I'm just curious about how much spell speed is too much spell speed for BLM. I'm going to guess somewhere around 1000+?
Quick Spell Speed Question
Printable View
-
04-09-2016, 12:43 AMKakerziamQuick Spell Speed Question
-
04-09-2016, 12:55 AMFrost_Tear
You can't have too much spell speed for BLM lol. It's not like you have a limited resource xD
-
04-09-2016, 12:55 AMStouterTaru
Spell Speed and Crit Hit Rate roll downhill; the more you have, the larger the marginal boost from adding more.
-
04-09-2016, 01:01 AMRongwayMP might be infinite, but max MP is not.Quote:
Originally Posted by Frost_Tear
There isn't enough MP to support the loads of spell speed that people want to stack.
On paper, yeah, loads and loads of spell speed are great, but spell speed doesn't get you any more Fire IVs in an Enochian segment where your MP only supports four casts anyway. -
04-09-2016, 01:09 AMFrost_TearEh I never implied high spell speed would let you get more Fire IV casts or anything like that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rongway
Just a light hearted joke post that only implies there is no draw back to being able to cast faster. -
04-09-2016, 01:13 AMFunkyBunchThe faster you can switch from AF to UI and back the better. So, if you can get nearly 4 sets of AF off instead of 3 sets of AF that'd be much better than the normal right?Quote:
Originally Posted by Rongway
So in 90 seconds you'd be getting ~16-18 F4's instead of 12-14. Plus you also get extra room for bonus T3 procs. 390>280 even when not including the DOT.
When you have enough room for just 3 AF rotations extra T3 procs are sometimes bad. But if you have extra room, (like 10 seconds say) extra T3 procs are good because they're free damage allowing smoother transition to next full enochian phase.
Which is getting close at around 1100 SS. -
04-09-2016, 01:18 AMNeophyteIsn't SS the only stat with no dimishing returns?Quote:
Originally Posted by StouterTaru
Afair it's something like ~30 points per -0,1s recast, which is an improvement by -0,4% from 2,5 to 2,49 but an improvement of -0,44% if it's from 2,3 to 2,29. -
04-09-2016, 01:19 AMFunkyBunchNo Crit has no diminishing returns either. The higher the crit, the higher the chance and the higher the damage. It's like double dipping.Quote:
Originally Posted by Neophyte
-
04-09-2016, 01:35 AMRongway
Sorry for the long wait since "edit incoming"; I wanted to triple check my maths to make sure everything was good
This number is off by an order of magnitude; it's closer to 25 points per 0.01s. But conceptually, your understanding of the marginal benefit is correct. Since each point is worth the same absolute reduction, the percentage of reduction goes up as points go up.Quote:
Originally Posted by Neophyte
Even if every cast was as short as the GCD and the GCD was, say, 2.30s, that's 26 casts per minute, and to fit in a 27th cast, it would require the GCD to drop to 2.22, which would require about 200 additional spell speed.Quote:
Originally Posted by FunkyBunch
800 spell speed gives 2.79 Fire II/IV and 2.33 GCD
1000 spell speed gives 2.71 Fire II/IV and 2.26 GCD
and these numbers support a gain of about 1 cast per minute with a gain of 200 spell speed.
So in a perfect world where this one extra cast is a Fire IV, that's a gain of ~80 DPS, yes; but to cast that extra Fire IV realistically, you need an extra Enochian segment, which is at minimum an extra four casts (Blizzard IV, Fire III, Fire IV, Blizzard III), which is currently unattainable. (Note however that if this were attainable, it would be the Fire IV DPS gain plus the extra other three spells, so much more than 80 DPS. My point here is it's something to look forward to some day, but today is not that day.) -
04-09-2016, 02:29 AMStouterTaruCrit Hit Rate increases damage as it increases rate. You start at ~5% chance at ~45% increase in damage. Around 46 Crit gives you a 1% increase to both crit rate and crit damage.Quote:
Originally Posted by Neophyte
Code:5% 45%
6% 46% ~0.50% marginal increase from ~46 Crit
...
16% 56% ~0.66% marginal increase from ~46 Crit
...
