 Savage clear: https://youtu.be/i46G2CZeGiI

Update: I dun goofed on some formulas and after some more number crunching, I came out with new ones.

Spell Damage Avg = (Potency * INT * (WD / 25 + 1) * ((DET - 218) / 5946.91 + 1) / 891 * Buffs
DET Dmg Multiplier = [(DET rating - 218) / 5946.91] + 1
Crit and Spell Speed remain the same.

I updated the spreadsheet to reflect this.
This gives DET more weight than I previously gave it.

Neophyter, I used your formula form with my numbers, and got some slightly different coefficients, though the idea is roughly the same. Note that my equation is basically yours but in an expanded form.

Base Potency = [ Int*WD*(Det-218)/350,000 + Int*WD/22 + Int*(WD-218)/2200 ] / 970. This somewhat approximated set of coefficients gave me fairly good results, under 0.5% error on most terms, at most 1.5% over.

Looking at your spreadsheet, I like the idea of examining how much of a stat it takes to gain X% more damage. So I extrapolated the above formula by changing one stat at a time to see how much it takes to get 1% to 10% potency increase:

Here is the raw chart:

%... Int WD Det
1% 835 99 372
2% 844 100 447
3% 852 101 521
4% 860 102 596
5% 869 103 671
6% 877 105 745
7% 885 106 820
8% 894 107 895
9% 902 108 967
10% 910 109 1044

And the associated changes between each %:

Change Int WD Det
1% 8 2 75
2% 9 1 75
3% 8 1 74
4% 8 1 75
5% 9 1 75
6% 8 2 74
7% 8 1 75
8% 9 1 75
9% 8 1 72
10% 8 1 77

Giving us the following average stat change per 1% damage increase... Considering Int, WD, and Det...

8.3 Int/%
1.2 WD/%
74.7 Det/%

Based on this we can say that 1 WD is worth 6.917 Int, and 1 Det is worth .1111 Int, or 9 Det = 1 Int in terms of % increases.
This also says that if you were to somehow have the choice between 2 weapons, where one has 1 more WD, and magically the same Int, the other one needs to have 62 more Det to make up for it.

I will add crit to these results sometime in the future, when I am in a mathematical mood. :p

For endgame raiding (static is working on A1S atm) is it ok to stay Elezen DW? FFXIV is my first ever MMO and while I love it I do see many of the other BLM's are Lala??

Is there an advantage to being one over the other for raiding? I know that Lala have better PIE whilst the Elezen have higher Int, but am unsure if I should change race. I have averaged 1106 on Faust over the last 10 Faust clears and understand I need to keep practicing, but will a race change help that at all?

Thank you :)

p.s. Thank you Aikaal for this great guide! has helped me alot to love my BLM even more than 2.0 :) I enjoy that it is more challenging now!

EDIT:
Scoured through quite a few pages and saw Aikaal mention he had moved to Elezen for the Int. SO I guess I'll stay as is for now.
Although, from what I read, it doesn't seem to matter much?

And those values are also dead-on the values I achieve with my Dragoon Model also.

73 DET = 1% (Accurate)
11 STR = 1% (Rough)
1.4 WD = 1% (Rough)

So we're all roughly similar with our damage models.

Is there a particular reason we're expressing DPS increases as a percentage of base DPS? Seems like that'll be confusing later. I'm not a fan of expressing it in terms of your primary stat, but at least it makes sense that way. A 1% increase in damage can change in terms of "value" very quickly and we look at DPS as inherently linear anyway.

My numbers were:
9.29 Det = 1 Int
5.07 Int = 1 WD

Which seems reasonably in line with Det and I'd say the Weapon Damage is just a product of your interpolation which could explain a bit. I also only looked at 100 and 102 magic damage items which could indicate I'm inaccurate. Could go either way and in all honesty because WD is so important you really could get away with just assigning each WD value its own det/int forumla.

One more update regarding Spell Speed and its effects on DoT damage:

Spell Speed DoT Damage Multiplier: (SS - 354) / 5544 + 1

So the average spell damage for DoTs (AKA Thunder) is:

Average Spell Damage = (Potency * INT * (WD / 25 + 1) * ((DET - 218) / 5947 + 1) * ((SS - 354) / 5544 + 1)) / 891 * Buffs

Also, I revised the formula to make look better. This formula has a 1% - 2% error.

Lastly, as for Xenitan's remark, while I do prefer the old method of doing stat weights, percentage-based stat weights does have its uses. It also isn't that difficult to convert the percentage-based stat weights into the old method. Given Kenji's weights of:

8.3 Int/%
1.2 WD/%
74.7 Det/%

In order to get WD in relation of INT, you just divide the 8.3 INT by 1.2 to get:

6.91667 INT = 1 WD

And do the same with DET and INT to get:

1 INT = 9 DET

The reason expressing potency changes as a % of some previous base would be to provide a common metric between classes.

For example, using Dervy's data, a DRG using the 190 weapon and stats for a similar ilvl has a base potency of about 4.08.
A BLM using the 190 weapon w/ an overall 180 gear level (me), has a base potency of 4.68.
A WAR w/ the 190 weapon and full 190 gear has a potency of 3.08.

This is due to the fact that each class has a different amount of weapon damage, stats, buffs, and rotational potency.
For the most part we assume that the rotation maintains all buffs, and outputs the optimal potency/sec, which we cannot really optimize further. That just leaves us with the base potency for optimization.

So say we compare BLM and WAR.
BLM has higher WD, higher stats, and base potency than WAR. So one would say that for a WAR, 1 WD (for example) is worth 10 STR. Okay... but how does that affect the actual potency value? Does 1 WD add .05 to the 3.08 that I have, or does it add .1? More, less?
You can apply the same logic to BLM, unless you KNOW exactly what you have now, it's kind of difficult to say how much a stat will affect things.

We can circumvent that a bit by dividing out the unknown quantity and considering how much of a given stat we need to elicit a X% increase. Surprisingly (at least to me) that was fairly linear across 1 variable. Still because the variable are linked, I am certain that changing multiple variables over time will bring forth some nonlinearity, at which point the model needs to be fed new data using the new gear, but atm I think we can use these models to estimate out 5% on each stat. And given that we have 5 stats, including crit and speed, thats 1.05^5 = 1.276, a "calculable" 27.6% max dps increase without updating the model.

Either way, if we say that 6.92 Int = 1 WD, or 1.2 WD = 1%, we can still use them to gauge the value of changing stats.
Though I will say that IF someone were interested in comparing complete gear sets as a whole, it would be cumbersome to use the weights. Instead it may be simpler to plug the resulting stats for each gear set into the complete model (w/ crit and speed modifications), to have a finalized Base Potency Value for a specific gear set on a specific class, and repeat this process for other gear sets in order to compare the Base Potency Values.

As everything is a multiplier, we assume. So always, X Amount of DET will be 1%. It's also kinda built into the Damage Formula, well, mine at least. DET/7290 is a function in my damage formula for Determination.

1/7290 = 0.000137
1%/72.90 = 0.000137

Scales exactly the same.

One other thing, is that for Summoners, my model actually does WD/23. So, it could be vastly different for jobs, or somewhere, each jobs scale X stat differently.

What we really, really need to check is get a linear regression going of X STR with base DET + 0 WD... But, I'll leave that for the SimFF/Damage Formula Thread.