Materia Question

[Ghishlain]

I'm well aware of this. I'm also aware that I could reach 100% accuracy if I would do full accuracy melds. However, since my total miss percentage from running A5S for 2,5 hours was that low without any melds, I decided to go for crit melds instead of accuracy, since I think removing that low-ish miss % is not worth all the crit I'd lose from for full accuracy melds instead of as much crit as possible.

I only bring it up because I'm not sure if the person who's parsing for you understands the nuances of SCH DPS. If s/he is telling you "you have 97% accuracy" but only checking the All Attack Rows, that's obviously going to skew your results. There are differing levels of player knowledge and the person who's giving you this information may not be giving you the correct information and the red flag for me in this instance was the "97% accuracy" statement.

Just to be clear, I can respect your decision and I'm not arguing against your decision. However, I do feel its very important to base your decision on accurate data. For example, if your Broils are doing 50 DPS worth of damage in a fight but hitting at 33% accuracy that means you're losing an additional 100 DPS on top of that (effectively tripling your Broil DPS). But you wouldn't know this if the person examining you looked the overarching attack hit % without realizing you have 100% accurate DoTs and thus skewing your end result.

Just some food for thought for you.

I like that view of thing (ok maybe on M4S it will be impossible but nevermind)

I wish I could overmeld piety on 4th and 5th slot...
No one consider this stat as a primary...
It's our secondary stat...

Unlock it SE purrrlease ! *miqote eyes*

I DON'T SEE A MIQO'TE HERE! =p

[Taika]

I only bring it up because I'm not sure if the person who's parsing for you understands the nuances of SCH DPS. If s/he is telling you "you have 97% accuracy" but only checking the All Attack Rows, that's obviously going to skew your results. There are differing levels of player knowledge and the person who's giving you this information may not be giving you the correct information and the red flag for me in this instance was the "97% accuracy" statement.

Just to be clear, I can respect your decision and I'm not arguing against your decision. However, I do feel its very important to base your decision on accurate data. For example, if your Broils are doing 50 DPS worth of damage in a fight but hitting at 33% accuracy that means you're losing an additional 100 DPS on top of that (effectively tripling your Broil DPS). But you wouldn't know this if the person examining you looked the overarching attack hit % without realizing you have 100% accurate DoTs and thus skewing your end result.

Just some food for thought for you.

I see your point, but on the other hand what counts in an actual fight is your total accuracy, including all spells used in the fight, even those that can't miss. So if I'm using the spells I'd normally use in specific fight, and someone tells me my total accuracy in that fight, that number is valid and the most important number to base my melding decision on. Now if I were to go in A5S and only use Broil, and I would ask someone to parse my accuracy from there, I would get my accuracy % for the spells that can miss in that instance, but since that's not how I would ever play that instance on SCH, the number wouldn't be useful to me.

[Ghishlain]

I see your point, but on the other hand what counts in an actual fight is your total accuracy, including all spells used in the fight, even those that can't miss. So if I'm using the spells I'd normally use in specific fight, and someone tells me my total accuracy in that fight, that number is valid and the most important number to base my melding decision on. Now if I were to go in A5S and only use Broil, and I would ask someone to parse my accuracy from there, I would get my accuracy % for the spells that can miss in that instance, but since that's not how I would ever play that instance on SCH, the number wouldn't be useful to me.

I disagree partially and I do feel it is important to at least split out the 100% hit spells from the not-100% hit spells so you can at least determine the "important of accuracy" in your mind and then isolate for that contribution to base your final decision on.

Just to expand on my previous example, let's say this is an example parse

SCH total DPS - 600
Broil accounts for 50 DPS @ 33% accuracy

If you meld / eat to accuracy cap, your broil DPS will increase to 150 DPS and your total DPS goes up from 600 to 700 DPS (net 16.67% gain - with some loss due to not having Crit melds anymore).

I don't think there's much more I can add ATM but I do hope you do find the information useful.

[Lyrica_Ashtine]

I'm just going to point out that the accuracy "measurement" is horribly skewed when DoTs are involved on a certain tool. For example: Casting 3 DoTs and a broil, miss the broil and for some reason you're still at 97% accuracy.

[Ghishlain]

I'm just going to point out that the accuracy "measurement" is horribly skewed when DoTs are involved on a certain tool. For example: Casting 3 DoTs and a broil, miss the broil and for some reason you're still at 97% accuracy.

*Coughs*

Yep, depends on how the player is reading the data. It can measure DoT ticks too so Shadowflare (10 ticks) + Bio (6 ticks) + Bio II (10 ticks) + Broil (1 data point)

Miss Broil, your hit rate in total is 26/27 = 96%