Ruin I versus Ruin II

So, I main SMN, and have been since 2.0 and today, I was told for the very first time by a SCH in Expert today that I shouldn't use II at all, and only use I. He left before I could ask him his reasoning, but I have a feeling it's because Ruin I uses less MP. It does, and the potency is the same, but it doesn't use THAT much less MP, and Ruin II blinds, and allows me to the freedom to move and DPS as well. If an AOE drops on me, I can Ruin II and move at the same time. I can Ruin II while I move in to Miasma II and Ruin II again to move back at a safe distance. And I have never once been in an instance where I run out of MP as a result of constantly using Ruin II. Maybe the SCH is just really bad at MP management? I dunno...

Fellow SMNs, any of you use I over II?

Nowadays I use Ruin III most of the time even outside DWT. The only time I use Ruin I is when I have less than 1500 MP and Ruin II when I have to move.

4-man roulette?

If that's the case I am 50/50 on this subject...if I am the only one doing damage (lackluster DPS partner) I would weave 1's in and 2 when its time to fester than back to 1's. The reasoning is because with the other DPS effectively slowing the run...I could potentially run out of MP unless I energy drain...which I try to avoid in lieu of bigger numbers.

In any other content (8 and 24 man) I can 2 all day and be fine...the spider has been pretty taking a little while in WC but I think that's the case because that's the only boss people can actually game and Netflix in that instance

If you have to move then yes you should use Ruin II.

The SCH maybe didn't realize this, not sure.

Basically if MP is not an issue (which it probably shouldn't be in most content) then Ruin II is totally fine. Seems to me they were just being nitpicky.

I main Summoner, and I never use Ruin I over II. The blind status effect helps tank mitigate damage which in turn indirectly helps Healers, and the ability to use R2 as a followup to nearly any spell with casting time is too good to pass up. In addition, I'll take it a step further and say that the casting time involved with R1 can be better used to cast dots which in turn will apply more potency over time.

I use ruin 2 when I'm in melee range so I can book thwack between casts. I also use it whenever I need to cast while moving, like when I have to dodge an aoe but don't want to let up my attack. Its also good for mechanics where you need quickly to knock back an object like bombs or barrels.

I hear people now-a-days use Ruin III more, even outside of Dreadwyrm Stance. >w>()
It's like you said though, Ruin uses less MP so while you're stationary it is better, while Ruin II is better for when you have to move and DPS.
You could try Ruin then Ruin II, seeing as Ruin II is Instant cast.,

should try to squeeze out extra Broils and Ruin III if not moving.

i only use Ruin for DD these days.

The only time I use Ruin I is when I am level synced below 38 and it's my only choice.

i use Ruin II as opposed to Ruin 1 unless I'm in a low level dungeon. I just find I don't have problems with mp and I suppose also I love the ability to move and fight given my main is blm and that requires not moving for the most part. I love my summoner as well and it such a nice change from my main.

Personally I think that the instant cast and mobility alone is worth the extra MP, but as a tank, the blind status effect seals the deal when choosing between ruin and ruin 2. Ruin 2 all the way in that choice.

He's not wrong, but his logic is being applied to content where it really doesn't matter.

If you spammed Ruin II and nothing else in say, nidhogg extreme, you may run into MP problems in the long run.

Personally, I never use Ruin II unless I need to force a GCD, move out of an AoE, or if something needs to be blinded (which is rarely ever tbh).

Keep your DoTs up and you're golden, Ruin II is for extra mitigation on the tank (like E4E) and using Fester and other oGCDs.

To any Summoners reading this, please god, do not spam Ruin 1 and then 2 throughout the entire run. You have other skills. I might just have bad luck with DF but I've seen it far too much.

Like everything a SMN does, it's situational. If I just need to do something in between cooldowns/refreshing DoTs, I choose Ruin I (or even a non-Dreadwyrm Trance Ruin III depending on my MP situation). If I need to move out of the way of an aoe, or want to throw in some OGCD skills, use II. Another reason not to spam II is the blind debuff has diminishing returns; after a point it's just unnecessarily using the extra MP for no real benefit. As for the run in, run out for Miasma II, unless the party is on the strugglebus DPS wise, I don't really use Miasma II all that much...

for every 5 ruin II you cast you lose the mp that could have been used to cast a ruin III:
ruin II 5x353 = 1765 mp and 400 potency
ruin 4x 176 + ruin III 1*1060 = 1764 mp and 520 potency

The 4xruin + ruin III is a 30% gain to potency over the same time and mp usage.

