SCH Theory - Dropping MND for Crit?

For the Start, this is my actual SCH build (Without Food/Deviled Eggs & Party Bonus)

http://i.imgur.com/TzWncPM.png

I'm actually struggling with a Question: Do i drop the Shoes + Hat (Crit Maxed) for non Crit iLv90s? (Both, Allagan & Argute doesn't have crit) The Raw healing power is no problem atm. (T5) So isn't it better to push the shield with crit's instead the heal with mnd?
Whats your opinion about Crit > MND at a certain point?

Never its always better to have higher consistent healing as a healer .

Crit rating is like spell speed where you need a ridiculous amount for it to have any effect.

T5 you spam physick and just pre shield every death sentence. With a virus, eye for an eye ,rain of death with the whm timing cure2 properly. You should be fine.

Wasn't it reported 500 crit= 17% crit which is very unreliable. Ilvl90 is better for the higher hp , higher mind, higher mana. Sacrificing so much isn't worth it.

Besides like you say TT isn't that healing intensive. You can easily heal TT in ilvl70 with relic+1. Collect crit gear at your leisure and post your results.

Honestly I got 567 crit with deviled eggs on and man, it's sick. Especially when Mantra / Convalescence / any healing buff you can think about is on. Not rare that you chain 2k+ physik combined with at least 1k embrace at the same time.

The more you crit, the best it is. But yeah adloquium is however crit capped, its gonna mainly affect your heals and those of the fairy.

On top, when you wanna do speed runs in AK its kinda ridiculous ... more crit = more chance to have crit ticks on your dots / shadowflare / energy drain.

Use the i90, no contest for a healer.

For scholar its different ... if he dont have problems with healing, I say, go for more crit.

http://na.finalfantasyxiv.com/lodest...acter/4856937/

Plannin to just replace belt and legs (and finish to get the last crafted astral pieces I miss). In dungeons I use Deus Ex Gratia fully crit melded on trash mobs and swap to relic on bosses :p


Only "advantage" that'd bring the ilvl90 to that setup is the mind boost. With full lvl 90, in cleric stance it'd certainly grant me some ridiculous support dps ... as a healer.

Don't forget that MND helps your fairy too



Focus on Main stat first

Doesn't det help fairy too ?

Yes but even less then it helps you

1 MND = 1.175 HP for Physick (average)
1 MND = 0. somethig for Embrace iirc

5 DET = 1 mnd

Make the mats :P

I'm personally going to try the full on ilevel 90 critical build. Yeah, there's more RNG involved and I will drop a bit on my physick average heal.

However, there are some things that I find compelling enough to try. For instance, Succor treats every individual target as a new critical roll. While you can't pick who gets the critical, it vastly increases your total raid heal. Due to relatively lower potency as compared to WHM, your MND and DET stats will have less of an effect anyway.

Furthermore, you have to remember scholars are treated as two entities. Thus, you need to effectively double your individual skill critical chance. Even getting one crit on either Embrace or Physick will raise your total heal over a pure MND/DET build. A critical adlo is the most efficient strong heal in the game.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sygmaelle

But yeah adloquium is however crit capped, its gonna mainly affect your heals and those of the fairy.

---

This is actually the first time I'm hearing of this and now you've gotten my attention, whats the % rate cap at? Was there some testing posted somewhere to back this up ?

Also, while this is slightly off topic, anyone else notice there embraces criting far more often then physick/aldo? Could just be coincidence but wasn't sure if the fairy's crit had a slight increase in relation to your base crit when summoned.
Anyways carry on, I'd love to see it if there really is some testing on the aldo crit % rate cap.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NarikoStar

This is actually the first time I'm hearing of this and now you've gotten my attention, whats the % rate cap at? Was there some testing posted somewhere to back this up ?

Also, while this is slightly off topic, anyone else notice there embraces criting far more often then physick/aldo? Could just be coincidence but wasn't sure if the fairy's crit had a slight increase in relation to your base crit when summoned.
Anyways carry on, I'd love to see it if there really is some testing on the aldo crit % rate cap.

---

I cast Embrace a TON more than anything else. Thus, I see more crits but I'm thinking I'm more of a victim of selection bias than finding some sort of special different in critical rates.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Whippet

Yes but even less then it helps you

1 MND = 1.175 HP for Physick (average)
1 MND = 0. somethig for Embrace iirc

5 DET = 1 mnd

Make the mats :P

---

Hah fair enough, thank you :P

Otherwise yup, Adloquium is crit capped at 470 precisely, its like 17%. I don't have more than that rate of Crit adlos done since I went up in crit.


http://www.reddit.com/r/ffxiv/commen...quium_testing/

Didn't read again but think it's there I found the info


As for the crit thing : its w/e really, purely RNG based guys'n'gals. Sometimes your fairy will crit 8 times in a row, sometimes zero at all, sometimes its you.

