Queling Strike and Spells!

[Razen_Arghast]

Yea, I'm only using stone and aero for the debuffs as their dmg is laughable. Hence the preference of a Conjurer casting them, but if they are too busy curing stuff we can just debuff ourselves. M-Eva down is quite annoying to land though.

Yes Quelling Strike can replace Invigorate for TP generation but it needs 5 casts of it to generate the same amount, and still it's much easier to whack him a bit at start while the tank builds aggro. You could argue that TP generation abilities are not needed at all if you whack to 3k at start. And seeing as we have managed to short work Ifrit already I'd say there's no need to add Quelling Strike to push that small bit of more efficiency at the games current stage. Personally, I'll just wait for any major patch or update to revisit tweaks to my action bar.

Edit: 29 M-Eva down is quite a lot if it works on a 1:1 ratio against accuracy which I'm guessing it does. For reference, 4 Black pearls will give you 20 m-acc. And if the accessory reform hits our m-acc then the debuff will become even better.

[Kaeko]

My input was in response to you listing out your 10 cross-class abilities and questioning the need for Aero to be on there. There is an argument for Stone being there due to the MEVA down effect. I cannot find a proper reason for Aero being there though. At -13 / tick for a maximum of 10 ticks you're looking at 130 damage in addition to Aero's initial damage. This may not even add up to 200, or the average damage of a single basic Thunder. There is no known special benefit to having a DoT present in this case (for instance, it does not surpress Ifrit's high Regen rate).

Regarding Invigorate, I agree that it's just easy to use and I use it as well. I feel like for optimization you should drop Aero and replace it with Quelling Strike. The argument that "we do fine without it" may be true, but is kind of not relevant in a min/max discussion right? It's true you're fine either way, but it's also true that you would be more efficient (albeit not by much) with Quelling.

Regarding Stone. The argument that it's useful for the -29 MEVA is a bit more dicey. I still feel it's not useful simply because if you look at the average duration of the MEVA down, it is definitely not the full 30+ seconds you see on many other debuffs. It may only last 10-15 seconds maximum and it's pretty consistent. This means it'll probably only be active (if it even lands) on your next 2 nukes. Ifrit is essentially an exercise in dodge > Thunder > Thundara > dodge > etc.. I question how much time you actually have to throw in another nuke (stone) w/o compromising safety, though it's hard to back this up with something as simple as a paper formula.

Finally, regarding the overall concept and use for a move like Quelling Strike. We must remember that a THM's damage is limited by 3 factors - resist rates, MP pool and regen rate, and enmity. One of these 3 things is going to limit your output. For Ifrit with a half-way decent MACC set, the limiting factor is by far going to be enmity. This means that to become more "efficient" from a DPS perspective, increasing damage or MACC really doesn't improve overall DPS that much because you'll be capped by enmity anyways (you just may need more nukes to get there). The only way to reliably increase the DPS would be to increase the enmity generation of the tank or decrease the enmity generation of the THM. Quelling Strike does this, and although we all agree it's "lackluster", but will certainly provide you more benefit than -29 MEVA for 10-15 seconds after a Stone cast.

EDIT:
Thinking more about this and Aero. There may be an additional benefit in that that +130 damage you get from the Aero DoT effect is not counted towards your enmity. So it's essentially 130 "free damage" (which is basically the same as Quelling). So from this point of view I can actually concede that Aero does have a benefit on DPS (it just won't be seen on a parser). So I guess the question to have Quelling on your bar comes down to Stone or even Invig versus Quelling. I'd still argue not to use Stone but at least I can give a valid reason to use Aero for increasing DPS.

[Umo]

Yea, I'm only using stone and aero for the debuffs as their dmg is laughable. Hence the preference of a Conjurer casting them, but if they are too busy curing stuff we can just debuff ourselves. M-Eva down is quite annoying to land though.

Note that it seems that Stone's debuff is related to earth magic evasion, not general magic evasion, so it would be pretty pointless for a Thaumaturge trying to land it. You can peruse the details HERE.
I think this is a Location issue, so I'll be posting there for an official response in order to clarify this matter.

[Actus]

^ only offensive spells you should be casting are the Thunder Combo

[Brigandier]

Note that it seems that Stone's debuff is related to earth magic evasion, not general magic evasion, so it would be pretty pointless for a Thaumaturge trying to land it. You can peruse the details HERE.
I think this is a Location issue, so I'll be posting there for an official response in order to clarify this matter.