Limiting your ruin II usage to movement and ogcd weaving is the better option than just spamming it.

Well, I just found myself in a situation where I decided to use Ruin 1. I was doing Chryfailis and got the balls mixed up so I died. Rezzed and had very little MP, so I went wtih using R1. Guess it does have its uses. :P

All of the Ruins each have their uses. Ruin I is the basic filler spell, with Ruin III being the new replacement, in and out of DWT, barring MP. Ruin II acts as the intermediate, depending on the situation. Trying to move/dodge, Ruin II, need to blind an enemy, Ruin II need to kill an enemy who is almost dead quickly, Ruin II, in a time crunch, like in Tam-Tara HM, Ruin II. And I'm saying this as a Scholar main.

When your choices are limited to Ruin I and Ruin II (aka, content where you're synced below the ability to use Ruin III), whether you should use Ruin II boils down to this question:

Are you running out of MP?

If not, if the jog between pulls is enough to make up the difference in cost, then by all means, use Ruin II freely.

There are a lot of longtime raiders who shy away from Ruin II for the simple fact that many of the old Raids were long slogs where MP conservation was a REAL PROBLEM for Summoners. A lot of SMNs who had gotten accustomed to using Ruin II for the freedom of movement suddenly found themselves running dry. These folks tend to admonish SMNs that they see doing the same, with the thought that it's going to come back to bite those newbie SMNs later, just as it did themselves.

Honestly, though, for casual content such as Roulette dungeons and trials, it really doesn't matter which you use.

As for content where Ruin III becomes available... It becomes a very tricky balance to maintain MP output while keeping your MP up. You want to cast Ruin III as much as you can afford to, but figuring out how much you can afford to varies from instance to instance. Certainly, during Dreadwyrm Trance, Ruin III should be your Ruin of choice, but that pretty much goes without saying!

Sometimes I like to jump around and toss Ruin II and pretend I'm a 50 BRD. Too soon? ._. I'm sorry bard-mages.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chalbee

Like everything a SMN does, it's situational. If I just need to do something in between cooldowns/refreshing DoTs, I choose Ruin I (or even a non-Dreadwyrm Trance Ruin III depending on my MP situation). If I need to move out of the way of an aoe, or want to throw in some OGCD skills, use II. Another reason not to spam II is the blind debuff has diminishing returns; after a point it's just unnecessarily using the extra MP for no real benefit. As for the run in, run out for Miasma II, unless the party is on the strugglebus DPS wise, I don't really use Miasma II all that much...

---

It helps. I add Miasma II in with the rest of my DoTs before I contagion. If I'm DoTing while chain pulling, then when I hit Contagion and then Bane, the rest of the mobs get a Miasma II without me even casting it again.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LineageRazor

snip

---

Yeah, that's my guess. He was most likely a raider, and I can under you'd want to be really careful with your MP management in raids, but this was just a roulette, so I don't really see why he had to bring it up unless he was just being snobbish.

As SCH I like Ruin 2 more since I love instant gratification
and also I haven't had MP problem since... the beginning of HW came out I guess. Also this one time in a dungeon when damage was so bad each pull took like 3-4 minutes it was awful but anyway
Honestly though as soon as Broil was an option...boom, that. If I need to move I'll pop off a Ruin 2 instead.
I use Ruin only when I can't use the others

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JustPlainLucas

So, I main SMN, and have been since 2.0 and today, I was told for the very first time by a SCH in Expert today that I shouldn't use II at all, and only use I. He left before I could ask him his reasoning, but I have a feeling it's because Ruin I uses less MP. It does, and the potency is the same, but it doesn't use THAT much less MP, and Ruin II blinds, and allows me to the freedom to move and DPS as well. If an AOE drops on me, I can Ruin II and move at the same time. I can Ruin II while I move in to Miasma II and Ruin II again to move back at a safe distance. And I have never once been in an instance where I run out of MP as a result of constantly using Ruin II. Maybe the SCH is just really bad at MP management? I dunno...

Fellow SMNs, any of you use I over II?