I'm sorry but that link is a load of bunk. No testing method on the crit cap other than the dubious claim of "using a parser".

I pretty much trust nothing that comes from Reddit. A lot of "theory crafters" that have a poor understanding of statistics or testing methodology.

There's RNG involved with just regular healing as well, there's a defined range. Sometimes you will hit on the high-end, other times the low.

The point is that we are talking about AVERAGE heal over a given amount of GCDs. I'm not convinced that a critical build will lead to a lower AVERAGE heal over a certain number of GCDs. I do believe that there will likely be an inflection point based on battle duration that will either give crits or potency the edge.

I dont think you get what I tried to say.

I for one just never trust forums because its a lot of "basic infos" that are not explained in details on purpose, and in general, the "bigger" picture is all the time pretty much not included in profit of pure non sense personnal theory crafting. While its cool to know how your class behave you simply can't rely on things said and experiment what work best for you in your usual gaming environment.


There's no crit cap on healing output of a Scholar so to speak. There's however one on adloquium and thats a granted, if you can't theory craft things out of a parser by doin yourself % , how can you claim that data is wrong ?

From my tests, Adlo is crit capped and I found an info somewhere sayin that the limit was at 470 : from my personnal sch experience it sound about right.

For everything that is not Adloquium, there's no cap at all. The more crit the merrier.

/cheer


To test that out, just do Adloquiums with X amount of crit and raise that amount, see if you do more of them, but from 470 I can guarantee that you ll hardly see a difference. It also apply for the adloquium goin after a succor. While succor isn't crit capped, the adloquium after is.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sygmaelle

stuff

---

Sorry, math doesn't work that way. You've not accounted for a ton of variables, which is why I trust nothing you are posting.

Implications that you need to reconcile before anyone takes you seriously:

1) Is 470 critical rate equal to 17% on crit on all skills? Did you test all skills? Do they have a central tendency normally distributed around 17%? If not, your methodology or understanding of underlying systems is incorrect.

2) What is the growth rate on critical rate? Please derive the logarithmic function with r-square. If you have so much data, that regression should be easy.

3) If other skills are uncapped on critical rate, what is their growth rate? Are they exponential? Polynomial? Linear? Non-standard "stair stepping"?

And so on...

Basically, if you don't have a degree in econometrics you don't stand any chance of getting this stuff right.

Bagel, seriously, confounds do not undo research. Confounds just add to error rate. Additionally, standard deviations and variances do not undo research. Chance does not undo research. Errors are built in. In fact, stats always identifies potential error.

So, yeah.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cainejw

Bagel, seriously, confounds do not undo research. Confounds just add to error rate. Additionally, standard deviations and variances do not undo research. Chance does not undo research. Errors are built in. In fact, stats always identifies potential error.

So, yeah.

---

I don't doubt that you did work to come up with your results. I'm saying you can't apply them to anything because you didn't account for confounding variables. If there is a huge error rate with your results, would you feel comfortable with them?

Good research knows the sources of error and how they may change the results. If I asked for a 95% CI, could you give it me? I have a feeling that interval is going to be something like 300-600 being the "cap" because you have that much error built in.

Quantify things.

Quote:

---

1) Is 470 critical rate equal to 17% on crit on all skills?

---

Yes sir, you can do some research around and see by yourself that 500 crit is ~20% crit rate. I can't really be totally precise here if its really what you want, but I can dig the data I found on Bluegarter forums, between others. Anyway, my point was : Adloquium is crit capped. All the other heals aren't.

And somehow I find it to be normal, otherwise Adlo would simply be too powerfull

I'm not theory crafting for a reason, I know how many variables need to be accounted for and I know the data simply isn't there. Yes, you can't trust other people.

I don't trust Blue Gartr. I don't argue that they are very skilled players, but to think that anyone is going to get this correct is pretty silly. Backing into a function solely on the basis of point estimates, regardless of the quantity, is tough to do.