While the translations say one thing, there appears to have been testing to say otherwise:

Again using Lemurs in Treespeak and the Soil Smear ability, Stone gives -29 MEVA where the amount of MEVA down was not dependent on the level of the mob nor the PIE/enfeebling skill of the player (rank of the caster may contribute though). There is no "earth specific" evasion down related to this spell in its actual use, despite whatever translation people have previously referred to.

SE needs to get this crap right.

[Actus]

That claim made no sense and had no logical basis to begin with anyway.

[Conradus]

That claim made no sense and had no logical basis to begin with anyway.

I never understood why everybody immediately jumped to the conclusion that the French translation was correct and the English translation was wrong. My immediate take was that the French translation of "earth magic potency" almost had to be wrong, because it didn't make any damn sense for it to be that way.

[Umo]

I never understood why everybody immediately jumped to the conclusion that the French translation was correct and the English translation was wrong. My immediate take was that the French translation of "earth magic potency" almost had to be wrong, because it didn't make any damn sense for it to be that way.

Maybe due to the fact that they described the spell's effect the same way on Class Reforms & Action Lists post:

CNJ Mag. 10 Deals earth damage to the target. Chance to reduce evasion against earth magic.

It could be wrong on both French client and that official post, that's for sure. Furthermore, on English client the text doesn't show "Chance to inflict Magic Evasion Down" but "Chance to inflict Evasion Down" instead.
Anyway, I've posted HERE in hope of an official response; that's not going to hurt in any way, right?

[Tsubaki187]

My input was in response to you listing out your 10 cross-class abilities and questioning the need for Aero to be on there. There is an argument for Stone being there due to the MEVA down effect. I cannot find a proper reason for Aero being there though. At -13 / tick for a maximum of 10 ticks you're looking at 130 damage in addition to Aero's initial damage. This may not even add up to 200, or the average damage of a single basic Thunder. There is no known special benefit to having a DoT present in this case (for instance, it does not surpress Ifrit's high Regen rate).

Regarding Invigorate, I agree that it's just easy to use and I use it as well. I feel like for optimization you should drop Aero and replace it with Quelling Strike. The argument that "we do fine without it" may be true, but is kind of not relevant in a min/max discussion right? It's true you're fine either way, but it's also true that you would be more efficient (albeit not by much) with Quelling.

Regarding Stone. The argument that it's useful for the -29 MEVA is a bit more dicey. I still feel it's not useful simply because if you look at the average duration of the MEVA down, it is definitely not the full 30+ seconds you see on many other debuffs. It may only last 10-15 seconds maximum and it's pretty consistent. This means it'll probably only be active (if it even lands) on your next 2 nukes. Ifrit is essentially an exercise in dodge > Thunder > Thundara > dodge > etc.. I question how much time you actually have to throw in another nuke (stone) w/o compromising safety, though it's hard to back this up with something as simple as a paper formula.

Finally, regarding the overall concept and use for a move like Quelling Strike. We must remember that a THM's damage is limited by 3 factors - resist rates, MP pool and regen rate, and enmity. One of these 3 things is going to limit your output. For Ifrit with a half-way decent MACC set, the limiting factor is by far going to be enmity. This means that to become more "efficient" from a DPS perspective, increasing damage or MACC really doesn't improve overall DPS that much because you'll be capped by enmity anyways (you just may need more nukes to get there). The only way to reliably increase the DPS would be to increase the enmity generation of the tank or decrease the enmity generation of the THM. Quelling Strike does this, and although we all agree it's "lackluster", but will certainly provide you more benefit than -29 MEVA for 10-15 seconds after a Stone cast.

EDIT:
Thinking more about this and Aero. There may be an additional benefit in that that +130 damage you get from the Aero DoT effect is not counted towards your enmity. So it's essentially 130 "free damage" (which is basically the same as Quelling). So from this point of view I can actually concede that Aero does have a benefit on DPS (it just won't be seen on a parser). So I guess the question to have Quelling on your bar comes down to Stone or even Invig versus Quelling. I'd still argue not to use Stone but at least I can give a valid reason to use Aero for increasing DPS.

Kaeko is legit. I am a fan.

I use Quelling Strike myself, for both of its benefits. As Kaeko mentioned, it's just more efficient. For TP gains, Invigorate is excessive and has only one use vs. Quelling Strike. And whacking things for 3k TP is just ridiculous to me. If you need more than 300TP every minute in any of the end game content as THM, then you're doing something wrong.