Why You Shouldn't Use Fracture

[RapBreon]

He was a jack ass to a lot of people in the thread. No, we're not in agreement.

If you are worrying about TP, you should be using Fracture unless the fight is almost over as it is more efficient. Did you not pay attention?

Fracture is always going to be a gain if it lasts the duration.

I'm far from a maths wizard. But logic dictates to me; weaving in a global that is more expensive than other the globals required for BB and SE combo every 30secs is going to drain my TP faster. Wasn't the crux of Kitru's argument that in an infinity long fight you'll eventually starve due to the additional cost of fracture? Thus, resulting in a DPS loss for longer than if you didn't use fracture and this discrepancy would be what makes fracture not so amazing?

He also said something about it being damage inefficient always, but if you just divide the combo TP cost by the potency you get the efficiency damage wise, which you have done. Thus damage wise - assuming infinity TP - fracture is more efficient. But you say it is more efficient always, as long as it lasts the duration. Thus, to me that point made by Kitru *appears* to be incorrect. Does this mean the discrepancy is over-stated by Kitru?

Unless my understanding of mathematics is more infantile than I assume and there is something I have an inadequate understanding of, explain it - as you would to a five year old - how that works. Bonus points if you can continue your unintentional parody (yes I'm aware of that being an oxymoron, but if the shoe fits) of Kitru.

[Coramac]

I'm far from a maths wizard. But logic dictates to me; weaving in a global that is more expensive than other the globals required for BB and SE combo every 30secs is going to drain my TP faster. Wasn't the crux of Kitru's argument that in an infinity long fight you'll eventually starve due to the additional cost of fracture? Thus, resulting in a DPS loss for longer than if you didn't use fracture and this discrepancy would be what makes fracture not so amazing?

Yes, that is basically what Kitru said, but it is simply wrong. If you are looking at a long term fight where you will experience a resource drain, efficiency is all that matters. He incorrectly assumed that damage goes to 0 when you run out of resource. It doesn't. You continue to auto attack and continue to regen resources. When you run out of resource is completely irrelevant if something increases both efficiency and DPS on a per use basis.

He also said something about it being damage inefficient always, but if you just divide the combo TP cost by the potency you get the efficiency damage wise, which you have done. Thus damage wise - assuming infinity TP - fracture is more efficient. But you say it is more efficient always, as long as it lasts the duration. Thus, to me that point made by Kitru *appears* to be incorrect. Does this mean the discrepancy is over-stated by Kitru?

Kitru made false assumptions.

Unless my understanding of mathematics is more infantile than I assume and there is something I have an inadequate understanding of, explain it - as you would to a five year old - how that works. Bonus points if you can continue your unintentional parody (yes I'm aware of that being an oxymoron, but if the shoe fits) of Kitru.

You continue to regenerate TP after you "run out" of it. You continue auto attacking regardless of whether you have run out of TP or not. With these two facts, the whole bit about whether or not to use Fracture is very easy. Kitru assumes that you when TP bottoms out, you stop auto attacking and can never use an ability again. There was no comparison for the non-Fracture cycle after it bottomed out.

[RapBreon]

Yes, that is basically what Kitru said, but it is simply wrong. If you are looking at a long term fight where you will experience a resource drain, efficiency is all that matters. He incorrectly assumed that damage goes to 0 when you run out of resource. It doesn't. You continue to auto attack and continue to regen resources. When you run out of resource is completely irrelevant if something increases both efficiency and DPS on a per use basis.

Kitru made false assumptions.

You continue to regenerate TP after you "run out" of it. You continue auto attacking regardless of whether you have run out of TP or not. With these two facts, the whole bit about whether or not to use Fracture is very easy. Kitru assumes that you when TP bottoms out, you stop auto attacking and can never use an ability again. There was no comparison for the non-Fracture cycle after it bottomed out.

Wooooooooooow. Right got it, shamefully, it took me longer than it should've. It seems that the matter got incredibly convoluted, because it's actually really simple 0.o. Thank you for explaining it for the umpteenth time, because looking at your previous posts, you have gone over this point numerous times, it just needed a sledge hammer to make it home for me at least.

I feel like I've been looking for my keys the entire time, only to find out I'm holding them.

