Connecting the DoTs: A Summoner Guide

With a base 3.0 recast timer and over a 10 minute test, it would be 200 casts. 3 sec / 600 sec = 200 swings.

If I were to test it with an absurd amount of spell speed and let the Enhanced Pet Actions buff proc at will (currently turning off pet attack when the buff procs) and using the same 10 minute model it'd be quite easy to see an increase in swing numbers. The damage wouldn't matter, just seeing if there's a big difference in swing numbers. Would require strict 10 minute time limit.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sidra

After that, if you get into Dreadwyrm Trance and have 2 stacks, it means you are delaying Dreadwyrm Trance a lot, and probably Aetherflow as well (it time gates DT, you never ever want to not use it every minute). You don't want to do that. After your opener, you basically want to use Festers on CD only delay DT to ensure your dots are up so that you can Ruin throughout it's duration.

---

Eh? Most DWT cycles go R2 > Aetherflow + DWT > M2 > 3D + Fester (or flipped around if the DoTs were on there already) > R3 spam > R2 with 2s left > Fester + Deathflare. The only times they deviate much are if you had to dodge/move during DWT (which still gives you 2 Festers), an awkward phase change leaves you activating DWT before the boss even appears, or if you really want to save some stacks for Bane like in A4S.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Charybdis

they are receiving Spell Speed benefit maybe it's not damage at all, but an actual recast reduction on their abilities.

---

As stated earlier, Spell Speed does affect the cast/recast of the pets, it's just not displayed in the tooltip. It's a bit harder to perceive on their primary attacks due to the 3s recast, but it's very apparent on the recast of things such as Aerial Slash or Crimson Cyclone.

Damn. I consider myself a good, although not spectacular SMN, and am generally pulling solid numbers (1081 in a 3 jump A1S, ~ 1400 Faust i192) - but apparently I have been doing it wrong. I use the 2P1F opener, but then just fester the rest of the way on CD. When DWT pops I generally just use it along with 3D and R3 spam until Deathflare.

I will have to dummy practice this for a bit - right now in my head the timing seems a bit odd, as it feel like I'd be holding off on using DWT for considerable time. Considering you have an opener named after you, and dps performance higher than mine, this seems like a time I might be better off shutting my mouth and listening. Thanks for the advice, and my apologies to whoever I was replying to that I was leading astray.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ShinryuReishiki

As stated earlier, Spell Speed does affect the cast/recast of the pets, it's just not displayed in the tooltip. It's a bit harder to perceive on their primary attacks due to the 3s recast, but it's very apparent on the recast of things such as Aerial Slash or Crimson Cyclone.

---

Which makes sense and I was sure I had read that, but in order to get a proper model going for Dervy and to understand the numerical weights and benefit, I'm trying to get some working numbers calculated for him is all. Trying to determine if Spell Speed also affects their damage or if it is SOLELY the recast timer, if it is just recast how can we measure/build an accurate model for it? Is it at the same reduction rate for us as players? I believe others were under the impression it was affecting damage as well (which is what I've been testing).

I honestly don't get the current obsession with spellspeed? Wasn't it the same on 2.0 and right now on 3.0 they just increased their base damage multiplier even then it's still lower than det. no matter how many times I think about it, spellspeed is not that relevant and maybe so if i'm going to stand still and hit a dummy with 0 movement to optimize every second which isn't the case on savage.

If you've been following the discussions between Dervy, Sleigh, Judge, myself and others through the data collection you'd know that:

-It's not an obsession with Spell Speed. It's an avid interest in nailing down the stat weights for our job which many people are incredibly interested in. It's not as easy as saying, X>Y>Z. Not for us anyway. Every job will have some sort of stat weights. We are on the front lines finding those exact numbers.

-Spell Speed is proving difficult to find and early models from Dervy show that Spell Speed is in fact better than BOTH CRT and DET. He mentions this a few pages back. If this is the case it puts SMN in an interesting place with their relationship between Spell Speed and their damage.

-Being so dismissive about the stats, work, and interest of others makes a lot of the research that Dervy and myself do disheartening to hear. We are putting in a lot of time for every SMN that's interested in optimizing their stats for gear and further progression.

