The current battle system mainly calculate everything from Your Rank vs Mob Rank

[Kurokikaze]

At least dLevel means you don't have to respec your stats when switching from a DoW to a DoM, 'cept for INT.

Trololo.

Well played sir. Well played.

/golfclap

[Naylia]

Well played sir. Well played.

/golfclap

It means you don't have to respec your stats to the point that they might as well just delete the whole damn stats page.

If respeccing is the concern then just let us save "builds" by "job" - so that when you switch "jobs" it swaps your stats (which you've unlocked via Physical Level), your skills (which you unlocked via Discipline Rank), and your gear (which you bought, won, what not and meet the requirements (based on stats) to equip).

[Kurokikaze]

It means you don't have to respec your stats to the point that they might as well just delete the whole damn stats page.

If respeccing is the concern then just let us save "builds" by "job" - so that when you switch "jobs" it swaps your stats (which you've unlocked via Physical Level), your skills (which you unlocked via Discipline Rank), and your gear (which you bought, won, what not and meet the requirements (based on stats) to equip).

I guess that went over your head... Hes actually making fun of your suggestion and I'm laughing in agreement.

[Lerris]

Take two players, one at rank 45, the other at rank 50. Give them the same exact stats and gear. You'll see a big difference.

Yes, we will see a big difference. I don't think anyone is denying that. But, has anyone actually done this and generated a large dataset? That is the issue. The difference does not necessarily mean that rank is the determining factor. It's likely that that's what it means, but "likelihood" does not constitute proof.

You're also missing details on the test: the characters need to be the same class and using the same gear.

At this pont, rent...do you really think that?
They won't see a damn thing lol...

This from someone whose every post is a broken record demonstrating an unwillingness to acknowledge the other point of view. Asking for proof demonstrates a willingness to be convinced. Personally, I'm not interested enough in the answer to put a lot of time I don't have into analyzing a combat system which will be replaced in a month.

[Rentahamster]

Yes, we will see a big difference. I don't think anyone is denying that. But, has anyone actually done this and generated a large dataset? That is the issue. The difference does not necessarily mean that rank is the determining factor. It's likely that that's what it means, but "likelihood" does not constitute proof.

Wait, wait, so you're saying that if everything else is kept constant except for rank difference, that it doesn't mean that "rank is the determining factor"????

Yes it does.


Gaining a rank is so much more significant to your dmg and accuracy and defense than getting new gear or gaining physical levels. It marginalizes gear way too much.

[Lerris]

Wait, wait, so you're saying that if everything else is kept constant except for rank difference, that it doesn't mean that "rank is the determining factor"????

Yes it does.


Gaining a rank is so much more significant to your dmg and accuracy and defense than getting new gear or gaining physical levels. It marginalizes gear way too much.

Then you need more tests using different gear and stats in order to demonstrate that they are overshadowed by rank. That is the missing element in the proposed demonstrations. That is what would help to move the premise from likelihood to proven. You've presented evidence that rank is a factor. You haven't presented evidence that it overshadows all other factors. What happens when you use different weapons but keep rank and stats the same? How about when you change strength but keep weapon, rank and other stats the same?

You can't test only one variable and conclude that it is more significant than the other variables involved. You need to test all the variables separately.

[Physic]

Wait, wait, so you're saying that if everything else is kept constant except for rank difference, that it doesn't mean that "rank is the determining factor"????

Yes it does.


Gaining a rank is so much more significant to your dmg and accuracy and defense than getting new gear or gaining physical levels. It marginalizes gear way too much.

This may be a valid point, but i would like some real values, as in what relationship you are saying it has, ie level gives you +15 damage weapon gives you 2, or better yet, an equation.

because on mobs my level i saw a 100% increase in damage per swing going from 20 to 120 attack with my weapon, versus a monster 16 levels higher than me i also saw a 100% increase in effectiveness. While im not sugegesting 100 attack will double your effectiveness in every case, I am saying that the weapon was a very noticeable boost to my damage. in fights in the range of -4 to +16 dlevel. and even in the 20-30 range versus strong mob types i saw a large % increase in damage.
this is just attack im looking at.

if you want your gear to be effective, it looks like it is. I have noticed gladiators taking way less damage than my pug, even at the same levels, why is this so, if gear has little effect?

[Rentahamster]

This may be a valid point, but i would like some real values, as in what relationship you are saying it has, ie level gives you +15 damage weapon gives you 2, or better yet, an equation.

For the millionth time, it's glaringly obvious how large a role dlvl serves in the dmg and acc calculations. That is why the difficulty is so drastically different between star levels on leves. You mistakenly put too many stars so the mobs are 15+ ranks higher than you and it takes forever to kill one while they do lots of damage to you. Lower the stars so that they are only 7 ranks higher than you, and proceed to slaughter them, if not OHKO.

You want math? Here you go.

http://ffxiv.zam.com/forum.html?foru...07363078848581

1. Effect of (DELTA)PlayerRank/MobRank: 48 VS 55,56,57,58,59

• Conclusion:Scourge's HITAVG & CRITAVG increases due to a function in direct proportion when the (DELTA)PlayerRank/MobRank increases. Further, there seems to be a point where the rank difference dramatically changes damage. This was observed on the Rank 59 mob.
• Data Citation: See spreadsheet. Normally the DMG change a mere 1-4%, but between mob ranks 58 and 59, the DMG changed a whopping 16-20%! This may be due to the mob stats not being set consistently, not necessarily the damage formula.
• Discussion: The scaling is consistent and matches my Phantom Dart test exactly. Damages scales exponentially, such that the closer the player rank is to the mob rank, the less damage changes when mob rank changes. Apparently from this data, the (DELTA) Mob/Player Rank dramatically affects the damage inconsistently, not on a smooth curve. These conclusions are the same as in my Phantom Dart experiment.

You get nowhere near the same sorts of damage bonuses by just equipping better gear or boosting your stats more.

if you want your gear to be effective, it looks like it is. I have noticed gladiators taking way less damage than my pug, even at the same levels, why is this so, if gear has little effect?

That because glad gear (full plate armor) has % dmg reduction properties, glads usually have more VIT than pgls, glads reduce their dmg by using a shield, and glads have dmg reduction skills like rampart, sentinel, and are probably using defender, as well.

Again, hardly anyone is saying that gear and stats have absolutely no effect. They do, but the main point of this entire thread is that gear and stats are far overshadowed by dlvl, and that the way to make gear and stats more important to the player is by decreasing the influence dlvl has on those damage and accuracy equations.