The Ultimate Black Mage Resources with Damage Calculator

Aye far from having all bis gear but slowly getting there. Reason I was thinking of getting piety were for moments i am not in a group with a scholar, yes they do give me 7 piety when with one. Our last coils kinda lasted only 45 min to get to turn 5 so i may be more helping friends and doing wp / ak runs. But then if i do manage to get 12 spell speed that is close to like having 2 more int according to your chart. hmmmmm But then, if the helm does drop next week i will have to get used to having a normal mana pool.

*Incoming Wall-o-Text*

For those of you who have access to MATLAB, or probably any decent code compiler, here is the code I have been using to estimate rotation potency.
Keep in mind this is not dps, this is simply the overall potency output over a period of time, going off the assumption that all spells have "roughly" the same % scaling from stats (ie. Fire 1 goes up by 2%, Blizz 3 goes up by 2%), and that all spells have the same crit rate.

*MATLAB code* - Note: The Firestarter proc use logic is still a bit rough. Feel free to improve upon it.

clc;
F1 = 270;
F3 = 396;
F3UI = 154;
B3AF = 154;
T2 = 14; %Estimating at 14 pps
SMana = 5; %Starting Mana: 4 for under 251 pie, 5 for over
rng('shuffle');
Time = 0; %Total Time Elapsed
TPot = 0; %Total Potency
Loops = 1000000; %Number of iterations <- Important!!!
STPot = 0; %Short Potency for this loop
STime = 0; %Short Time spend in this loop
Z = zeros(1, Loops); %Array to hold resulting PPS values for each loop
Next = 0; %Are we casting the next Fire 1?
Firestarter = 0; %Do we have a Firestarter proc up?

for s = 0: 1: Loops
STPot = 0; %Reset short potency
STime = 0; % Reset short time
TPot = TPot + 308; %Regen Phase (Thunder counted later)
STPot = STPot + 308; %Regen Phase
Time = Time + 8; %Time for Regen Phase
STime = STime + 8; %Time for Regen Phase
Mana = SMana; %Reset Mana to full
Next = 0;
while Mana > 0
TPot = TPot + F1; %Cast Fire 1
STPot = STPot + F1; %Cast Fire 1
Time = Time + 2.5; %1 GCD for Fire 1
STime = STime + 2.5; %1 GCD for Fire 1
Mana = Mana - 1; %Cast 1 spell
if rand(1) <= 0.6
Firestarter = 1;
end
if (Firestarter == 1 && Next == 1) %Have proc AND casted next Fire1
TPot = TPot + F3; %Cast Fire 3
STPot = STPot + F3; %Cast Fire 3
Time = Time + 2.5; %1 GCD for Instant Fire 3
STime = STime + 2.5; %1 GCD for Instant Fire 3
Next = 0;
Firestarter = 0;
else
Next = 1;
end
end
%Now we calculate the effect of Thunder 2
if STime >= 21
TPot = TPot + 295; %Full Thunder 2 Duration
STPot = STPot + 295; %Full Thunder 2 Duration
else
TPot = TPot + 14*STime; %Partial Thunder 2 Duration
STPot = STPot + 14*STime; %Partial Thunder 2 Duration
end
Z(s+1)=STPot/STime; %Update array with PPS for this loop
end
disp('5 Fire 1 Method')
fprintf('PPS = %f , STD = %f, Min = %f, Max = %f\n',TPot/Time,std(Z),min(Z),max(Z))

Time = 0;
TPot = 0;

for s = 0: 1: Loops
STPot = 0; %Reset short potency
STime = 0; % Reset short time
TPot = TPot + 308; %Regen Phase
STPot = STPot + 308; %Regen Phase
Time = Time + 8; %Time for Regen Phase
STime = STime + 8; %Time for Regen Phase
Mana = SMana; %Reset Mana to full
TPot = TPot + F3; %Quick-Cast Fire 3
STPot = STPot + F3; %Quick-Cast Fire 3
Time = Time + 2.5; %1 GCD for Quick-Cast Fire 3
STime = STime + 2.5; %1 GCD for Quick-Cast Fire 3
Mana = Mana - 2; %Cast equivalent of 2 spells
while Mana > 0
TPot = TPot + F1; %Cast Fire 1
STPot = STPot + F1; %Cast Fire 1
Time = Time + 2.5; %1 GCD for Fire 1
STime = STime + 2.5; %1 GCD for Fire 1
Mana = Mana - 1; %Cast 1 spell
if rand(1) <= 0.6
Firestarter = 1;
end
if (Firestarter == 1 && Next == 1) %Have proc AND casted next Fire1
TPot = TPot + F3; %Cast Fire 3
STPot = STPot + F3; %Cast Fire 3
Time = Time + 2.5; %1 GCD for Instant Fire 3
STime = STime + 2.5; %1 GCD for Instant Fire 3
Next = 0;
Firestarter = 0;
else
Next = 1;
end
end
%Now we calculate the effect of Thunder 2
if STime >= 21
TPot = TPot + 295; %Full Thunder 2 Duration
STPot = STPot + 295; %Full Thunder 2 Duration
else
TPot = TPot + 14*STime; %Partial Thunder 2 Duration
STPot = STPot + 14*STime; %Partial Thunder 2 Duration
end
Z(s+1)=STPot/STime; %Update array with PPS for this loop
end
format COMPACT
disp('F3 + 3 Fire 1 Method')
fprintf('PPS = %f , STD = %f, Min = %f, Max = %f\n\n',TPot/Time,std(Z),min(Z),max(Z))

