Gonna use your post as an exampe and say something controversial.
Tenacity isnt terrible.
There I said it.
The popular myth is that Tenacity is the worst thing ever and anything with it on it is garbage, etc etc.
No, this isnt the case. Tenacity as a sub stat is ok. You get better bang for your buck out of the other stats, but youre not SoL just because one of your sub stats is Tenacity. When determining weaps you need to be looking at more than sub stats. You could have ideal sub stats on a weap, but if its 3 or 4 ATK below a weapon with less optimal stats, youll be gimping yourself. This is because Weapon Damage is a lot more heavily weighted than Primary stats, which are also more heavily weighted than sub stats. So if a weapon is +2 DMG, thats gonna make up for a lot of sub stats. This gets more complicated because its not a zero sum game. Having tenacity doesnt mean the stat does nothing damage wise. You will deal more damage if you have 1500 tenacity vs 400 tenacity. As I said, you wont get as much bang for your buck as Crit or DH.
Why It goes to RUBY weap is Im assuming (and this is a big assumption) is that at its base - meaning no materia - RBY weapon out damages the Relic weapon, probably by a small to ok margin. Im gonna bet that if it gets mathed out and tested the Relic weapon full melded will probably deal just as much damage as the RUBY weapon. It's only 'worse' in that you expend more resources to make it comparable. This would make sense since, honestly, getting your Stage 1 Relic weap is by and large easier than a ruby weapon.
Also I dont think this is isolated to tanks. Monk Relic Samsara has Crit/det weighted to Crit. RBY is Crit/DH with it weighted to DH. RBY weapons on paper are better. Again though, Pretty sure at the end of the day fully melded isnt going to yield to much difference in damage. 300 DH + 334 Det is gonna match 477 DH most likely.



Reply With Quote

