Fire II

[Rongway]

Really it just needs to grant Astral Fire III. The real issue isn't its potency but that it forces you to use F3 at those levels.

Respectfully I disagree with lack of Astral Fire III being the real issue.

The biggest issue with Fire II is that it's meant to be the spammer spell for AoE fire phase, but its cost is twice that of its single target sibling Fire I. This means you can only afford to cast it twice before you have to switch back to ice. That's the root of its biggest losses.

If it's meant to be the spammer spell for AoE, make it cost the same as the spammer spell for single target and give it enough damage to make it worth casting five times once you average in the Freeze and Fire III recovery. If the base single target rotation from 35 to 49 is meant to be

Blizzard III > Thunder > Fire III > Fire > Fire > Fire > Fire > Fire

then the base AoE rotation should be

Freeze > Thunder II > Fire III > Fire II > Fire II > Fire II > Fire II > Fire II

and the MP costs and potencies should be adjusted to support this.

[Tint]

But is it actually?

Freeze - 100
Thunder II - 150
Transpose
Fire II - 112
Fire II - 128
Fire II - 128

= 618 Potency in 14 Seconds
so 44.14 potency per second

Freeze x 4 - 400
Thunder II - 150

= 550 potency in 12.5 seconds
so 44 potency per second

This is with AF2. With AF3 the third Fire II will be buffed to 144 potency and the potency per second of that rotation will be 45.29.

Yeah the difference is abysmal. But the Freeze rotation is not "much stronger".

But of course if you use Fire III in that rotation instead of Transpose you will lose out on dps because it's single target.

But Fire III is even in single target a dps loss before you get AF3 on lvl 40 - wich is just another reason why BLM needs a rework for the leveling phase.

[Mikey_R]

But is it actually?

Freeze - 100
Thunder II - 150
Transpose
Fire II - 112
Fire II - 128
Fire II - 128

= 618 Potency in 14 Seconds
so 44.14 potency per second

Freeze x 4 - 400
Thunder II - 150

= 550 potency in 12.5 seconds
so 44 potency per second

This is with AF2. With AF3 the third Fire II will be buffed to 144 potency and the potency per second of that rotation will be 45.29.

Yeah the difference is abysmal. But the Freeze rotation is not "much stronger".

But of course if you use Fire III in that rotation instead of Transpose you will lose out on dps because it's single target.

But Fire III is even in single target a dps loss before you get AF3 on lvl 40 - wich is just another reason why BLM needs a rework for the leveling phase.

The one problem here is that Transpose is not instant. It takes time from the end of the cast, to use transpose, then to start casting again. I don't know exactly how long it takes to use transpose, however, if we take it as half a second, the it is 618 potency in 14.5 seconds, which is a potency per second of 42.62.

We can even work out the break point, where if transpose takes X time to cast, the 2 would be equal. That time is 0.05 seconds (0.045454545454....... to be exact). Transpose definitely takes more time to cast, therefore it will always be less potency per second.

[Tint]

The one problem here is that Transpose is not instant. It takes time from the end of the cast, to use transpose, then to start casting again. I don't know exactly how long it takes to use transpose, however, if we take it as half a second, the it is 618 potency in 14.5 seconds, which is a potency per second of 42.62.

We can even work out the break point, where if transpose takes X time to cast, the 2 would be equal. That time is 0.05 seconds (0.045454545454....... to be exact). Transpose definitely takes more time to cast, therefore it will always be less potency per second.

Damn you are right xD

All my math is useless again Q.Q

[Roeshel]

The one problem here is that Transpose is not instant. It takes time from the end of the cast, to use transpose, then to start casting again. I don't know exactly how long it takes to use transpose, however, if we take it as half a second, the it is 618 potency in 14.5 seconds, which is a potency per second of 42.62.

We can even work out the break point, where if transpose takes X time to cast, the 2 would be equal. That time is 0.05 seconds (0.045454545454....... to be exact). Transpose definitely takes more time to cast, therefore it will always be less potency per second.

Instant ogcds require 1 second to execute for the animation. So it would be 15 secs.

In the example which Tint gave, using transpose after thunder and then proceeding to fire 2 spam would be beneficial only if the thunder that was cast beforehand was instant. It gives you 2,5sec room to execute transpose.

[Rongway]

Oh so you were making a complete tangent not relevant to the discussion, cool.

If we're going to talk about relevant to the discussion, let's be completely fair:

Your first reply to the Calculator comment was a serious reply to what was a joke about how people doing lots maths are Calculators, a Final Fantasy Tactics job based on arithmetic. The job's contemporary localized name is Arithmetician. It was not a a post accusing people of being bad or enjoying playing wrong. An example of what would have been an appropriate exchange is

My impression from this thread is that you guys aren't really black mages. You're all really Calculators masquerading as black mages.

The PC term is Arithmetician, tyvm.

You missed the joke. That's fine. But please just stop already.

Instant ogcds require 1 second to execute for the animation. So it would be 15 secs.

Instant actions, including spells and weaponskills, take on average 0.7s. Some (e.g., Displacement) take slightly longer.

[ReiMakoto]

Oh so you were making a complete tangent not relevant to the discussion, cool. We were talking about the balance of black mage and the fact that it contains buttons within its own kit which are sub optimal to press and dont contribute to blms playstyle so pressing them is objectively bad. Your comparison of mch being a "bad button" when compared to bard doesnt logically track as as bawked as SB machinist was, its buttons all contributed to its kit, and for better or worse it was mostly balanced by the end (first ultimate clears used mch). Saying picking MCH over brd in SB is equivalent to a BLM choosing to use fire 2 is such mental gymnastics im not sure how anyone was supposed to dissect your thinking. This is not even getting into flavour/taste arguments.

To simplify further:
SB MCH:
Viable, Different Playstyle, More optimal than BRD in certain non-meta comps, dismantles lower CD and more immediate usefulness made it better defensive utility than troub at times

Fire 2:
Objectively Terrible beyond a certain level, Actively trolling your party/limiting effectiveness to use.

If we're going to talk about relevant to the discussion, let's be completely fair:

Your first reply to the Calculator comment was a serious reply to what was a joke about how people doing lots maths are Calculators, a Final Fantasy Tactics job based on arithmetic. The job's contemporary localized name is Arithmetician. It was not a a post accusing people of being bad or enjoying playing wrong. An example of what would have been an appropriate exchange is






You missed the joke. That's fine. But please just stop already.



Instant actions, including spells and weaponskills, take on average 0.7s. Some (e.g., Displacement) take slightly longer.

I agree i misread the initial joke because ive never heard of the job referred to as a calculator, everything past that was an interesting exchange (imo) resulting from the incorrect reading i initially had.

[Lilyth]

Snip

Fire 2 also has a poopy 3 second cast whereas Freeze is only 2.5.

F2 in AF1 is 112/3 = 37.3 pps (potency per second)
F2 in AF2 is 128/3 = 42.7 pps
Freeze is 100/2.5 = 40 pps

Now factor in Transpose and how the first F2 in AF1 is actually a dps loss, you reach the conclusion it's really not worth the trouble.