---

I usually use ruin i over ruin ii, but use ruin ii if I need to use an oGCD or move. Saving MP using 1 over 2 lets you use more 3's too.

For example, here is a random A5S log with my damage on my Summoner: https://www.fflogs.com/reports/Dar6f...-done&source=3

Ruin 1 is 4.11% of my damage
Ruin 2 is 1.90%
Run 3 is 11.20%

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JustPlainLucas

It helps. I add Miasma II in with the rest of my DoTs before I contagion. If I'm DoTing while chain pulling, then when I hit Contagion and then Bane, the rest of the mobs get a Miasma II without me even casting it again.

---

Actually, Miasma II is NOT passed by Bane. It's explicitly written on the power's ability: "Spreads a target's Bio, Bio II, and Miasma to nearby enemies." Fester, too, does not include Miasma II in its potency equation. When I learned these things. Misama II became so much less valuable to me. ;_;

Against a single target, Miasma II is not worth using at all. It does 20 potency plus 10 potency a tic for five tics, for a total of 70 potency. Ruin or Ruin II is a better use of your GCD against a single target, since they do 80 potency. It's decent enough to use against groups, though. Even just three mobs, and Miasma II is more potent than Ruin III.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LineageRazor

Actually, Miasma II is NOT passed by Bane. It's explicitly written on the power's ability: "Spreads a target's Bio, Bio II, and Miasma to nearby enemies." Fester, too, does not include Miasma II in its potency equation. When I learned these things. Misama II became so much less valuable to me. ;_;

Against a single target, Miasma II is not worth using at all. It does 20 potency plus 10 potency a tic for five tics, for a total of 70 potency. Ruin or Ruin II is a better use of your GCD against a single target, since they do 80 potency. It's decent enough to use against groups, though. Even just three mobs, and Miasma II is more potent than Ruin III.

---

Miasma II is a dps increase on a single target if you use contagion, albeit very small.

OT: I like ruin I. Cost almost no MP and allows you to cast moar ruin IIIs over the course of a battle. If I have the move or weave a oGCD, I use ruin II.

I've always used Ruin 2 when on the move, I think it was just an uninformed healer who wanted to feel big or looking for a reason to leave so they were willing to grasp the slightest error and blow it up. However when no movement needed, ruin 1 is the way to go. Can't speak past 50 as I havn't touched it much since I hit 60.

This is a good question, but it also has a very easy answer. You just have to ask yourself one question. They are the same potency so what is the benefit of using Ruin II over Ruin I? Well, 2 things. 1) It adds a blind effect. This is only useful depending on the situation. The encounter, party makeup and skill level of your tanks and healers. I wouldn't put too much weight on this. 2) It's instant cast. This allows movement, and the ability to weave oGCDs.

So if you are just standing still spamming your Ruin spell, there is really no reason to use Ruin II. The MP you save affords you more Ruin IIIs, which is far more important.

If the argument is that MP is not an issue in a particular encounter, then you should be using Ruin III. If you need to move, or use an oGCD, Run II your little heart out. But if you are literally just standing there spamming Ruin II, I can see why someone might say something.


Again, there is zero advantage in using Ruin II if you are standing still, using no oGCDs.

Played both SCH and SMN...I never use Ruin I unless in a low-level dungeon that requires it. Everyone says that Ruin I is more MP-efficient, and that's true, but I have never been in a situation where I was so low on MP that I couldn't afford Ruin II. Ruin II can't be interrupted from moving to dodge mechanics, or from knockbacks. It's not that expensive. People used to say the same for SCH too, that don't spam Broil because it eats up your MP--but I can spam Broil for days while also throwing Succors and Adlos and never come close to running out of MP. This is even more true when overgeared for content because spell's MP cost is based on Level, not iLVL and most mage iLVL stuff has free Piety on it which means you have more MP for casts. Also, I may be wrong, but isn't the amount of MP you auto-regen based on your Max MP?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jonnycbad

Played both SCH and SMN...I never use Ruin I unless in a low-level dungeon that requires it. Everyone says that Ruin I is more MP-efficient, and that's true, but I have never been in a situation where I was so low on MP that I couldn't afford Ruin II.