There is no way SS will be better than Crit also the model won't reflecting on actual practical instance/fights. Smns do not chain casts like blms and pets are a 1/3 or so of smn's overall damage. I'm not trying to discourage the discussion. I'm just being realistic. Yes, as a smn i'm interested to know the formula since I was the one who dragged dervy here and asked him on his own thread back then, and we got crit/det values but ss is just not really convincing atm, i'm sorry.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Minorinz

There is no way SS will be better than Crit also the model won't reflecting on actual practical instance/fights. Smns do not chain casts like blms and pets are a 1/3 or so of smn's overall damage. I'm not trying to discourage the discussion. I'm just being realistic. Yes, as a smn i'm interested to know the formula since I was the one who dragged dervy here and asked him on his own thread back then, and we got crit/det values but ss is just not really convincing atm, i'm sorry.

---

How can you say there is no way SS will be better than Crit? What, you think it is literally impossible that SE would give it a higher weight? Doesn't that seem a bit arrogant?

SS effectively has two weights... one in how it affects DoT/Pet damage, and two in how it affects GCDs. The former can be modeled, and if early numbers are pointing at SS being weighted more heavily, without even getting into the benefits to GCD, how can you just outright dismiss it? Do you know something nobody else knows? I doubt it.

SMNs do chain cast like BLMs. We don't get a vast majority of our damage from chain casting (which is usually just ruin), but to say we don't chain cast means what, we just stand around doing nothing? Of course we're chain casting. Applying dots with a GCD benefit can and will mean occasional extra ticks that you wouldn't get without it. Spamming ruin (even more important now with DWT) always benefits from GCD improvements. Handling mechanics without interrupting casts, being able to slide cast sooner, minimizing lost GCD time while utilizing 2 oGCDs after instant casts, etc.. all benefit from SS.

But to outright say that SS can't be better than Crit with no evidence whatsoever? Really?

Personally, I _really_ appreciate the work that Chary and Dervy are doing to nail this stuff down. Right now, we just kind of use the first 210 piece we can get our hands on, but I would definitely like to know definitively that I am gearing correctly in the long run. I look forward to the realistic sims on actual fights (and dummy parses) to see how it all pans out.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kona_Nightwind

You always want to do two Festers in a DWT, excluding your opener if you use sleighs. Then you use your third fester after Aether CD is less than 30 secs. That way you get 2 Festers in every DWT.

---

Dreadwyrm Trance Duration: 15 seconds
Fester Recast: 10 seconds

Not sure how you're doing that lol.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Charybdis

With a base 3.0 recast timer and over a 10 minute test, it would be 200 casts. 3 sec / 600 sec = 200 swings.

If I were to test it with an absurd amount of spell speed and let the Enhanced Pet Actions buff proc at will (currently turning off pet attack when the buff procs) and using the same 10 minute model it'd be quite easy to see an increase in swing numbers. The damage wouldn't matter, just seeing if there's a big difference in swing numbers. Would require strict 10 minute time limit.

---

Thanks again for all the work you are doing.

Keep in mind that although Garuda's Wind Slash is a 3s CD, for testing purposes it does seem to work as Shinryu says, that it's a little bit higher, whether that is due to the AI not pre-queing skills or w/e.

On the quick testing I did a few pages back (edited my post so it may not have been noticed) I decided on low Crit, with Garuda doing 5 minute trials. This seemed to alleviate most of the procs interfering with data. Unfortunately, those short tests show such a small difference it's hard to get any sort of comparison even with the +377 Spell Speed that I used.

------------------------------------------------------------

One idea may be that if Ifrit's AA is confirmed @ X time, then you could always directly compare any results to his # of AA's. (assuming his AA isn't somehow effected by SPD too, and assuming that neither AA or Skills are delayed by any level of clipping from each other)

If the parse runs long enough then it could possibly even out any effect that procing EP has on the data so that you could correct for it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bhuni

Dreadwyrm Trance Duration: 15 seconds
Fester Recast: 10 seconds

Not sure how you're doing that lol.

---

DWT > Fester at 1 GCD in. Fester + Deathflare on the last Ruin II.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by T0rin

How can you say there is no way SS will be better than Crit? What, you think it is ...

---

Have you ever seen parses with people saying i could've done better with a higher crit rate even if it's by 1-2%? I have. I have seen the difference of dps output with crit in 3.0 because i've pased so many times that I don't need a formula to tell me that. The discussion was about mostly det vs ss at the beginning then ss is now better than crit and det lol who's being arrogant here without proof? I have proof with my parses I can show them here all day every day and average them out. Again, I'm just being realistic about what I experience.

About GCDs, bio and ruin 2 are instant on gcds with 0 cast time, if ss is supposed to be top secondary stat then where does it exactly shine?!??!?! our ruin is already low on potency and weaving CDs will require you to use ruin 2, although a funny thought would be a smn asking for arrow which is an attack speed buff from astro over litany which is a 15% crit rate how's that even, I don't know I guess it's just me? See blm would die to get arrow and blm would benefit from arrow way more than smn which already tells you something.