26% 66% ~0.78% marginal increase from ~46 Crit
-
04-09-2016, 02:58 AMFunkyBunchYou are correct. It is not yet the day for an extra Enochian segment. But it is the day for extra T3 procs.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rongway
But you are also missing that Spell Speed affects how soon Enochian is up, so more Enochians per fight. As did I, because I was basing it on 90s and then realized Enochian will always be 3 segments as it's cooldown is based on Spell Speed.
Faster Enochian's make more F4's too. -
04-09-2016, 03:02 AMRongwayEdit: No, sorry, you're right; I should have included the base damage.Quote:
Originally Posted by StouterTaru
normal chance + crit chance * (1 + crit damage multiplier) = expected value
0.95 + 0.05 * 1.45 = 1.0225
0.94 + 0.06 * 1.46 = 1.0276, an increase of 0.499%
0.93 + 0.07 * 1.47 = 1.0329, an increase of 0.516%
0.92 + 0.08 * 1.48 = 1.0384, an increase of 0.532%
.
.
.
0.75 + 0.25 * 1.65 = 1.1625
0.74 + 0.26 * 1.66 = 1.1716, an increase of 0.783%
And suddenly crit sounds even tastier. -
04-09-2016, 03:07 AMJackFrossI feel like you're missing something important in this argument. Three runs of enochian (at best) is 30+25+20 = 75 seconds. Enochian's recast is 60s. The 20s timer runs out during AF, so you will (at best) be going:Quote:
Originally Posted by Rongway
Eno wears off > B3 > T1 > F3 > Eno
Aka: 3 extra GCDs after it wears off - an additional +6 seconds. So we can assume the maximum recast for Enochian is ~80-81 seconds, and that's a slight undershot.
Spell speed would only necessitate a fourth cycle of AF under Enochian if you cut this 81 second timer (which is generally more like 70-73) down to something strictly less than 60. To shave off 10-13s from your casts in 60s, you would need nearly four to five times as much additional Spell Speed as you posited in your post to increase the gcds per 60s by 1.
Because of this massive leeway that BLM has in refreshing Enochian, Spell Speed has no soft cap with the current amounts we can get. For some actual numbers:
Assuming 0 random procs and a 2.26s GCD (since you gave me the F4 cast for that speed), your Enochian rotation would be:
F3>Eno>F1>F4>F4>F4>F3p>F4>B3>T1>B4
F3>F4>F4>F1>F4>F4>B3>T1>B4
F3>F4>F4>F1>F4>F4>B3>T1
F3>Eno
F4/B4 casts: 14*2.71s = 37.94s
GCD casts: 12*2.26s = 27.12s
Total: 39.06s + 27.96s = 65.06s
That's with not a single proc of any kind outside of the forced proc with Sharpcast for the 30s rotation and absolutely zero interruptions for movement or anything similar.
Thunder ticks for 18s. Assuming it's not flowing for the first, but is from then on, we're looking at ~11-12 ticks of Thunder which gives ~28%-31% chance of 0 procs.
You have two casts of F1. There's a 36% chance of getting 0 procs between the two of them.
Combined, there's a 10% chance that you will go through this entire rotation with literally 0 procs. Possible, but highly unlikely.
To decrease this baseline 65.06s rotation to a point where it is notably less than 60s (so 60.0 or less), you would need to increase Spell Speed to ~1460+
This drops the GCD to 2.08 (which is glorious) and causes the full rotation to be ~59.82s long with 0 procs. 10% chance that you'll wait less than 1s to pop Enochian.
Dropping below 59.0 requires 1570+ Spell Speed, and would give it ~58.64s duration with 0 procs. This would be scary, but 1 proc bumps it to 60.68, which is comfortable, and will happen 90% of the time.
So while this point exists, it's realistically unattainable in this current patch cycle.