---

This is the exact argument though. If you have enough MP to cast Ruin II so much, then you should be using Ruin III or Broil. Ruin II for movement is great, but if you're standing their with plenty of MP spamming Ruin II, then you aren't using your resources correctly. There is literally zero benefit to using Ruin II outside of movement windows and oGCD weaving.

I use a Ruin I, Ruin II combo when I'm synced down. On SMN after level 50 there's very little cause to use Ruin I at the expense of more powerful tools available. On SCH I almost never use Ruin I. They didn't know what they're talking about.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bounddreamer

I use a Ruin I, Ruin II combo when I'm synced down. On SMN after level 50 there's very little cause to use Ruin I at the expense of more powerful tools available. On SCH I almost never use Ruin I. They didn't know what they're talking about.

---

Your last point is a very telling one. Healers are already forced to stand still in order to deliver their heals. So any attack that let's you stay on the move is very welcome. As Sch I'd always go with Ruin II over Ruin if it is an option for that very reason. I also have to say that a SCH could usefully run in, pop Miasma II on a pack, once the tank has aggro, and then retire to a safer range for healing. Instant cast attacks are awesome when you are otherwise rooted to the spot to cayrry out your role.

I don't understand how this thread is still going... If you need to move or weave ogcd use ruin II, if you don't need to move use a combination of ruin and ruin III/broil. Any further use of ruin II is a dps loss.

On summoner:
Ruin III if you have the MP (you should always have the mp in dreadwyrm)
Ruin II if you need to move or weave. You should be weaving very frequently.
Ruin If you have nothing to weave, lowish mp, and will not need to move.

On Scholar:
Broil if you won't have to move.
Ruin II if you need to move or weave. Ruin II, cs off, lustrate, cs on, back to dps, is a dps increase over not utilizing your ogcds.
Ruin if you want to always lose dps.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JustPlainLucas

It helps. I add Miasma II in with the rest of my DoTs before I contagion. If I'm DoTing while chain pulling, then when I hit Contagion and then Bane, the rest of the mobs get a Miasma II without me even casting it again.

---

That might be a waste though, because of the deminishing return and potency of the DoTs. If casting each DoT, averaging 2.5 seconds a cast/recast and DoT counter, you have Bio II at 30 secs, then Miasma at 24 and Bio II at 27, then since Bio is instant, if all goes well you'll have Bio II at 26/7, Miasma at 23/4, and Bio at 18. Immediately after that or about a second later you'd use Contagian which would add 15 secs to each DoT, bringing the total to Bio II 41/2, Miasma 38/39, and Bio 33. Then you use Bane which would snapshot those numbers onto the surrounding enemies.

Now if you add Miasma II into there you have to waiy a whole GCD to use the skill bringing the totals down to Bio II 24/25, Miasma 20/21, Bio 15/6, and Miasma II 10 seconds. And Miasma II potency is only like 120 with contagion. The lose of the larger numbers isnt worth it.

Also i think Bane only works on the 3 main DoTs, but I'm on my phone can't check that now.

I use ruin I and follow it by ruin II, it's a lot more fun since you attack 2 times in a row and you actually see ruin do some damage that way, ruin 1 is the least fun skill in the game does no damage and has a long cast time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LineageRazor

Actually, Miasma II is NOT passed by Bane. It's explicitly written on the power's ability: "Spreads a target's Bio, Bio II, and Miasma to nearby enemies." Fester, too, does not include Miasma II in its potency equation. When I learned these things. Misama II became so much less valuable to me. ;_;

Against a single target, Miasma II is not worth using at all. It does 20 potency plus 10 potency a tic for five tics, for a total of 70 potency. Ruin or Ruin II is a better use of your GCD against a single target, since they do 80 potency. It's decent enough to use against groups, though. Even just three mobs, and Miasma II is more potent than Ruin III.

---

I guess I never paid attention. I just assumed that since it was extended by Contagion, it would have been passed along in Bane with the rest of the dots.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nerisu

Nowadays I use Ruin III most of the time even outside DWT. The only time I use Ruin I is when I have less than 1500 MP and Ruin II when I have to move.

---

This is the proper answer :v or you'll lose dps...more than you'd think.

What I do is I use Ruin 1 first and use Ruin 2 right after.

There really isn't a definitive way of playing a job. Just read up on your spells and abilities, practice different types of rotations, pick the best rotation (for whatever situation) and do your best on pumping out as much DPS as possible