Like i said i can show you my parses with the crit rate difference for you to see with your own eyes.

Nail what down? that SS is the best secondary stat for smn? well good luck with that!!

So you give some anecdotal evidence about crit improving damage. Yes, of course it does. I'm sure if you made some effort, you could probably provide some anecdotal evidence for a couple hundred points of any secondary stat making a notable difference.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Minorinz

Nail what down? that SS is the best secondary stat for smn? well good luck with that!!

---

That's the whole point of the work being done! Nobody knows for sure, and anecdotal evidence is simply not good enough for a lot of people. It's not a matter of luck, it's simply a matter of gathering data, analyzing the numbers and coming up with provable weights, followed by a realistic sim. It will all happen eventually, as it always has.

Nobody at this point, except apparently you, is convinced of anything. People are remaining open minded, because nobody has proof one way or another. I certainly don't know if spell speed is better than crit or not, but I can't dismiss the possibility until the work has been done to prove it out one way or another. You're just advocating for a single point of view because anecdotally you find it unlikely that anything else would be realistic.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Minorinz

... although a funny thought would be a smn asking for arrow which is an attack speed buff from astro over litany which is a 15% crit rate how's that even, I don't know I guess it's just me? See blm would die to get arrow and blm would benefit from arrow way more than smn which already tells you something...

---

Spell Speed increases the damage done by DoT spells. Fey Wind and the Arrow card DO NOT increase Spell Speed (and therefore SMN's dot damage) but rather Attack Speed. Attack Speed is a new terminology introduced in Heavensward and it means that cast times are reduced, the GCD is reduced and auto attack frequency is increased. Fey Wind and Arrow are not good buffs for SMN but that says nothing about the viability of Spell Speed as a secondary stat nor its weighting relative to the other stats.

Looking at the scaling of Crit (which is amazing) I'm fairly convinced that Crit will be best (for all DPS classes).

I haven't seen any thorough DET VS SPD Dot testing, but the little bit I did showed results of
~52 SPD = 1% increase
~72 DET = 1% increase

So from a glance they just look so close when you consider the oGCD skills and the arsenal of SMN Dots.

So glad for people collecting data and creating the Simulator, because I think it would just be too hard to optimize otherwise.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by T0rin

So you give some anecdotal evidence about crit improving

---

It's common sense in some way, you don't need people to tell you that the sky is blue when you see that it is blue. You saying that you need people to convince you with evidence instead of thinking about it yourself with your own experience as a base assumption is not better than following the pack with your eyes closed. I'm pretty sure I'm not the only one thinking Crit > SS otherwise I'm at complete awe with the current smn community s:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fainto

Spell Speed increases the damage done by DoT spells.

---

I was setting a comparison of how good spellspeed is for blm other than it being a better multiplier/secondary stat base. The example of "chaining spells" question being clarified with arrow since it obviously reduces the recast of a gcd. IF we are purely considering the damage increase on a dot vs the damage increase on all out going damage on smn then it's det vs ss otherwise if ss is better than crit, then, congratulations, the game just broke!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Minorinz

It's common sense in some way, you don't need people to tell you that the sky is blue when you see that it is blue. You saying that you need people to convince you with evidence instead of thinking about it yourself with your own experience as a base assumption is not better than following the pack with your eyes closed. I'm pretty sure I'm not the only one thinking Crit > SS otherwise I'm at complete awe with the current smn community s:

---

Did you just try to explain why it is more accurate to just 'go with your gut' rather than do analytical analysis of something? I'm sure a lot of people still think that Crit > SS, because that's how it was for a long time. Which really doesn't mean much of anything, since you know, stuff changes.

Thinking for myself and waiting on a proper analysis to be done are in no way related. If I want to know what is actually better, the only way to accomplish that is to wait until the analysis is done, or do it myself. Doing some parses and changing some gear is probably the least accurate way to come to an actual understanding of what is going on behind the scenes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by T0rin

Did you just try to explain why it is more accurate to just 'go with your gut' rather than do analytical analysis..

---

I'm basing what i'm saying righ tnow off my parses and others' parses that were posted here. I've compared the damage output to understand that crit is actually really good. I haven't went too far with my calculations and simply accepted that crit is that good. As for det vs ss, from how smn works, yes, it's my gut feeling. I don't think the difference is huge to be making assumptions that ss is starting to get on crit's level to begin with. The damage formula will help to calculate the best gear set, from how I see it but it won't be to whether stack more det or ss because whatever comes with crit and the accuracy cap is welcomed.