You don't know what's at play for round of testing. Your extrapolation may correctly predict in a vacuum, but making those numbers universally applicable is a total joke.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Whippet

Yes but even less then it helps you

1 MND = 1.175 HP for Physick (average)
1 MND = 0. somethig for Embrace iirc

---

this is wrong. DET impacts fairy more than it does yourself. whereas the DET:MND ratio for you is somewhere around 5:1 or more, the DET:MND ratio for fairy heals is closer to 1:1. test it

re: crit, the prevailing logic is and has been that it's beneficial for scholars to stack crit because of the inherent bonuses that come with it. WHMs don't stack crit, for example, because they have no built-in incentive other than the chance to (over)heal for more. however recently i've been seeing people challenge this idea, which is interesting to watch. i'm curious to see how it plays out, and whether the prevailing logic ultimately favors another stat (perhaps SS, which Selene magnifies strongly, or DET, which as mentioned highly benefits the fairies). in the meantime, though, i'll continue to stack crit, and recommend that TC ditch the hat

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sygmaelle

Anyway, my point was : Adloquium is crit capped.

---

can you provide a source?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sygmaelle

To test that out, just do Adloquiums with X amount of crit and raise that amount, see if you do more of them, but from 470 I can guarantee that you ll hardly see a difference. It also apply for the adloquium goin after a succor. While succor isn't crit capped, the adloquium after is.

---

this is a terrible test lmao

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FinagleABagel

I'm not theory crafting for a reason, I know how many variables need to be accounted for and I know the data simply isn't there. Yes, you can't trust other people.

I don't trust Blue Gartr. I don't argue that they are very skilled players, but to think that anyone is going to get this correct is pretty silly. Backing into a function solely on the basis of point estimates, regardless of the quantity, is tough to do.

You don't know what's at play for round of testing. Your extrapolation may correctly predict in a vacuum, but making those numbers universally applicable is a total joke.

---

Maybe ! but for the crit rating, for now I'm kinda right and you can test it yourself : 17% = 470 crit rating.

And you ll hardly have more than that with critted adloquium. Again, its just adloquium beein concerned.


Btw not believin the first guild that downed TT in the world after theory crafting pretty much everything that had to be done ... well you truelly need some super "concrete" proofs with sheets and such I guess ^^'

Quote:

---

can you provide a source?

---

I totally didn't take screens of my tests by raisin crit from 470 up to 543 but you can easily check it out by yourself by chain casting adloquium in a limited timeframe, get the % of critted ones, and then do the same with Physik / Cure / Succor (but don't count the adloquium applied at the end of, just the healing done by succor)

Quote:

---

DET impacts fairy more than it does yourself. whereas the DET:MND ratio for you is somewhere around 5:1 or more, the DET:MND ratio for fairy heals is closer to 1:1. test it

---

Yeah thats what I saw about the fairy, but atm I can't really invest too much into det since I don't really run with bards most of the time so the extra mana given by piety is always nice to have - at least for me, but for optimised build, full crit + 300 ish det seem to be great -


I saw some scholars with 500 ish crit, 310 det or so and 520+ spell speed, I don't find the spell speed that important considering that, on the pure dps side, our main damage is to have a lot of dots under crits + energy drain crittin a lot too ... acceleratin an attack that you can do maximum 3 times per minute doesnt sound right.

For heals tho it definitely help to apply adloquium quicker

Quote:

---

this is a terrible test lmao

---

Yeah its so silly to see if your overall crit rating is effectively applied to all your skills when you feel that a certain one is clearly not as much affected as it should be on paper. Terrible sentence if you ask me.

Regardin crit : 130 points = +12/13% from the base rating of @lvl 50

1% crit is like ~10 points.


Base crit @lvl 50 -> 341 crit rating -> 5%

For the rest I'll let you do your own tests

so your test is that you have 470 crit, cast adlo for, what, a minute? then you do it again with another 30 or so crit? however many spell casts you're doing probably isn't enough to accurately measure chance, and even if it was, the amount of crit stat you'd have to add to notice a difference in actual % is significant. if you really wanted to find out of there was an adlo cap (and for the record, i don't think there is, although i admit that there could be), you'd at the very least have to do way more casts, then add way more crit, then do it again

More like 5 minutes of Adloquium, then you raise the bar. And there are hardly any differences really in term of total crit shields beein done.

Then you just do the same with Physiks and Embrace and you ll totally notice the difference. :)

120 casts is not statistically accurate.

I would say 1000 casts of Adloquium is a good number. If you come out with ~170 crits, then your control would be valid.
Another 1000 casts at a higher number. If still 170 crits, then the theory is valid.
Yet another 1000 casts each of Physic/Embrace. Not 170 = not capped.

Can do that I think :) thanks for the advice !

As someone said, 1000 casts is a much better test number than ~100. I'd like to see more theorycrafting done regarding Adlo crits, because it seems ridiculous to put a cap on our signature skill - especially when the best gear in the world will still not get us to any excessive crit rates.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Amaret

The Raw healing power is no problem atm. (T5)

---

If your current mind is already working in T5 coil then ... you just asked a rhetorical question.