*end code*

So we set the potency of our abilities as a reference. Start with a regen phase of Blizz 3, Thunder 2, and Fire 3, taking 8 seconds, and outputting 308 potency while setting up Thunder 2.
Then we start spamcasting Fire1.
After every Fire1, we try to get a Firestarter proc. If we did get a proc, we note that we have one. Regardless of whether we got a proc, we cast the next Fire1, and note that we are casting the next one.
Then we return to the actual casting sequence of Fire1, retry for Firestarter, but now since we cast a 2nd Fire 1, and have a Firestarter proc banked, we can cast Fire 3.

Once we're out of mana for Fire 1's, we look at hold long it's been since we cast Thunder 2, averaging it to 14 PPS, and factoring in the 8 second regen period beforehand... Then back to the top.

This sequence is run 1 million times to have reliable averaging.

This is beautiful. Oh and I love your reasoning for the Allagan BiS - "Sexy robe is sexy" xD. I'll have enough for the sorc body today, but man....i hate it covers half my face :(. On the other hand, sorc bis gives 100% acc, more crit, and more dmg with the spell speed.

Blah why couldn't vanya be i90 >_< ...love my dalamud red/black vanya robe so much lol. Im at 430 acc, 438 crit, 419 spell speed with the materia melds w/o food on vanya, so I assume it would be fine for a while. May just get the 3 hero acc first.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kenji1134

*Incoming Wall-o-Text*

---

What does your code have to say about Thunder I and Thunder III when applied?

Mmm... nothing.
The code uses Thunder 2 because... I generally use Thunder 2. =)
Thunder 3 isnt really worth it...
With 5 Fire1's, your longest rotation will be F1-F1-F3-F1-F1-F3-F1-B3-T3-F3, which is a total of 26 seconds, versus Thunder 3's 24 second duration.
Your shortest rotation is 5-F1s with no Firestarter procs, + B3-T3-F3 which is 21 seconds. So at best you exceed T3's dot by 2s, at worst you lose 3s of the dot.
With T2, your longest cycle is 25.5s, and shortest is 20.5s, so you will almost always get the full duration of T2.

Gear Page Updated with Turn 5 gear comparison

DPS Calculator is also updated and ready to rock!

--

@Kuroyasha - I know that feel bud. Hopefully they'll release the item fusing feature soon where you could fuse gear to keep stats/appearance of one another.

@Kenji1134 - I wish I'd gone with computer science route in college. I was born for these kind of things for sure. Maybe I'll get into it once I retire in ~40 years xD. How does MATLAB compare to my raw data by the way? (That is if you can adjust it to match my awesome data) ^^

PuroStrider,

Hmm... guess Ill poke around in your formulas for a bit, see what I can come up with.
Though I imagine your results are averaged over a large set, so your formulas dont have any variance in them... though I suppose that with 1,000,000 cycles, variance is moot...

Hmm... excel formulas look like holy hell man!
Have you tried looking at the value of 1 potency... or maybe 100 potency? Perhaps the entire reason the game uses potency in the first place is to do 1 generic calculation, get a "potency value", and then apply it to whatever you happen to be doing?
If nothing else it would greatly simplify the calculations.