[Sapphidia]

Coramac hits the nail on the head here, and made me realise what I'd also overlooked based on the complicated maths in the original post. At the end of the day, ALL THAT MATTERS is simply Damage-per-TP. You get 1000 TP to start, and you regen TP over time, independantly of what actions you're taking. Everyone has exactly the same amount of TP to play with over a fixed length fight. What counts is how you convert this TP into damage.

If it runs its duration, Fracture is 300 potency for 80 TP. That's 3.75 potency per TP for 1 GCD. A butchers combo of Heavy/Skull/Butchers is 150+200+280 potency for 70+60+60 TP, which is 630 Potency for 190 TP, or 3.3 potency per TP over 3 GCDs.

A 100 potency attack that costs 50 TP is exactly the same damage over a long fight as a 200 potency attack that costs 100 TP. Regen doesn't affect this efficiency. Just because the high cost one runs out sooner just means they frontload the same amount of damage at the start of the fight but still regen as much. In fact, the 200 potency attack will almost always be better to use because it gives you a "blank" global cooldown that makes it better for non-TP starved fights where global cooldowns are an issue.

Yes, Fracture is Low Threat. No, you shouldn't use it in situations where you don't have a nice threat lead.

But for damage? As long as Fracture runs its course, it will ALWAYS be better damage-per-TP than doing a Butcher's Block combo. The fact that you can only use it once per 30 seconds really, and can almost always ensure this clicks with a damage cooldown, makes it even more useful.

[Gooner_iBluAirJGR]

Too many numbers and parenthesis.

[Leiron]

He was a jack ass to a lot of people in the thread. No, we're not in agreement.

You kinda are, take the time to read his posts and yours, and you'll find that while your REASONS are in disagreement, your end conclusions are the same.

If you are worrying about TP, you should be using Fracture unless the fight is almost over as it is more efficient. Did you not pay attention?

You're being as much of a jerk as Kitru does, and actually yes I did pay attention and I disagree with it because it does not quite make much sense.
TP to Damage ratio wise? Yeah. Fracture is worth it.
Yes, it is a DPS gain.
No one disagrees on that, quite sure Kitru agreed.

The thing is, in terms of your TP pool, its less efficient.
TO suggest otherwise is... nonsensical.
Which is going to cost less? 80 TP ability? Or a 70 TP ability?
Standard hate rotation costs 40 TP.
40 TP...over the cost of 3 GCD's.
That's an average cost if 13.
Fracture? It costs 30 TP in a single GCD.
This cost does not magically go away.
It does not disappear.
Everytime you use Fracture, you're substituting and 80, over a 70.
Your pool, WILL drain faster. Undoubtedly.

Its still a DPS increase though, especially for Warrior.

But for damage? As long as Fracture runs its course, it will ALWAYS be better damage-per-TP than doing a Butcher's Block combo. The fact that you can only use it once per 30 seconds really, and can almost always ensure this clicks with a damage cooldown, makes it even more useful.

No one was debating the tp/damage cost.
The debate from what I have read, is all about the TP cost per GCD.
Which means Fracture is still more expensive and will drain the pool more quickly.

Cormac is obsessing over the empty GCD, but that has no relevance over TP cost and the like,
Its a minor detail that has absolutely NO impact on the actual argument because auto attacks cost nothing and will happen regardless of what you do.

[Leiron]

10 character

[Coramac]

You kinda are, take the time to read his posts and yours, and you'll find that while your REASONS are in disagreement, your end conclusions are the same.

They are not. The whole post is why you shouldn't use Fracture whereas I'm saying you should use Fracture! (as long as it lasts the duration)

No one was debating the tp/damage cost.
The debate from what I have read, is all about the TP cost per GCD.
Which means Fracture is still more expensive and will drain the pool more quickly.

Yes, but as I stated earlier, the point at which you "drain the pool" is completely irrelevant to whether or not you should use Fracture. All this does is change the rate at which abilities occur. It has no bearing on damage or threat over the long term. All that matters is efficiency in the long term. Period.

Cormac is obsessing over the empty GCD, but that has no relevance over TP cost and the like,
Its a minor detail that has absolutely NO impact on the actual argument because auto attacks cost nothing and will happen regardless of what you do.