If I never tested stuff out and never identified how badly DET has been butchered as it scales differently in level 60, we'd still be on the DET > CRT > SS bandwagon as. This is clearly not the case.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Minorinz

Have you ever seen parses with people saying i could've done better with a higher crit rate even if it's by 1-2%? I have. I have seen the difference of dps output with crit in 3.0 because i've pased so many times that I don't need a formula to tell me that.

---

Again, anecdotal. We also said this exact phrase in 2.0, but oh golly gee, DET was still far more superior. That's like me saying "if I had more WD I'd do more damage". "if i had more DET I'd do more damage".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Minorinz

have proof with my parses I can show them here all day every day and average them out.
!

---

So why haven't you? I see you at the Dummys all the time. You've provided no factual evidence for your arguments.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Minorinz

About GCDs, bio and ruin 2 are instant on gcds with 0 cast time,

---

Ruin II is instant, but you're still locked by your GCD, which is a recast of 2.5, which is affected by SS, no?

That's like saying, just because all of my abilities on my Dragoon happen instantly with no cast time, SS is irrelevant. No, that isn't how SS works.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Minorinz

although a funny thought would be a smn asking for arrow which is an attack speed buff from astro over litany which is a 15% crit rate how's that even, I don't know I guess it's just me? See blm would die to get arrow and blm would benefit from arrow way more than smn which already tells you something.

---

Because SS has exponential growth on your DPS. This is a FACT. It's exponential for every Job. But, Black Mages benefit the most from it, not because of their cast time, but they have infinite resources and can stack Skillspeed with 0 downside. Doesn't this sound a bit like a Summoner? If I stacked SS on Dragoon, damn right it'll be better than Crit once I reach a certain point.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Minorinz

Like i said i can show you my parses with the crit rate difference for you to see with your own eyes.

---

Please do and average them out and try convince us rather than just saying "I saw with my own eyes it must be true!!!!!!!!!!"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Minorinz

Nail what down? that SS is the best secondary stat for smn? well good luck with that!!

---

Prove it isn't.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by T0rin

Thinking for myself and waiting on a proper analysis to be done are in no way related. If I want to know what is actually better, the only way to accomplish that is to wait until the analysis is done, or do it myself. Doing some parses and changing some gear is probably the least accurate way to come to an actual understanding of what is going on behind the scenes.

---

Been watching the thread as always and this is where I had to draw the line. This is not a good way of thinking when aiming for high parses. Do not feel because the formulas dictate a number, that this is how it works in game, especially on a patch by patch basis. You should always value you're parses higher in the end no matter what. Sure, you can have a BIS or coefficients thrown at you all day, but if you can maintain higher numbers using another build, you should exploit that or come to understand that what works in game is far superior to any simulation or math done in a calculator. Going on behind the scenes and what gives the most damage don't always line up.

Now just to figure out how a few numbers of this stat may impact overall damage in theory, is different from how it will impact overall damage in execution. Regardless we should WANT to understand how each stat CAN affect the damage done by SMN / Pet anyway.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Havenchild

Been watching the thread as always and this is where I had to draw the line. This is not a good way of thinking when aiming for high parses. Do not feel because the formulas dictate a number, that this is how it works in game, especially on a patch by patch basis. You should always value you're parses higher in the end no matter what. Sure, you can have a BIS or coefficients thrown at you all day, but if you can maintain higher numbers using another build, you should exploit that or come to understand that what works in game is far superior to any simulation.

Now just to figure out how a few numbers of this stat, may impact overall damage in theory, is different from how it will impact overall damage in execution. Regardless we should stand to understand how each stat CAN affect the damage done by SMN / Pet anyway.

---

This discounts the reality that there may be minor differences in execution between parses. I can do 10 different parses with the exact same opener and routine and come up with 10 different results, without changing anything. Unless you execute everything perfect, every single time, no, this is a really bad way to come up with an analysis of which secondary stats are better. Any given kill, take A1S for example, can vary, simply because of RNG. Resins go out on different people. Spasers go out on different people. Number of jumps before kills vary. Etc. etc. Changing gear between one attempt and the next doesn't do anything to quantify the real differences between your potential. And this is what is important, your potential, not your execution.