Poking around in your math some more, namely for Fire 1 vs Fire 3... 396/270 is ~1.466. For various values of WD/int/det, the ratio between your calcs of F3/F1 is within 1% of the potency ratio. That may be sufficient justification to reduce your F3 equation... cause I like big numbers and bigger explosions... down into a baseline potency calculation... then multiply my results by it. =)

*Dropping The Math-Text Bomb*

Code Printouts: (Using my stats)
Intelligence = 423
Determination = 258
Weapon Damage = 66
Critical Hit Rate = 395
Spell Speed = 463
Potency =
2.4730
5 Fire 1 Method
PPS = 107.111960 , STD = 1.851122, Min = 94.878049, Max = 107.647059
DPS = 264.887842 , STD = 4.577825, Min = 234.633384, Max = 266.211142
F3 + 3 Fire 1 Method
PPS = 109.178302 , STD = 3.700309, Min = 98.111111, Max = 113.086957
DPS = 269.997905 , STD = 9.150862, Min = 242.628746, Max = 279.664007

*Code* - as always, may need minor tweaking... Im an electromechanical engineer, not a programmer after all =P
clc;
Int = input('Intelligence = ');
Det = input('Determination = ');
WD = input('Weapon Damage = ');
Crit = input('Critical Hit Rate = ');
SPD = input('Spell Speed = ');
%From PuroStrider's EPIC BLM spreadsheet.
F3DMG = .382*Det+1.8*Int+7.447*WD-451.36; %And thank you Wolfram Alpha!!!
AdjustedF3DMG = 0.000362*(Crit+2491)*(F3DMG+0.2769*SPD); %And TI-89!
Potency = AdjustedF3DMG/396/1.097 %3rd number is a correction factor between my results and spreadsheet.
%God your excel formulas are HUGE!!!
F1 = 270;
F3 = 396;
F3UI = 154;
B3AF = 154;
T2 = 14; %Estimating at 14 pps
SMana = 5; %Starting Mana: 4 for under 251 pie, 5 for over
rng('shuffle');
Time = 0; %Total Time Elapsed
TPot = 0; %Total Potency
Loops = 1000000; %Number of iterations <- Important!!!
STPot = 0; %Short Potency for this loop
STime = 0; %Short Time spend in this loop
Z = zeros(1, Loops); %Array to hold resulting PPS values for each loop
Next = 0; %Are we casting the next Fire 1?
Firestarter = 0; %Do we have a Firestarter proc up?

for s = 0: 1: Loops
STPot = 0; %Reset short potency
STime = 0; % Reset short time
TPot = TPot + 308; %Regen Phase (Thunder counted later)
STPot = STPot + 308; %Regen Phase
Time = Time + 8; %Time for Regen Phase
STime = STime + 8; %Time for Regen Phase
Mana = SMana; %Reset Mana to full
Next = 0;
while Mana > 0
TPot = TPot + F1; %Cast Fire 1
STPot = STPot + F1; %Cast Fire 1
Time = Time + 2.5; %1 GCD for Fire 1
STime = STime + 2.5; %1 GCD for Fire 1
Mana = Mana - 1; %Cast 1 spell
if rand(1) <= 0.6
Firestarter = 1;
end
if (Firestarter == 1 && Next == 1) %Have proc AND casted next Fire1
TPot = TPot + F3; %Cast Fire 3
STPot = STPot + F3; %Cast Fire 3
Time = Time + 2.5; %1 GCD for Instant Fire 3
STime = STime + 2.5; %1 GCD for Instant Fire 3
Next = 0;
Firestarter = 0;
else
Next = 1;
end
end
%Now we calculate the effect of Thunder 2
if STime >= 21
TPot = TPot + 295; %Full Thunder 2 Duration
STPot = STPot + 295; %Full Thunder 2 Duration
else
TPot = TPot + 14*STime; %Partial Thunder 2 Duration
STPot = STPot + 14*STime; %Partial Thunder 2 Duration
end
Z(s+1)=STPot/STime; %Update array with PPS for this loop
end
disp('5 Fire 1 Method')
fprintf('PPS = %f , STD = %f, Min = %f, Max = %f\n',TPot/Time,std(Z),min(Z),max(Z))
fprintf('DPS = %f , STD = %f, Min = %f, Max = %f\n',TPot/Time*Potency,std(Z)*Potency,min(Z)*Potency,max(Z)*Potency)