If we attempt to maximize Spell Speed at the expense of all other stats, we still hit only a maximum of 1181 spell speed, which makes this rotation ~63s long with 0 procs.
http://ffxiv.ariyala.com/TQ67
So I dunno.
tl;dr: I think what needs to be looked at re: Spell Speed is the Enochian refresh timers, not some arguably nonsense discussion about a fourth Enochian rotation, which would never, in any realistic sense, be warranted. By the time you have the Spell Speed to do that fourth rotation, you'll also be able to hit F3>F4>F4>F1>F4>F4 in 15s, anyway, which means you'd have 4 shots of 15s AF3 rotations per 60s pretty easily. -
04-09-2016, 03:11 AMRongwayAlas, the cooldown is 60s independent of spell speed. Only Spear can shorten it for us.Quote:
Originally Posted by FunkyBunch
-
04-09-2016, 03:12 AMStouterTaru1.1716 / 1.1625 is an increase of 0.78% damage.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rongway
-
04-09-2016, 03:30 AMRongwayPlease recall my very first statement that the limiting factor is our low maxMP, not our spell speed. The point of the fourth segment post was that we can't afford to cast any extra Fire IV spells unless we add a fourth segment. We're already casting the most Fire IV spells per segment that our MP allows, so spell speed is really only useful to the point where you can comfortably fit a full three segments into the one minute recast on Enochian.Quote:
Originally Posted by JackFross
-
04-09-2016, 11:56 AMJackFrossAs I just explained in a long post above, this is absolutely not accurate for any value of Spell Speed that we can achieve in this patch cycle. Enochian is the only cooldown in the game that is directly affected by the amount of Spell Speed you have. I outline this here:Quote:
Originally Posted by Rongway
I further explain that this is the minimum cooldown for Enochian, and you will only see this exact rotation 1 out of every 10 casts of Enochian that you do in single-target encounters, at BEST.Quote:
Originally Posted by JackFross
...which is all values of Spell Speed less than 1600 or so, so saying that you only want Spell Speed to a point is flat wrong when the breakpoint that we'd be worried about is literally never going to be encountered.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rongway
You're just looking at this in the complete wrong way. You're considering additional casts being completed in the same time window, when we're looking at how long it takes us to complete the string of casts that we need to and want to complete.
Fundamental misunderstanding of my counterpoint to you.
This is completely debunked by the extensive post I made, by pointing out that what you are arguing here is a grossly incorrect way of viewing the benefit of Spell Speed. You're looking at it as black and white -Quote:
Originally Posted by Rongway
"Can I get more casts of Fire IV during Enochian if I increase Spell Speed? No? Welp."
When it is really:
"Will my Enochian be off cooldown for less time if I have additional Spell Speed? Yes! Hot damn."
It's a few seconds here and there, but in discussing min-maxing and optimal stat spreads for BLM, it is fundamentally wrong to argue that these additional Fire cycles in an extended duration fight do less to aid dps than the comparatively marginal gains you would get from an equivalent expense into Critical Hit Rate.
(There's also the breakpoint I can't be arsed to find where you'd be able to do F3>F4x5>B3, rather than having an F1 in there) -
04-09-2016, 01:12 PMRongwayQuote:
Originally Posted by JackFross
The point where you can comfortably fit a full three segments (including accessory and supplemental actions) into the one minute recast on Enochian is the point where Enochian is off cooldown the minimum amount of time (approaching 0 seconds), so why we're still arguing is beyond me.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rongway
-
04-09-2016, 06:04 PMCherubI got 5 Fire IV into a single rotation only with fey wind, ley lines and an enhanced arrow with my SS being at 1046. A new problem arises though. Mp ticks, you're too fast with B4 and Thunder in UI, you only get 1 tick lol. Still was fun being a machine gun. But the amount of SS we'd need for that probably will never be attained. My GCD was at 1.51 or so with those buffs.Quote:
Originally Posted by JackFross
-
04-09-2016, 08:49 PMNekotee
The more the better in spellspeed for a single target rotation.
Having too much is kinda confusing in aoe rotation.
I find myself going back to Fire to quickly for the mana regen to tick XD
But i adapt. -
04-09-2016, 08:55 PMJudge_Xero
@ Jack
I believe the value for 5 x F4 is around 1650 SPD @ 2.4s for F4.
While that value lowers the 3AF cycle below 60s it is also extended slightly by the longer cast of F4 vs F1 and guaranteed T1 procs from Sharp. -
04-11-2016, 07:24 AMMadroneThis can be somewhat addressed with about +46-52 piety. 310 is enough that you can always cast either a Thunder or Blizzard IV after B3 without waiting for the 1st mp tick. If more wait is needed for the 2nd mp tick and enochian timer allows, you'd B1 for filler. B3 T1 B1 B4 F3. T1 and B4 should be long enough for both ticks though, unless getting SCH/AST speed boosts.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cherub
-
04-11-2016, 08:45 AMShurrikhan
Easy way to find out:
Keep adding spell speed until you're able to do something different, and try to think over what further changes might come with even more spell speed. If it's not near a particular spell speed plateau, it's going to be worth a bit less than more direct damage increases.