If we were robots, and the fights had no RNG, and we executed everything exactly the same way every time, then comparing two parses would be a legitimate way to determine which gear (stats) were better. But in reality, we aren't. But you know what is? A simulation.

If you can maintain higher numbers with inferior gear, it is not an issue that the inferior gear is actually better, it is an issue with how you play the game.

And all of this analysis should be able to be proven out in the game. If the math says that SS is worth X and Crit is worth Y and Det is worth Z, that should actually be provable in the game. This isn't just some exercise for funsies, the whole point is to determine the actual outcome of something happening in the game, to determine a real value to something more than an anecdotal guess.

If the reality is that SS > Crit > Det, and someone can pull higher numbers with a Crit heavy set than an SS heavy set, that just means they are screwing something up when using the SS heavy set, or that the method for determining the value of SS vs Det was flawed. You're proposing a really bad hypothetical, simply to get behind the idea that a flawed human execution of something is more analytically accurate than a mathematical analysis.

Exactly. I can use the exact same set and have a variation of 50DPS simply because of human error, latency, good vs bad damage ranges, critting all my high potency skills, the list goes on.

The only, true way, to test stats and different "builds" is in a vacuum where RNG and Crit are normalized, with human error removed from it.

Any other method isn't scientific. You need to eliminate as many variables as possible when conducting tests.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by T0rin

snip

---

There's two things kinda wrong with your statement. The first is, that there would be a better rotation than the one you found before that would better utilize the let's say for purpose SS, you have gained. In theory this is true, but in actual in game use it's not. Maybe on Striking Dummy? But in a fight? Highly Unlikely for the exact reason you mention, disconnects of a fight, RNG that can mess around with you and such. That is what slightly reduces the use of Spellspeed as well. How many casts it gave you over the course of the fight actually almost never changes or changes very little because of how fights play out. Now if we are looking at SS, like a modifier similar to DET, that's completely different.

The second way you are wrong, I would take you back to the 2.5+ series a sec. Many people stood by on calculators and sims alone, but several people could not pull the numbers I was able to do, when I would sacrifice yes, main stat for secondaries.
Many people claimed I was wrong regardless of reasoning and logical testing in game showed otherwise. It was only after I showed parse data relative to what I was saying, that people began to question how things actually worked again with SMN.

Turns out, that the old damage calculator was slightly off and the NA scene largely as a whole, didn't actually understand that DET scaled higher with more main stat. However the JP scene was more privy on this. Turns out I was proving the JP calculators in game without even knowing of either calculators existence. Have I tried builds from multiple people before? Absolutely, and executed my rotation the exact same way because even then, when Spellspeed had stronger influence on our cast times and such, it still never changed my rotation or gave an extra cast. Many people went full INT builds by maximizing ilvl, but that stuff was bloated with Spellspeed.

RNG has been existent in raiding for a long time. In T10 with charges/ tethers, T11 tethers, T13 Megaflare/ Earthshakers, T6 Flower debuff, T5 Dread stun....etcetc.

Now understand this does not take away from the fact that, now in Heavensward, Spellspeed is different, because it is. However, regardless, you should still go by what you see in game. A simulator is not server code. Nor are simulators always updated where as patch by patch, things can be tweaked behind the scenes without notice. If you would recall, stat scaling has been adjusted before between patches.

You don't have to trust what you see in game, but that's on you. However, I would strongly recommend against saying any Simulator or Calculator as the top result over what actually executes in-game better. That's not bad advice, that's kinda just common sense, I think.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dervy

Any other method isn't scientific. You need to eliminate as many variables as possible when conducting tests.

---

Do you guys think, that it is impossible, for someone to have little to no human error involved, when they understand the rotation they execute that much? I don't think so, and I feel a lot of people that post ridiculous numbers on DPS boards make it there with very little human error in between runs. You are definitely correct in, it's not based on science but what works in-game.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dervy

The only, true way, to test stats and different "builds" is in a vacuum where RNG and Crit are normalized, with human error removed from it.

---

Dont think I'm entirely disagreeing with you. When testing for coefficients and even potency per second,its instrumental to make a vacuum with static circumstances. However, what I'm saying is that gives you the general direction, that does not mean other lanes don't exist that can possibly be better outside of the vacuum which torin eluded to.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Havenchild

snip

---

The simple reality is that if the game doesn't back up the numbers, then you need to look at the numbers. The odds of there being human error involved are just as likely in a mathematical analysis as there are in executing a rotation in the game. That doesn't take away from the merit of either, it just means that you need to be very diligent about both. If the analysis is done right, then nothing in the game short of player error should counteract the data. Going back to your pre-3.0 example.. if the analysis is saying one thing and the reality is showing another, that points to a potential flaw in the analysis, but does not discount the idea that the analysis should definitively be able to prove out what is analytically better than something else.