Time = 0;
TPot = 0;

for s = 0: 1: Loops
STPot = 0; %Reset short potency
STime = 0; % Reset short time
TPot = TPot + 308; %Regen Phase
STPot = STPot + 308; %Regen Phase
Time = Time + 8; %Time for Regen Phase
STime = STime + 8; %Time for Regen Phase
Mana = SMana; %Reset Mana to full
TPot = TPot + F3; %Quick-Cast Fire 3
STPot = STPot + F3; %Quick-Cast Fire 3
Time = Time + 2.5; %1 GCD for Quick-Cast Fire 3
STime = STime + 2.5; %1 GCD for Quick-Cast Fire 3
Mana = Mana - 2; %Cast equivalent of 2 spells
while Mana > 0
TPot = TPot + F1; %Cast Fire 1
STPot = STPot + F1; %Cast Fire 1
Time = Time + 2.5; %1 GCD for Fire 1
STime = STime + 2.5; %1 GCD for Fire 1
Mana = Mana - 1; %Cast 1 spell
if rand(1) <= 0.6
Firestarter = 1;
end
if (Firestarter == 1 && Next == 1) %Have proc AND casted next Fire1
TPot = TPot + F3; %Cast Fire 3
STPot = STPot + F3; %Cast Fire 3
Time = Time + 2.5; %1 GCD for Instant Fire 3
STime = STime + 2.5; %1 GCD for Instant Fire 3
Next = 0;
Firestarter = 0;
else
Next = 1;
end
end
%Now we calculate the effect of Thunder 2
if STime >= 21
TPot = TPot + 295; %Full Thunder 2 Duration
STPot = STPot + 295; %Full Thunder 2 Duration
else
TPot = TPot + 14*STime; %Partial Thunder 2 Duration
STPot = STPot + 14*STime; %Partial Thunder 2 Duration
end
Z(s+1)=STPot/STime; %Update array with PPS for this loop
end
format COMPACT
disp('F3 + 3 Fire 1 Method')
fprintf('PPS = %f , STD = %f, Min = %f, Max = %f\n\n',TPot/Time,std(Z),min(Z),max(Z))
fprintf('DPS = %f , STD = %f, Min = %f, Max = %f\n\n',TPot/Time*Potency,std(Z)*Potency,min(Z)*Potency,max(Z)*Potency)
*end code*

Um... so that's that... Though I am pretty sure I am not doing 264 dps. Really closer to 210... dunno, math is a fickle mistress.

Updated DPS calculator as well as better methodology to compare INT vs Crit vs DET...

^.^

I wonder, is there a significant difference in damage output on a lvl 1 dummy vs a lvl 50 dummy? Or do all dummies take the same damage (have 0 defense) and just have different HP and accuracy caps?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kenji1134

*Dropping The Math-Text Bomb*

5 Fire 1 Method
PPS = 107.111960 , STD = 1.851122, Min = 94.878049, Max = 107.647059
DPS = 264.887842 , STD = 4.577825, Min = 234.633384, Max = 266.211142

F3 + 3 Fire 1 Method
PPS = 109.178302 , STD = 3.700309, Min = 98.111111, Max = 113.086957
DPS = 269.997905 , STD = 9.150862, Min = 242.628746, Max = 279.664007

---

How confident are you in these results and your simulation?

I ask because I did a similar investigation in the other thread: http://forum.square-enix.com/ffxiv/t...=1#post1501774

With similar results from lightweight modeling.

Curious before I go harass our BLM who doesn't read the forums :D.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EasymodeX

How confident are you in these results and your simulation?

I ask because I did a similar investigation in the other thread: http://forum.square-enix.com/ffxiv/t...=1#post1501774

With similar results from lightweight modeling.

Curious before I go harass our BLM who doesn't read the forums :D.

---

On that thread, your potency/gcd using the first method (no double F3 trick) was 266.6 potency/gcd.
My numbers for the first method are typically around 107 potency/sec, on a 2.5s gcd, so 107*2.5=267.5, pretty much matches your numbers. So, it looks good.

Overall I am pretty sure of the potency calcs/simulation/method. Though the newest addition based on Puro's spreadsheet does not "feel" quite right... yet.

I suppose the next question becomes, IF the double F3 method is more potency... though surprisingly also more unstable (higher STD), then what is now the minimum Piety you need for the 2nd method?
Speaking for myself, as a Highlander, I needed to put 12 points into Piety to get to 251, which obviously lowered my damage per cast by a kinda noticeable amount, ~2.5%. Offhand I believe it is 9 MP per Piety for BLM... lol, or is it 7? =P

I guess I should also test the following situation...
Using the 2nd method, if we wait say... 0.5, or 0.75 sec for the Fire1 to land... adding 0.75s to the cycle time, and catching that last potential Firestarter proc, would it again be a dps gain in the long run, or is it better to just queue up B3 once the last F1 goes off?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kenji1134

I suppose the next question becomes, IF the double F3 method is more potency... though surprisingly also more unstable (higher STD),

---

My first reaction is that F3 is a larger single cast so gets more variance from crits. I don't know though.

Quote:

---

then what is now the minimum Piety you need for the 2nd method?