That said, keep in mind some safety margin for clipping (e.g. via Sharp Cast or increased reaction times due to panic-mode). Determination will still scale a bit less than either Speed or Crit until at... levels likely unreachable in this expansion... though it's far from a shit stat. The +CritDamage component of the adjusted Critical Strike stat keeps it from tapering off nearly as much as before, and .01 seconds per 25 SS or whatever it the ratio was will be worth a greater % of your remaining GCD the further you increase the stat /decrease the GCD. -
04-11-2016, 09:44 PMMaero
Ideally 1000+ spell speed is best, 8-900 is far too low.
Just meld spell speed where you can, add crit for the rest, and if not possible to add crit add determination. -
04-12-2016, 04:38 AMFunkyBunch
One thing to note. With high spell speed, sometimes your AoE rotations can screw you because your F3 from UI is too fast and you don't actually get the mana tick (;_; ).
So you get stuck after casting F3, with only enough MP for an F2 and then you're OOM and have to wait for transpose to be off cooldown. True Story. -
04-12-2016, 05:34 AMShaolinMikeCouldn't you throw in a filler spell while in UI to wait for the tick? I like to use a Thunder I when I run into this, just so there's something to do rather than sit and wait for the tick before Casting Fire III again. Also, If it procs you can switch targets and throw the Thundercloud at another target. I'm far from a good BLM, but it sounds like a good idea to me in my own head lol.Quote:
Originally Posted by FunkyBunch
-
04-12-2016, 06:00 AMFunkyBunchYou can, but it's a straight up DPS loss and can still mess with your mana. As you may get an extra tick.Quote:
Originally Posted by ShaolinMike
We're talking like tenths of a second here. You don't need to wait for the tick, you need to wait just enough so the tick happens during your F3 cast.
Remember the AoE rotation is F3-F2-F2-F2-Flare-Transpose-F3-F2-F2-Flare. Adding in a T1 to force the tick or something is a pretty big DPS loss. Not as big as having the wrong amount of MP in AF but it's definitely not optimal. On 3+ enemies every single target spell is a DPS loss compared to F2/Flare, even T3P.
Also you don't need to cast B1/B2 in the AoE rotation ever. -
04-12-2016, 06:33 AMJackFrossThis is literally the worst. I've taken to just NOT using Ley Lines during AoE stuff because I always forget to hold for a half-second and end up missing the tick! xD Generally the 1 tick is enough for F2>B3, though, I think? I also always carry Max Ethers with me just in case I fuck it up (or if I feel like triple Flare).Quote:
Originally Posted by FunkyBunch
The worst, though, is running down to one mob left and cycling from transpose>F3>F1 and you use one too many F1s and end up with like sub 100 Mana left and can't even B3. -
04-12-2016, 07:20 AMFunkyBunchBut you don't want to F2->B3 if you don't have to. But I agree on the F3-F1 thing. Many annoyings.Quote:
Originally Posted by JackFross
-
04-13-2016, 12:31 AMJackFrossWasn't saying it's not a loss, just I think I remember that being a way to salvage it. Though that might have also been before the 12s AF timer - back when AF in that situation would wear off before Transpose is back. D:Quote:
Originally Posted by FunkyBunch
-
04-13-2016, 08:53 PMWaliel?_? F4 is 529,2p with AF3 and Eno. Spamming TC without any regard to how much has passed since previous application of Thunder of any type is a bad idea.Quote:
Originally Posted by FunkyBunch
Not really double dipping. If crit didn't increase crit damage, it would have diminishing returns. Going from 20% to 21% is worse than going from 5% to 6%.Quote:
Originally Posted by FunkyBunch
I really want to know where this idea of 900 SS being too low suddenly came up. You won't magically be able to do something differently with 1000 SS compared to 900. Well I guess you could go to fourth Eno rotation without cutting an F4 if needed, but that's quite niche.Quote:
Originally Posted by Maero
Don't cast anything during ice and just wait until after the first tick before casting F3. That's all there is to it.Quote:
SS and AoE things.