And this is comparing dummy parse sims vs real fights, of course there will be differences in the impact of different stats. What if you wrote a sim that actually simulated real fights with normalized RNG on mechanics?

From a conceptual level, I am not understanding how Spell Speed could have been weighted so highly in the initial testing. It has no impact on Fester, Painflare, Deathflare. And we know that it has less impact on dots than determination does. It allows for more ruins, and somehow impacts the pets attack speed. But as crit and determination both also buff the pet in some way, it would seem like Spell Speed would be well behind the other 2 stats.

With that being said, SE is notoriously stingy with letting on how stats impact the game. I will let science do its thing here and see where it all ends up. I've definitely been wrong before. Thanks to everyone doing the hard work to figure this all out.

I'm not disagreeing about the concern/surprise over the Spell Speed weights. I am just as surprised myself. But there's a way to talk about it and a way not to. Everyone is curious/surprised/polarized. It's what drives us to DO the testing, find the formula, find the numbers, collect the data, etc. There's nothing wrong with Dervy, Judge, Sleigh, T0rin, and myself collecting this data. Speculation is also warranted and appreciated. Hell, speculation is the reason Dervy finds some of the things he does. But there's no need to bring negativity into the thread or say that the efforts we do are a waste of time. We don't deviate the thread so hard that people AREN'T getting help because they certainly still are. Discussion is good. We want discussion, we are not omniscient and may miss things. But don't discredit the hard work we are doing in the name of science.

Minorinz frustrated me not because of the doubt over Spell Speed, which is 100% justifiable. I have it. It was over the way they presented it, like doing the work we are doing is a waste of time which I don't agree with. Don't discredit the hard work being done to gain an understanding of "just how much" a stat is really affecting us. Or not.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Judge_Xero

Thanks again for all the work you are doing.

snip

---

I'll likely circle around to this after I finish the SS/Damage Pet model and then SS/DoT model. It seems that I misunderstood how OBVIOUS the recast timer reduction on SS works with pets. Hopefully it's just the same reduction of our own Spells/GCD which is already figured out. It's last on my list for the time being though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aikaal

DWT > Fester at 1 GCD in. Fester + Deathflare on the last Ruin II.

---

Well that's only really doable with the 2P1F opener as opposed to the 1P2F as Fester will be cooldown when you Trance, unless you Painflare last but by then your DOT's would start falling off before you can Tri-Diaster in Trance.

The opener aside I'm not sure about using Painflare in one Aetherflow cycle just so that you can Fester twice during Trance with 10% Magic increase.
Do the two 10% Festers even make up the 100 potency loss by using Painflare over Fester?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bhuni

Do the two 10% Festers even make up the 100 potency loss by using Painflare over Fester?

---

Nope, which is why that opener is a DPS loss, unless it causes the dot timers to line up better with phase jumps.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Havenchild

Dont think I'm entirely disagreeing with you. When testing for coefficients and even potency per second,its instrumental to make a vacuum with static circumstances. However, what I'm saying is that gives you the general direction, that does not mean other lanes don't exist that can possibly be better outside of the vacuum which torin eluded to.

---

But that's what I mean. You can eliminate Human Error over time through pure consistency and muscle reflexes, but you're still going to be subjected to RNG from your hit ranges and Crit, also when you clip DoTs due to the global ticks.

Though, you're absolutely correct about the NA/JP DET stuff. The issue is majority of the people who were working on the damage formula quit once EMX made his first draft. Afterwards, it was just.. Set in stone and no one questioned it.

It wasn't until Sunny noticed inconsistencies in 2.4ish about DET, that I started investigating the true nature of Determination. And even then, it turns the old Critical Hit Formula we used in 2.0 was incorrect. I'm gonna be honest and I agree with the JPs, 2.0 NA Theorycrafting was horrible.

But, this is the reason why I'm very confident about my work. Both myself and JPs have ended up with very similar coefficients for WD and DET. The only outlier is the function of AP.

Anyway, there's only a few things which you can't test in a vacuum. Example, you need to change your potion placement to get 3 GKs before Phase 2 in A3S. Sometimes, you may say that SS is weighted poorly, but in a certain fight, SS will be valuable (A1S, T13 earthshaker dancing etc). Obviously I'm no summoner so I cannot give examples where SS will be better due to mechanics.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dervy

Obviously I'm no summoner so I cannot give examples where SS will be better due to mechanics.