---

I don't play a BLM, but IIRC F3 replaces 2 F1s in terms of practical mana cost. However, F3's actual mana cost is less than double an F1, right? That means you will have excess mana left over if your stats are tuned to use 2x F1s, so you would be able to reduce Piety.

Quote:

---

Using the 2nd method, if we wait say... 0.5, or 0.75 sec for the Fire1 to land... adding 0.75s to the cycle time, and catching that last potential Firestarter proc, would it again be a dps gain in the long run, or is it better to just queue up B3 once the last F1 goes off?

---

The PPS is rated at 109.18 per your simulation. Roughly 22.5s per cycle. Does this rating include crit adjustment? Or are crits ignored for the purpose of the simulation?

Regardless, the new scenario requires a hard wait of 0.75s every cycle, reducing the normal cycle to (109.18*22.5) / (22.5+0.75) = 105.66 when no Firestarter procs but you waited anyways.

When a Firestarter does proc, your cycle becomes: (109.18*22.5+396)/(22.5+0.75+2.5) = 110.78.

60% of the time the first event happens, and 40% the latter happens [(109.18*22.5)*0.6 + (109.18*22.5+396)*0.4] / [(22.5+0.75)*0.6 + (22.5+0.75+2.5)*0.4]

= 107.83.

This is lower than the original 109.18, so at first glance it's a bad idea. Other considerations:

1. If your simulation is crit-adjusted, then the 396 I used above needs to be moderately increased.
2. Even if the "wait for the last Firestarter" scenario becomes better in the above assessment, then the alternative benefit of holding the Firestarter for an alternate UI->AF switch needs to be subtracted, assuming it is better than the normal "UI3_F3->" start.

With a crit% assumption of 15%, if your simulation is not crit adjusted, the result becomes:

= 108.32

So it's not looking good for "hard wait 0.75 every time".

Re-doing the numbers for a 0.5s hard wait:

108.96 (no crit adjustment)
109.45 (crit adjusted)

So your simulation has to include crit already and the player has to only wait 0.5s to check for Firestarter every cycle (or less) and successfully capture the Firestarter (e.g. use it) every time it procs to possibly be worth it. The alternative "holding Firestarter" for the UI3->AF3 switch also needs to cost nothing.

All in all, looking bad for the "hardwait the last Firestarter proc".

The potency calcs for each rotations do not have any crit calcs built into them. The "potency" calc that was recently added does include crit, though again, I am not sold on it's accuracy just yet.

Edit:
Did some quick testing on how much mana the F3-3F1 rotation takes, basically blew up the dummies in Whitebrim for a few minutes.
I start with 3728 mana in UI3. Then F3(UI)-F3(AF)-3*F1+T2+B3, B3 and T2 are out of order to make sure I get an accurate number before B3's mana regen hits... This puts me between 219 and 352 mana at the end. I imagine that 352 is from a quick UI regen tick compensating for the 113 mana I spend on F3(UI)...
So 3728-219 = 3509 MINIMUM mana required to do this rotation, with T2. Or 3615 mana if you want to use T3... which will almost always be clipped with this rotation...
Now, on WHM, which I believe also holds true for BLM, 1 piety = ~7.88 mana.
So as a Highlander, I have THE lowest racial piety. My current 3728 is with 12 extra piety to get to 251. If I move those points back into INT, I should be down to 3633 MP... which HEY! is enough for either T2 or T3, without having to drop any INT or slotting for PIE!
*Highlander Happy Dance*

Edit some more: Actually dropping 12 pie put me at 3629 MP... Still more than 3615! *Highlander Happy Dance*

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kenji1134

Though the newest addition based on Puro's spreadsheet does not "feel" quite right... yet.

---

-.-

I'll be happy to answer any questions regarding methodology for every single value and test on my spreadsheet. I get all my data raw from the game for my calculations to get real world result instead of throwing around potency values. You can think of me as an interpreter who translates potency into real damage. ^^

Also, when you guys are doing calculations with anything concerning subsequent casts, you have to consider casting animation delay. For instance, If you cast two Fire III in a row (3.5 sec each), your total cast time for 2 spells will actually a tad bit longer than 7.0 sec total. I have not tested the exact time for casting animation, but it's something worth mentioning.

The Fire III + 3 Fire I method is also something I will investigate in the future after I'm done tinkering with the current Fire I x5 rotation values.

Well if you care to do all of the same calcs for Blizzard 3 under AF3 AND Fire 3 under UI3, then I can tweak the code to output how many of each spell was cast over a single rotation, and the probability of that specific set occurring...
So it'd say something like... [Regen, 3 F1, 1 F2, 20.5s] = 18.5%... something like that.
Think Ill mess with that right now...