It's one of the areas an error occurs. The non-fracture rotation gets credit for continuing to attack. The Fracture rotation does not. Additionally, Kitru counted auto attack when determining TP efficiency. So, it matters because it was included in the OP numbers. Kitru wanted to compare over all DPS which is fine but really irrelevant to whether or not to use Fracture. It's a small DPS increase and a minor efficiency boost.

You keep obsessing over these "net TP costs." They're irrelevant.

[Leiron]

They are not. The whole post is why you shouldn't use Fracture whereas I'm saying you should use Fracture! (as long as it lasts the duration)

If you read my posts, you would understand I agree.
Is the fight one where Fracture has no impact on your TP pool or Enmity isn't an issue?
Use it.
Fracture is AWESOME.

But if you feel you're restrained?
Don't use it.
You don't lose too much.

Yes, but as I stated earlier, the point at which you "drain the pool" is completely irrelevant to whether or not you should use Fracture. All this does is change the rate at which abilities occur. It has no bearing on damage or threat over the long term. All that matters is efficiency in the long term. Period.

It is entirely relevant because cost is greater than gain.
A cost of 30, is going to have a greater impact over a cost of 70 or 60.
Even over the course of 12 GCD's, it will still have an impact.
Will it harm threat? No. That's only an issue of being undergeared.
WIll it harm damage? Not really. Whether you do use Fracture or don't. Your damage won't fluctuate greatly.

You keep obsessing over these "net TP costs." They're irrelevant.

That is a false statement.
Fights such as Titan are long, and have minimal downtime and TP pool does become an issue.
If you are a tank who i utilizing a GC weapon, or even using an Ifrit weapon, you don't want to use that TP on a low enmity ability.
Its better to put it towards your enmity building which is more important and cost effective.

Like I said, I disagree with the idea that the cost is irrelevant, but I agree with you on its tp/damage efficiency.
If Kitru made an error that is fine, but it doesn't really change the fact that he did agree Fracture is TP/DMG efficient, but more costly in terms of TP.
If you feel the tp pool doesn't matter that is fine, but from personal experience, there are cases where its best to stay as TP pool efficient as possible.

[Genesiser]

You guys are looking at it all wrong. Can it be good? Yes, can it be bad? Yes. It all depends on how long the fight takes and once you reach the threshold of how long the fight lasts until you start having to let tp regenerate is when you start getting an idea. Let me be a bit more clear...

No matter what, you always auto attack, so that gets cancelled out. In other words auto attacks mean nothing when figuring out if auto attacks matter when figuring if fracture is worth it.

Now, what does matter is how much time you spend regaining tp because since we factored out auto attacks, when you are doing no special moves, you are basically doing zero damage. From what I remember, it takes 3 seconds to get back tp. So if by using fracture say 4 times and then you start running out of tp, that is 1200 (300x4) but only a max of 600 more than if you used heavy swing. Heavy swing is 150 potency, 300-150 is 150, 150x4 is 600.

Alright, now this the part that matters. If over the course of the entire fight, you have to spend more than 12 seconds waiting for tp to regenerate, then fracture is worthless because you will end up doing less total potency overall than if you hadn't used it all because as I said, auto atk dmg is factored out so those 12 seconds you do zero dmg. Now of course, I used an extreme example of using 4x heavy swing vs fracture to see how much more potency you would do, but in reality you would be using combos which have more than 150 potency. What this means is that in reality if you have to wait more than about 6 seconds during a fight, then fracture is worthless.

If I had all the real values it would be fairly easy to figure out the exact amount of fight length so wed know at what point it becomes worthless. Also, this would assume you had 100% uptime on the enemy where you are always hitting a skill. But not all fights are like that.

So ultimately, this is how it boils down... If you have 100% uptime on the target and are always using attacks, then if you have to spend more than 6 seconds waiting for tp to do another attack, then you are in the negative overall dmg output. If you do have to run away from the enemy or wait on enemy to fly so you cannot use your moves, then for every second you cannot atk the target, you can subtract one second from the 6 second 100% uptime. Long story short, if over the course of a fight you are off the target for at least 10-15 seconds, then you can safely use it.