---

With ~715 SS, I've noticed that I can fit an extra GCD comfortably inside DWT, where I could not back when I had 5xx SS. For the same MP, that's an extra 40 potency in every DWT.

Fairly minor thing, but SS makes a lot of fairly minor improvements possible. And isn't that what optimization is all about?

Edit: One thing I've seen a lot of, is people mentioning that "SS doesn't reduce GCD enough to get an extra cast", which in some cases will be true. It ignores the fact of things like Raging Strikes, Potions and DWT where you get buffed damage within a finite window of time, and if you can get 6 GCDs inside of a buff instead of 5, you don't need to get the benefit of a full extra GCD to see a potency improvement.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by T0rin

The simple reality is that if the game doesn't back up the numbers, then you need to look at the numbers. The odds of there being human error involved are just as likely in a mathematical analysis as there are in executing a rotation in the game. That doesn't take away from the merit of either, it just means that you need to be very diligent about both. If the analysis is done right, then nothing in the game short of player error should counteract the data. Going back to your pre-3.0 example.. if the analysis is saying one thing and the reality is showing another, that points to a potential flaw in the analysis, but does not discount the idea that the analysis should definitively be able to prove out what is analytically better than something else.

---

This was a better statement I can get behind. You ideally want to see the theoretical yield of stats in action. It's what ultimately determines how high you will parse with Build A vs Build B.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by T0rin

And this is comparing dummy parse sims vs real fights, of course there will be differences in the impact of different stats. What if you wrote a sim that actually simulated real fights with normalized RNG on mechanics?

---

Forgive me if I'm mistaken but this would be an example of how spellspeed loses weight.

We can understand Spellspeeds weight in testing based off a few different things we look into.

1) How much damage Spellspeed changes our DoT ticks.
2) How much damage does Spellspeed influence Pet DPS, in the form of more attacks.
3) How many extra casts does additional Spellspeed give us.

The first two can be accurately portrayed on a dummy because there aren't too many factors that can heavily increase or decrease Spellspeed even during a fight after factoring player abilities. Not to mention, it also doesn't heavily affect the DoT damage. The last one however, will likely pull the weight down in an actual fight for two reasons. The first would be because of unavoidable downtime. Downtime is not adjusted regardless of how much Spellspeed a player may have. This means that the strength of Spellspeed in a fight, when referring to additional casts is balanced against the fact of gaining additional casts / or skill completions, before the inevitable downtime. Now on a striking dummy, or a simulator, odds are you will see something that will tell you, it's possible.

Now as for "what if you wrote something that simulated real fights with normalized RNG on mechanics?" This largely assumes one big thing, that your rotation is stagnantly proceeding regardless of the mechanic, however what if my actual rotation of skills is adjusted beforehand based off what I've seen from the mechanic which previously targeted someone else or presently targeting me? The maximum rotation would now flip in an instant for that encounter. If we can assume RNG as a constant factor in fights in terms of mechanics choosing players, than in the same breath we should assume that the maximum rotation of skills changes mid encounter and thus we change how many casts we have gained by not staying striking dummy like in execution and when weighed against what I said before of amount of casts you can get before inevitable downtime, this concludes the second reason of how the Spellspeed weights variate. So I'm not sure it's entirely possible to simulate a rotation entirely based off those and other factors, for example, how fast something is dying, which can also change depending on buffs, or gear acquisition among players etcetc.

Having said all that, what we would in theory also need to analyze is what part of spellspeed is the strongest portion of it. For example, in say 500 Spellspeed, how much of the weight concluded is represented by additional casts or increased DoT strength?
If it was in fact a strong modifier to DoT damage (would imagine 80-90% of the coefficient is how it affects DoT strength) than it's stat weight wouldn't change much even in an actual battle. However if its the former, of additional casts it will.

Considering however we know that, it's not too strong as a modifier of DoTs, even though it does modify them, we can safely conclude I think, that it's not somewhere in the 80-90% bracket, which means we have to fall back on additional Attacks or Casts from SMN or PET, correct me if I'm wrong here.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Charybdis

Don't discredit the hard work being done to gain an understanding of "just how much" a stat is really affecting us. Or not.

---

I 100% agree with this. For one, I personally appreciate all the efforts, you guys are showing to help fellow SMNs improve on the class. Let's try to keep the discussion as civil as possible regardless if we have differing opinions.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bhuni

Well that's only really doable with the 2P1F opener as opposed to the 1P2F as Fester will be cooldown when you Trance, unless you Painflare last but by then your DOT's would start falling off before you can Tri-Diaster in Trance.

