Summoner got destroyed this patch

Can any one tell my what the loss in potency to elemental resistance is? I was under the impression that elemental damage had higher potency because it would have to go through an enemies elemental resistance and non elemental attacks like ruin do not. Is this correct? Does this mean the loss in damage due to casting lightning vs ruin is alot lower then people are assuming using potency for those math's instead of damage done? Is the trade off in having blizz 2 for aoe fights not worth the small loss in single target? Just curious as I was planning on a SMN as my next class

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Einheri

Can any one tell my what the loss in potency to elemental resistance is? I was under the impression that elemental damage had higher potency because it would have to go through an enemies elemental resistance and non elemental attacks like ruin do not. Is this correct? Does this mean the loss in damage due to casting lightning vs ruin is alot lower then people are assuming using potency for those math's instead of damage done? Is the trade off in having blizz 2 for aoe fights not worth the small loss in single target? Just curious as I was planning on a SMN as my next class

---

Enemies all have the same, standard resistance to attacks, 100% damage. You'll do the same against a training dummy as you will Twintania. You can simply ignore elemental damage and focus purely on Potency.

A 50 Potency Blizzard II is terrible and probably won't see any use in PvE from anyone but BLM anyway, or when you're FATE grinding. You'd need 4 enemies to make it worthwhile over weak moves, which is terrible when you look at the actual options the DoMs get:

WHM will have Holy, 200 Potency
SMN/SCH will have Bane and a plethora of strong DoTs to multi-DoT with anyway

Blizzard II being cross-class is in no way a trade-off for Thunder being lost. If it wasn't nerfed, there'd be a case to be made, but it is.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sleigh

A 50 Potency Blizzard II is terrible and probably won't see any use in PvE from anyone but BLM anyway, or when you're FATE grinding. You'd need 4 enemies to make it worthwhile over weak moves, which is terrible when you look at the actual options the DoMs get

---

Blizzard 2 is not a trade off for Thunder, one is AoE, one is ST. They obviously intended to take ST potential away from us, to create a situation where it would be easier for monks to shine.

But in what universe does a 50 potency AoE with no target cap not beat out Ruin, with 80 potency? I mean, that is what we are debating here, right? There were situations where you would Tri-Disaster instead of Ruin, namely if there were more than 2 targets. Now, if there is more than 1 target to hit, B2 is going to be a superior filler to Ruin on anything with more than 1 target. How is that not better?

I think the thing that makes me most upset about the SMN nerf is that being objective, BLM is the better endgame raiding mage choice. SMN is so much fun and BLM is so zzzz. Now that I need to go BLM for endgame raiding I've lost a lot of interest in this game. SE takes one step forward with patch 2.1 and two steps back with their class "Balancing" decisions, at least as a SMN main.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stupified

I think the thing that makes me most upset about the SMN nerf is that being objective, BLM is the better endgame raiding mage choice. SMN is so much fun and BLM is so zzzz. Now that I need to go BLM for endgame raiding I've lost a lot of interest in this game. SE takes one step forward with patch 2.1 and two steps back with their class "Balancing" decisions, at least as a SMN main.

---

SMN will still be superior end-game DPS. They still have better utility. The only thing this change has done is let Monks come more to the forefront of ST DPS, which is where they should have been all along, given how weak their AoE potential is. Since ARR was released, SMN has been the king of ST DPS while also having very strong AoE DPS. We will still be #1 in ST DPS on many fights, there will just be more fights where MNK can be competitive, or even beat us.

We were really simply too good. I think we needed a nerf, it is just unfortunate that it had to come in a form that makes the class easier to play.

The Allagan Boots change is really the biggest impact of this patch, and if those i90 EM Primal accessories can't help make up the loss of accuracy, then our BiS set will most definitely suffer.

So, out of curiosity, I went and tested the nerf. Since damage values on ruin aren't changed, this was actually simple. I timed how long it took to cast thunder and the effect's duration. I then cast thunder on a target and spammed ruin until thunder ran out. On the second target, I simply spammed ruin for the same duration (yes, including the time it takes to cast thunder). I did this 100 times to make sure I had a decently sized test pool. Here is a screenshot of the typical difference of damage. The target on the right is the thunder + ruin target. Target on the left is ruin only for the same duration: http://img2.finalfantasyxiv.com/acci...6ba7f3e378.png

So, yeah. So much for SPAM RUIN MOAR. Keep in mind that's 20.42 seconds (give or take a half a second of human reaction time) of damage. Imagine a Titan HM, or coil bosses, and the amount of damage loss is staggering.

You guys are forgetting BLM biggest nerf that was stated in the patch notes because it was a bug fix.....Mana Regen now is sync with umbral buffs, no more double flare or additional hasted spells.

So yea, nothing to see here, everything's fine, people overreacting is the norm on the internet.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by T0rin

Blizzard 2 is not a trade off for Thunder, one is AoE, one is ST. They obviously intended to take ST potential away from us, to create a situation where it would be easier for monks to shine.

But in what universe does a 50 potency AoE with no target cap not beat out Ruin, with 80 potency? I mean, that is what we are debating here, right? There were situations where you would Tri-Disaster instead of Ruin, namely if there were more than 2 targets. Now, if there is more than 1 target to hit, B2 is going to be a superior filler to Ruin on anything with more than 1 target. How is that not better?

---

His original quarry was, is Thunder's loss worth (nerfed) Blizzard II going in? It's Thunder vs B2, not Ruin vs B2.

I understand what SE was trying to do. Make SMN better AOE and worse ST to allow MNK and BLM to better compete single target. But heres the thing, you took a SMN into coil because though they had no real advantages in burst dps checks, their overall great DMG made up for it. Now that BLM and SMN will be roughly competitive ST dmg, AND even though SMN might be better at AOE (there are very few endgame situations where AOE is truly a challenge), might as well just Go/Bring BLM for all circumstances. Seems all SE looked at was what they wanted certain job roles to be, not how it translated to overall endgame need.