Hmm...
Added a small section of code to do some haphazard binning based on the available values in my pot/sec matrix...

%binning based on predetermined numbers
if (96 > Z(s+1) && Z(s+1) > 93)
BinLow = BinLow+1;
elseif (104 > Z(s+1) && Z(s+1) > 101)
BinMid = BinMid+1;
elseif (109 > Z(s+1) && Z(s+1) > 106)
BinHigh = BinHigh+1;
end
%done binning

The results were... interesting... and though I always tend to question my coding skills... not being an actual "proper" coder... these results in particular make me worried.

BinLow, no extra Fire 3's in the rotation, meaning no Firestarter procs happened or none were caught... 0.546%... 5462 times out of 1 million cycles.
BinMid, 1 extra Fire 3 in rotation, 9.52%.
BinHigh, 2 extra Fire 3's in rotation, 89.93%.

That is to say, for this code, the odds of getting no Firestarter procs on the first 4 Fires is half a percent, since the last Fire is immediately followed by B3, so we cant use that last proc... That seems wrong. Its saying that somehow, 0.6^5 (odds of NOT getting Firestarter 5x in a row) =/= 7.78% but is equal to 0.546%...
Well... This is a smidge troubling =P

I added some similar code to the F3+3F1 section, setting the bins for the numbers that appeared there... oddly enough it was again 3 conditions... even the unique(Z) command only returned the same 3 values, which correspond to 0, 1, or 2 used Firestarters...
Anyway, results for 2nd method binning:
BinLow, no extra Fire 3's, = 4.70% ...this looks a lot more realistic.
BinMid, 1 extra Fire 3, = 58.26%
BinHigh, 2 extra Fire 3's, = 37.04%

I guess I should revisit the 5 Fire 1 method code later, to see why its giving such odd numbers. The results for the F3-3F1 method looks a lot more realistic.

PS. @Puro
Note that I am a few drinks into the evening while writing this part... yay editing old-ish posts!
TBH the last time I really parsed my BLM was probably close to a month ago, using FFXIV-APP.
Since then I have gotten LogRep, and played with it a bit, and got some minor gear upgrades on BLM. So I guess I should sit down sometime and parse myself on a lvl 50 dummy to see if I really would be doing around 260 dps, vs my 210 a month ago. Which, with a hopefully more accurate parser, will prove BOTH our work to be valid... and we can get many internet points while I go study for my mathematical methods exam next week q.q

Also to answer my own question from before, it seems that the lvl 1 and lvl 50 dummies take the same damage from the same spells. namely I threw Thunder 3 on both, and it ticked for about 77 on each. Now the tick is 35 potency, so my potency value, if we assume thats the logical computational method to remove excess calculations and why EVERYTHING is in terms of potency and gives NO REAL DATAAAAAAA... Then my potency value is 2.2... while my calculated potency value from the modified F3 calc is 2.47... then again, that 2.47 is after spell speed and crit modifications... so hell if I know right now... *swig*
Anyway... Im gonna stick to the potency method for now, and Puro, if you have time, and/or are bored, see if you can find a pattern in just generic potency values across a number of spells for BLM... maybe my theory is true... It'd really simplify things.
Um... so I'll parse sometime tomorrow or Friday, when I am more sober and not watching Gundam.

*later*

Ah, morning...

Did some parsing on the lvl 50 dummies in Whitebrim with LogRep2. Still getting used to it, but I do have some interim results.

I parsed 2 times, over a 3-5 minute period... not quite sure, but it was a while, using the F3-3F1 rotation both times.
My peak dps was 283. Interestingly it peaked about 1 minute into to parse both times, then subsided.
Overall I typically had 240 dps at the end of a Regen phase, and about 260 dps at the end of a Fire phase.
My program gives me a dps of about 264, and always ends on a Fire phase... though after 1 mil cycles it doesnt really matter where it ends.
So... I'd say that atm, we're accurate to within 6%. Pretty good factoring in human error, Thundercloud procs, and the occasional full-cast-time F3.

Thanks for all this info, i was going to switch from PLD to dragoon but seen a BM wipe out several enemies in no time the other day so thinking of BM now :)

Updated BiS 'Gear' page (Allagan Ring vs Astral Ring)

Enjoy!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PuroStrider

Updated BiS 'Gear' page (Allagan Ring vs Astral Ring)

Enjoy!

