The Monk Temple Reborn

[Hakmatic]

Those numbers with party buff, food pot .

[Ricdeau]

Those numbers with party buff, food pot .

Yep, I've never seen a monk pulling 650 average in any scenario. Get a really high run, sure, but I think there's a discrepancy in the definition of average being used by Truedragon.

[Hakmatic]

Yeah the numbers you said were good estimates for no buffs. He was spitting out 650-670 so I figured party food and pot was taking in consideration.

[ClaireAbigail]

Because he forgot to take into account the fact that nin has higher potency attacks compared to monks. The way I define nin right now is a class with the skill speed and tp cost of a monk along with the high potency dmg of a dragoon. To be honest, stop trying to turn this thread into another nin vs. mnk thread.

Also I think the best way to put it is that can YOU pull those numbers yourself? You spit out absurd numbers like anyone can just grab a monk or ninja and start doing the numbers you're claiming. Go on, show us your parses, show us your work, and show us your math.

Also trying to bait dervy and wanting him to get banned is kinda a dick move imo. I don't believe that kind of troll behavior is welcomed here.

[Odowla]

Because he forgot to take into account the fact that nin has higher potency attacks compared to monks.

on the contrary, with gl3 our potencies are around the base values of a ninja potency, but yeah.

Idk what t his guy is talking about. the biggest spot you notice DET is on your crits, especially bootshines. DET's good, and the stat weights reflect that, but I think he's taking the conversion to strength a bit too seriously. Add 50 str in i110 without changing your weapon and you tell me how much dps you get. Also 50 str is less than i110 -> i130.

Funny thing about all of these is disregarding weights, 5 ilevels on weapon has always been 10-20 dps, and 3 weapon damage has always been about 30-40 dps. Don't ask me why that is, its just an obvservation.

[Reiokyu]

What in the world happened here in the past day, seems like the train was knocked clear off the rails.

[Xenosan]

Monk nub here trying to rock it. Question: Should I worry about clipping demolish?

I'm clipping quite a bit when I combo 1 > 2 > Demolish > 1 > 2 > Snap Punch > 1 > 2 > Demolish > etc rotation (ToD as needed).

Should I be trying 1 > 2 > Demo > 1 > 2 > Snap > 1 > 2 > Snap > 1 > 2 > Demo > etc instead? Demo DoT will wear off if I refresh ToD this rotation, but only for a couple seconds. Is that better than consistently clipping Demo?

Second way makes hitting positions a little more manic.. that and between Twinsnakes buff and Dragon Kick Debuff.. my brain..

I should have looked harder at 1st post ._.;

[Truedragon]

lol some people are so funny. Look, ill be blunt with some of you. If you cant do 600 dps on a dummy as a maxed out monk, then you are not a solid monk. Up your gear or up your rotation. Period.

As for the earlier argument. I figured out a way to determine the true value of det. Unequip your monk. Equip all crafted gear. Now go attack a dummy and repeat the same rotation over and over again. Determine average dps after X amount of runs.

Now, repeat same exercize but this time, meld a shitton of det on your gear. It will have to be a large amount to make a substantial difference, but there is only so much det you can meld so I guess just max it out with maximum det. Now repeat the dummy X amount of tries. Determine average dps.

The difference between the first run and the last run, is the value of X amount of det you melded onto it.

Funny thing about all of these is disregarding weights, 5 ilevels on weapon has always been 10-20 dps, and 3 weapon damage has always been about 30-40 dps. Don't ask me why that is, its just an obvservation.

Ok, 2 things. First, 3 weapon damage is same as 21 str. If 21 str equals 30-40 dps, then 50 str = 71-95 dps. ALMOST as much as I asked for (100dps). Close enough. So unknowingly, you actually validated my claims.

Secondly, and this is for the rest of the people. Since we now know what dps increase 21 str gives us, using the above method, we can calculate the true worth of a det. This would lay to rest once and for all what the value of a det is. But will prolly cost a heft amount of gil. Now you talked the talk, time for you to walk the walk. I asked for a 750 dps proof, in light of recent comments, ie 50 str being 71-95 dps, I would lower this to 730 dps.

So 2 choices. 1) post 730 dps of a det stacked monk using criteria as described previously and not one different criteria. or, 2) determine det value using method described above.

No, because that isn't how Determination Scales. You've forgotten the two core principles of Determination. It's linear gains of damage per point, presumably as a multiplier, and the effect of this multiplier is scaled with an increase of Weapon Damage and Strength.

Determination at 600 Strength, per point, scales better with damage than you would if you had 500 Strength.

That's what you're failing to understand.

Reached max posts. Use the method above using a monk with 600 base str (or 630 or 660 whatever you have) and this will determine the value of DET for THAT PARTICULAR amount of str.

This works because we are determining det weight NOW aka on a i120 or i130 monk with the strength now. If det really scales per strength, then the findings wouldnt be much use next patch but who cares. The stat weights posted previously are gonna be next to useless next expansion ANYWAY.

Until you have evidence, data, parses, excel spreadsheets and graphs to back up your claims, please, kindly, stop posting because you're starting to annoy the majority of the players here.

Noone forces you to read. Drop your attitude. You dont own these forums man.

[Dervy]

No, because that isn't how Determination Scales. You've forgotten the two core principles of Determination. It's linear gains of damage per point, presumably as a multiplier, HOWEVER, the effect of this multiplier is scaled with an increase of Weapon Damage and Strength.

Determination at 600 Strength, per point, scales better with damage than you would if you had 500 Strength.

That's what you're failing to understand. So a naked determination test does absolutely nothing for your argument. And I've done all the work already on my blog for you to check out, how per point, how Determination scales from 574-660 Strength and Sunny as a graph showing the scale of Determination at 300 and 330 Strength.

Come back when you have as much data, or more, as this. And this isn't half of what I have:

http://www.filedropper.com/detvsbasestrtotals <- Link for my excel spreadsheet with a lot of the data you're seeing

Until you have evidence, data, parses, excel spreadsheets and graphs to back up your claims, please, kindly, stop posting because you're starting to annoy the majority of the players here.

EDIT: oh you know what, here's all my Models and Formulas as well whilst I'm at it, which I'd say, is around 95% accurate for the Dragoon.

Ability Skills: (Potency/100)*((WD*0.0437052+1)*(AP*0.0763653+4.4581293)*(DET*0.0006116+1))
Auto-Attacks: ((AA_DMG*0.0.0388814+1)*(STR*0.0717908+3.5421066)*(DTR*0.0014237+1))

So if you want to play around with something, there you go. Test it and prove me wrong. I'm waiting.

Because all you've done so far is blanket rebuttals against my arguments towards you without any factual evidence. There's my Evidence.

[Viridiana]

Snip

So, just to be clear, your idea is to do the following:

1) Take a 630 parse as baseline, which is what people average around current BiS gear.
2) Drop down to i110 because you're going to only use crafted gear
3) Determine the new average of this i110 gear
4) Meld the gear with full Determination for millions of gil
5) Establish a new average with the full Determination melds
6) Somehow be surprised that your DPS average hasn't skyrocketed to 730

If you're going to try to say that the model is wrong, you can't do it by asking people to produce something the model doesn't predict. Either produce something yourself that the model doesn't predict (which would show that the model is wrong), or actually use the model to make a prediction and show that the prediction is wrong. You've failed to do either.