SS doesn't do anything for you in AoE situation until you can shave off a full three seconds. That said, Ley does absolutely nothing for you in AoE. I guess you could technically get that last F2 or Flare off before some/all of the mobs die, and increase the kill speed by 0.5 seconds. Yay, I guess? There is also some TC shenanigans you can do with 900 SS+, but you can't quarantee the procs when you want them to happen, so yeah. Anyways, I'm not sure if it's even possible to do the normal rotation in 12 seconds, because you always need two mana ticks to do anything worthwhile. -
04-13-2016, 10:24 PMStouterTaruGoing from 5% to 6% is an increase of 0.51% of base damage, 0.49% increase of adjusted damageQuote:
Originally Posted by Waliel
Going from 20% to 21% is an increase of 0.81% of base damage, 0.72% increase of adjusted damage
Crit hit rate has increasing proportional returns, similar to spell speed. -
04-14-2016, 03:15 AMJackFrossThey specifically said "If crit didn't increase crit damage" - you then just responded by saying "but because it buffs crit damage" which seems to ignore the comment that was made.Quote:
Originally Posted by StouterTaru
Maths below the cut.
Regardless, yeah. It's clearly NOT diminishing, as Waliel said:
If your crit is such that you have a 5% crit rate base, you deal 150% damage on a crit. Thus, adjusted base damage is:
100 x (.05*1.5 + .95*1) = 102.5
Increasing it to 6% (and thus Crit damage to 151%):
100 x (0.06*1.51 + .94*1) = 103.06
Difference: 103.06 - 102.5 = 0.56 -> 0.56/102.5 = 0.546% increase in damage
And similar calculations for 20% (165%) -> 21% (166%):
100 x (0.20*1.65 + .80*1) = 113
100 x (0.21*1.66 + .79*1) = 113.86
Difference: 113.86 - 113 = 0.86 -> 0.86/113 = 0.761% increase
However, if you get rid of the crit rate increasing crit damage, the crit mod is always 1.5. If we plug this into the above formulas, we can actually solve everything. Consider x to be the current crit rate as a percentage. Below, I solve to find the net change in potency that is gotten when increasing the critical hit rate by 1%:
net change = [ 100 x (((x+1)/100)*1.5 + ((1-(1+x))/100)) ] - [ 100 x ((x/100)*1.5 + ((1-x)/100)) ] -> simplify:
net change = [ 1.5(x+1) - x ] - [ 1.5x + 1 - x ]
net change = [ .5x + 1.5 ] - [ .5x + 1 ]
net change = .5x - .5x + 1.5 - 1 = 0.5
Considering the fact that, as your crit rate increases, the expected potency of each hit, adjusted for crit, increases as well, even with constant crit damage percentage, the fact that you have a constant rate of change (rather than variable) leads to a pretty clear picture as to why what Waliel said is completely accurate.
tl;dr: Waliel is right.
With crit damage, 20-21% gives a buff of 0.761% whereas 5-6% gives a buff of 0.546%.
But if crit damage were NOT increased by crit, both the gain from 20-21% and from 5-6% give the same static buff to net potency, resulting in a higher percentage gain for 5% to 6%.
What they were saying (and are NOT wrong about) is that increasing Crit is NOT double dipping. You get good gains from the boost to crit damage which clash with the diminishing returns on crit rate. Thankfully, the bigger gain from the damage outweighs the diminishing effect of boosted rates to make it an overall increasing growth curve. -
04-14-2016, 05:31 AMStouterTaruThey followed it with "Going from 20% to 21% is worse than going from 5% to 6%" without a qualifier added in.Quote:
Originally Posted by JackFross
ps - your maths are wrong, base crit damage starts at +45% (just a hair under) instead of +50%. -
04-14-2016, 08:01 AMJackFrossRIP me. I didn't double-check the formula before working it. Yeah, 0.499% v 0.723% not whatever numbers I put up.Quote:
Originally Posted by StouterTaru
-
04-15-2016, 10:11 PMWalielI thought it was pretty obvious I was talking about without crit damage. Text is hard sometimes.Quote:
Originally Posted by StouterTaru