---

You made your decision/test based upon the fact that you want to use Thunder II at the end of Fire rotation then cast Bliz III, correct?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NeoAmon

You made your decision/test based upon the fact that you want to use Thunder II at the end of Fire rotation then cast Bliz III, correct?

---

Not entirely. All you're getting from Thunder II is 16% more chance to proc thundercloud because the DPS between I and II is negligible.

You're pretty much sacrificing ~3-4 base damage for +1% crit, +116 HP, +1 Acc, +0.01 sec GCD (+0.02 sec if you put in PIE materia to use Thunder II Rotation) (You can also use it on your healer b/c it comes with +9 MND)

That's just one example. You can mix and match materias depending on what you need.

Hope that helps.

hmm seeing the dif its just best to have the astral ring. much more in my case since i need more hp for turn 5

I did some more testing of my potency theory on the lvl 1 dummies by Bentbranch.
I cast B2 on 2 dummies for a while, getting about 15 data points, ignoring crits. Since B2 is 100 potency, then my average / 100 is my potency value... which came to be ~2.195 from the B2 test.
Then I did a few full cycles of Thunder 3, again ignoring crits, and averaged about 15 points, divided by 35, and got ~ 2.246.
Then B3 spam... 2.198.
And (controlled) F3 in AF3 spam... 2.170.

So max/min = 3.5%... but TBH I dont trust T3's ticks since they only give 2 digit precision... If we ignore that result, then the max/min = 1.3%.

This should be sufficient proof that everything in the game is built off of a single generic potency calculation, then multiplied by some value for each ability...
Know the Potency... RULE THE WORLD!!!

PS. It "feels" like B2 and B3, averaged together, give the best overall approximation of your potency value, and are by far the easiest to test with.

I wonder... would gold rose earrings (socketed with materia: +12 acc, +8 det, +2 crit) be a viable option to allagan's earrings? You lose 4 int but would it be worth it just to cap acc?

edit - for set a.

It's always worth it to cap acc. But you shouldn't have an HP, vit, or acc issue if you're in full i90. Crafted jewelry is always a stepping stone to deal with abnormal amounts of acc or insufficient vit due to the randomness of coil drops.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rwarr

I wonder... would gold rose earrings (socketed with materia: +12 acc, +8 det, +2 crit) be a viable option to allagan's earrings? You lose 4 int but would it be worth it just to cap acc?

edit - for set a.

---

I did preliminary testing with 434 ACC in turn 5 and have not missed once out of 2500 casts. So it's safe to say that 434 is cap for now until I test 433 and lower myself. I've also tested 430 ACC a while back and missed 2 out of 1800 casts T1-T4.

With that said, I would say Allagan > Rose Gold > Hero Earrings for maximum DPS. Though I would highly consider Astral ring and Rose Gold Earrings solely for the +VIT for Turn 5.

Materia-wise, I would go with +8 VIT, +4 DET, +4 DET, +3 CRIT, and +X ACC (4, 6, or 9 depending on your current ACC and your bank)

Cheers.

Is 447 ACC good or bad?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by avecha

Is 447 ACC good or bad?

---

Above the cap. You could lower it to 424 and use HQ deviled eggs to get the 434 (Turn 5 cap). As a BLM you can't afford to miss, you miss and your entire rotation is down the toilet so yeah having your accuracy at cap is a must but you don't need to cross it until new content is released.

Oh so 434 seems to be the cap. hmm something always told me to not go less than that. Whelp soon i will be getting the ring to get more vit, this week i got nothing to upgrade.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shadowzanon

Oh so 434 seems to be the cap. hmm something always told me to not go less than that. Whelp soon i will be getting the ring to get more vit, this week i got nothing to upgrade.

---

The exact hard number is yet to be 100% confirmed, after all the only place to test it is against Twintania. At the moment I think it is 434, but it may be a point up or down.

I have not yet to miss on twit yet but then we have not done many attempts so a miss may or may not happen. i did have my acc at 430 but decided to put 4 more points as my last meld

I have figured out how to do flare twice from 1 mana bar use based on timing, distance from mob, and using transpose. Is this a dps increase over the standard fire II AOE spam or is this a loss? Can you track it on your doohickey?

Hmm, IIRC, to do the double Flare trick, much like the double F3 trick, one is affected by UI3 and one by AF3.
Under UI, Flare has 260*.7 = 182 potency. Under AF3, Fire 2 has 180 potency, but generally has a lower cost.