The opener aside I'm not sure about using Painflare in one Aetherflow cycle just so that you can Fester twice during Trance with 10% Magic increase.
Do the two 10% Festers even make up the 100 potency loss by using Painflare over Fester?

---

The only time you painflare (in a perfect single target situation) is during your opener. I use Sleighs opener, the reason her opener is so effective is it maximizes the use of your potion and litany/trick attack. After the opener, you use two fester and Tri-Disaster, during DWT. Then after around 20 secs you use fester again. So every time you use DWT you have 3 aether stacks for the two Festers and Tri-Disaster.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bhuni

Well that's only really doable with the 2P1F opener as opposed to the 1P2F as Fester will be cooldown when you Trance, unless you Painflare last but by then your DOT's would start falling off before you can Tri-Diaster in Trance.

The opener aside I'm not sure about using Painflare in one Aetherflow cycle just so that you can Fester twice during Trance with 10% Magic increase.
Do the two 10% Festers even make up the 100 potency loss by using Painflare over Fester?

---

I think you might be misunderstanding what Kona first stated.

If you are using Sleigh or my Opening, the first DreadWyrm Trance, you will only be able to Fester once inside it.
However, the DreadWyrm Trance in the rest of the encounter you want to line up with Aetherflow usage. So essentially what will happen is you will wait to use your last AF stack still the Aetherflow CD is less then 30 seconds (preferably closer to 20 second remaining) and then you use your last stack. This then leaves you with three Aetherail Stacks and zero Aetherflow stacks. However the timer of Aetherail stacks will be 30 seconds, but the CD to get Aetherflow Stacks back will be less than 30 seconds.

So when Aetherflow finally comes off CD, you will wind up doing something like:

Some skill / Ruin II -> Aetherflow -> (Some skill/ Ruin II/ No skill) DWT -> Fester -> Ruin III Spam, Tri-Disaster + Contagion somewhere in between -> Ruin II -> Fester -> Deathflare.

This is true regardless of what opener you use.

A couple interesting Data Points.

Over 1680s (28 Minutes) - Ifrit Testing

Quote:

---

354 Spell Speed
607 Crit (11% Chance)
552 Auto Attacks
528 Burning Strikes

---

Quote:

---

751 Spell Speed
479 Crit (7% Chance)
552 Auto Attacks
541 Burning Strikes

---

Quote:

---

354 Spell Speed
483 Crit (7% Chance)
552 Auto Attacks
523 Burning Strike

---

I should have done a full base Crit/SS as something to compare these results to, but to give an example.

4% Crit Chance was almost a 1% increase in Pet damage through Enhanced Pet
397 SPD was close to 3.5% increase in Pet damage.

I'd be interested in a combination of really high Crit/SPD to see how it would compare.

I wish I could record a proc chance, to determine how much the SMN would benefit from additional SPD.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Judge_Xero

A couple interesting Data Points.

---

So the AAs seem set (which makes sense since they said SS wouldn't affect AAs) but with +397 SS there's a ROUGH increase of 13-18 Burning Strikes. The increase in Crit on your first set could account for more Enhanced Pet procs which increase the number of Strikes a bit. This is all rough speculation of course using this.

But +397 SS would be a rough increase of 3.44% of ability uses which would mean 114.406 SS per 1% increase in Stikes/ability.

My math could be wrong (I'm the data collector, not the math-er) and that's likely not enough data to make a data point but it's some napkin math for discussion.

EDIT: Were you letting Enhanced Pet Actions proc and pet attack through them? I'd assume so, just asking for clarification.
EDIT 2: You answered like everything I just said with your edits, damn you!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Havenchild

There's two things kinda wrong with your statement. The first is...

---

Omg i love you, and I totally get what you are saying. I think about it this way too.

I can't quote everyone, but I will say that I don't mind the ss test but just to be clear, do not start spreading misinformation about ss being better than crit or even det without going through ingame scenarios (instances) because people will blindly trust you on it and start stacking and adjusting their gear. Most of the people who post on this thread are creditable smns. If you wanna do some researching on it then sure, i'm happy to see smns who care to help and reach out to others. However it wouldn't be a good thing when new smns coming to learn/lurk jump to the conclusion that ss is somewhat better. Other than what I just noted, I feel it should be about capturing data and analyzing it, not having a conclusion/assumption ready then working in reverse trying to prove it.