In effect from a full-ish mana bar, you can do 3 F2s and a Flare, which puts you at 0 mana and you need to transpose. This is a total of 1008 potency for your mana bar, and transpose is always up after Flare.
Going from UI3 into Flare for 182 potency, then a 2nd flare to 468 potency is a total of 650 potency, but even without doing any math, my gut feeling is that transpose wont be up in time.
Transpose takes ~5 gcd's to refresh.
So trans - tick (1) - B3 (1.4) - Flare (1) - Flare (1) = 4.4 gcd's. So transpose would not be up.
Also 468/4.4 = 106 pot/gcd, barely above B2 spam, and below the 3 F2 - Flare rotation.

Hmm, Ill get back to this idea later.

Edit: Returning to the idea.

I got ACT running for FFXIV this week... makes quicker testing a whole lot easier.

Baseline B2 spam: 98 dps on 1 dummy... 98 dps aoe... All tests are done on a lvl 1 dummy in the Bannock, that doesnt clip the other one with 5m range aoes... so its all effectively ST and AoE's that just hit 1 target.
Ranged Double Flare: *0 mana - Transpose - tick - B3 - *wait for tick, hit Flare a bit before the blue bar fills up - Flare - *back at 0 mana = 125 dps on 1 dummy, 91.25 aoe.
Melee Double Flare: *0 mana - Transpose - tick - B2 - B2 - *wait for tick, hit Flare a bit before the blue bar fills up - Flare - *back at 0 mana = 120 dps on 1 dummy, 120 aoe.
Ranged F2-Flare: B3 - F3 - F2x3 - Flare - Transpose - tick - *back to B3 = 151 dps on 1 dummy, 110 aoe.
Melee F2-Flare: B2 - B2 - F3 - F2x3 - Flare - Transpose - tick - *back to B2's = 132 dps on 1 dummy, 115.4 aoe.

Comparisons

If you can be in melee range:
Melee Double Flare is best, if you watch your mana bar like a hawk. If you get the timing wrong, then you lose the AF3 Flare and that just sucks.
2nd best is the ol melee version of the 3F2-Flare rotation, trading B3 for 2 B2's in melee range. ~96% as effective as the "New King" Melee Double Flare... but SOOO much easier to do.
And 3rd place in the melee category goes to the the old standby "mash Blizzard 2 until everything dies"... coming in at 82% of #1's dps... Also mindlessly easy and you never miss cause your target died...

From a distance:
Your best bet is the standard 3F2-Flare rotation using B3.
The ranged Double Flare rotation sadly falls flat in this category, coming in at 83% of the above rotation's dps, and for more work.

Conclusion

If you get the timing down, and can safely stay in melee range, this "new" Double-Flare rotation does seem to be our best option for AoE.
That said, the non-double Flare melee rotation is a close second, and likely easier to use in the long run.

And one last comment. Since I separated the damage into "total" and "aoe", I could do a quick analysis on the break-even point between [AoE * N] vs [ST + AoE * (N-1)]... and simply put, the magic number seems to be 4. On 4 mobs, a purely or predominantly aoe rotation is better than a slightly less aoe rotation...
So... the answer is 4... when you must choose whether to AoE... or AAAAYEEEOOOOHHHWWWWWWHHEEEEEEEE!!!!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NeoAmon

Have you figured out Quadric Flare yet all under AF III :)?

---

I actually can do a quad flare. I can do flare all day long until the mobs die. It's basically an umbral flare, transpose, flare, flare, transpose, flare, flare, transpose, flare flare...etc.

It takes almost 2 flares for transpose to be off cool down. The problem is you have to hard cast flare, and if your in melee range you end up waiting a full tick and a half for the timing to be correct so you will have mana for your next flare. It's a lot of work and watching you bar. If the dps change is so minor as stated above then the normal F2 spam is best.

Also the raging strikes, flare, swift cast, convert, flare, transpose seems to be pretty righteous. Quelling strikes first if you want. Usually stuffs dead before I can get the last fire 3 and flare off.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NeoAmon

Here is the most optimal AOE rotation for "General" use against 4+ targets:

Bliz III > Fire III > Fire II Spam until low mana > Bliz III > Blizz II twice > Fire III > Fire II Spam.

---

There's almost zero chance this is true.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PessimiStick

There's almost zero chance this is true.

---

Yeah was my imagination, must have dreamt it somewhere.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NeoAmon

Yeah was my imagination, must have dreamt it somewhere.

---

I never said you didn't believe it, I'm just nearly positive that it isn't true.

wow that is really a hard work, thanks very much man. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PessimiStick

I never said you didn't believe it, I'm just nearly positive that it isn't true.

---

OK ^^/10characters

Why do you say that astral ring is better of than allagan ring? In terms on DPS and theoretical int based on your calculation, set B with allagan ring is better than astral ring.