So you're telling me..

[Akiudo]

If a selfish dps does the same or less rDPS as every class with raidbuffs then you never get any more damage from taking these damage focussed jobs. The reason being raid buffs are multiplicative, so adding another job with a generally higher rDPS and a raidbuff will result in a higher total raid damage than including one of those lower rDPS selfish classes, made more potent a difference as you align burst windows with each other/the fight more efficiently and accurately.

see but thats exactly the point, the classes with raid (dps) buffs NEED to actually deal more RAID dps in the perfect scenario or they will in fact allways be worse. the fact that they gain more by having an optimized group means they also lose more by having a group that isn't perfectly optimized.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
lets say classes had no "support", i.e. heals, shields, rezzes and whatnot, only dps buffs. exactly because raid buffs can and do stack to the high heavens you can now

1) make it so in a "perfect" scenario the buffers actually offer more raid dps meaning they will be stronger at the top and than get overtaken relatively early on when you go lower

or

2)you make it so that even in that case the "pure classes" do more meaning they will simply allways be stronger.

acting like samurais being overtaken at 95% while still being stronger everytime before is an issue but samurai simply allways being the stronger choice is actually good design is turning raidbuffs into an detriment.

[tearagion]

Samurai and BLM topping rDPS was busted. It meant their aDPS was so far above the others that the buffed damage (which is given to the buffer) still wasn't enough to cover the spread. That is straight up busted. If people knew how to read the brackets this wouldn't be an issue, but they don't. They look at what fflogs uses for rankings and says that how things are, when it is not the case.

Not reading and they just saying something was busted before doesn't contribute anything, it's just repeating yourself.

see but thats exactly the point, the classes with raid (dps) buffs NEED to actually deal more RAID dps in the perfect scenario or they will in fact allways be worse. the fact that they gain more by having an optimized group means they also lose more by having a group that isn't perfectly optimized.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
lets say classes had no "support", i.e. heals, shields, rezzes and whatnot, only dps buffs. exactly because raid buffs can and do stack to the high heavens you can now

1) make it so in a "perfect" scenario the buffers actually offer more raid dps meaning they will be stronger at the top and than get overtaken relatively early on when you go lower

or

2)you make it so that even in that case the "pure classes" do more meaning they will simply allways be stronger.

acting like samurais being overtaken at 95% while still being stronger everytime before is an issue but samurai simply allways being the stronger choice is actually good design is turning raidbuffs into an detriment.

You're viewing it too black and white, there's an acceptable margin they can be tuned into, but as long as a class with a raidbuff has a higher rDPS (read: they are contributing more damage with their buff and aDPS than a SAM or BLM can contribute with rDPS) then a group optimising will never consider the SAM or the BLM as they are numerically incapable of competing with the multiplicative bonuses raidbuffs feed into each other. If the SAM or the BLM contributes slightly more rDPS (read: enough to cover the gap a multiplicative raidbuff would give instead) then any job is competitive.

In a perfect and infinite set of data, ideally everything would contribute an equitable amount of rDPS, but from the incomplete data we have access to BLM and SAM should very slightly lead as it would indicate competitive value.

[Akiudo]

If the SAM or the BLM contributes slightly more rDPS (read: enough to cover the gap a multiplicative raidbuff would give instead) then any job is competitive.

but if they provide more rdps at the top than the buff classes than they aren't "covering the gap" but instead actively exceeding the maximum potential even after multiplicative buffs, otherwise the top groups would still ditch samurai and go for the buff classes.

you are literally saying that its not just okay but necessary for a samurai to deal say 1% more than a "buff class" at the absolute top because no one would take a samurai over a "buff class" if these same buff class provided 1% more dps at the absolute top compared to samurai, by that logic no one would take any "buff" class over samurai aswell.

there will ALLWAYS be a best class, its literally 100% impossible to make every class equal. not even "equal" chess pieces truly hold equal value but are actually more/less valuable in different stages of the game.

all you're asking for is making Samurai every bit as mandatory as you claim say monk to be.

[tearagion]

but if they provide more rdps at the top than the buff classes than they aren't "covering the gap" but instead actively exceeding the maximum potential even after multiplicative buffs, otherwise the top groups would still ditch samurai and go for the buff classes.

you are literally saying that its not just okay but necessary for a samurai to deal say 1% more than a "buff class" at the absolute top because no one would take a samurai over a "buff class" if these same buff class provided 1% more dps at the absolute top compared to samurai, by that logic no one would take any "buff" class over samurai aswell.

there will ALLWAYS be a best class, its literally 100% impossible to make every class equal. not even "equal" chess pieces truly hold equal value but are actually more/less valuable in different stages of the game.

all you're asking for is making Samurai every bit as mandatory as you claim say monk to be.

What I'm saying is that for a selfish DPS class to be pragmatically competitive with the datasets we get it needs to be marginally ahead in average rDPS. Without a lead it's probably (read: given the nature of higher coordination required for buff classes and the fact that parses in general do not utilize these timings well) not good enough at accomplishing its only job. There are only 3 of these selfish DPS jobs in the game they will never be able to crowd out other options just by virtue of there not being enough of them, let alone it being inefficient to start taking more than one if properly balanced.

I'm not saying anything is mandatory. Balance as it is right now is perfectly fine for 99.9% of players. Every job is capable of comfortably completing all content in almost any combination. People just seem to have a misconception about what rDPS indicates as a statistic and what that means for classes who don't positively contribute to rDPS.

[Ransu]

but if they provide more rdps at the top than the buff classes than they aren't "covering the gap" but instead actively exceeding the maximum potential even after multiplicative buffs, otherwise the top groups would still ditch samurai and go for the buff classes.

you are literally saying that its not just okay but necessary for a samurai to deal say 1% more than a "buff class" at the absolute top because no one would take a samurai over a "buff class" if these same buff class provided 1% more dps at the absolute top compared to samurai, by that logic no one would take any "buff" class over samurai aswell.

there will ALLWAYS be a best class, its literally 100% impossible to make every class equal. not even "equal" chess pieces truly hold equal value but are actually more/less valuable in different stages of the game.

all you're asking for is making Samurai every bit as mandatory as you claim say monk to be.

The whole point of sam needing to have top rdps and adps is to make up for the fact the raid doesn't get any buffs from them....rdps is contribution to the raid, not just personal buffs.

[Akiudo]

What I'm saying is that for a selfish DPS class to be pragmatically competitive with the datasets we get it needs to be marginally ahead in average rDPS. Without a lead it's probably (read: given the nature of higher coordination required for buff classes and the fact that parses in general do not utilize these timings well) not good enough at accomplishing its only job.

and if samurai is top until 90-95% than it is "ahead in average dps" the original argument was that samurai needs to be ahead when we look at the top, you can't only look at the top 1% and than talk about averages.

The whole point of sam needing to have top rdps and adps is to make up for the fact the raid doesn't get any buffs from them....rdps is contribution to the raid, not just personal buffs.

but what buffs are we talking here ?

utility buffs ? in that case i allready said they should be accounted for (meaning less damage the more actual utility you offer) , i.e. the argument was never against samurai being above reaper (as reaper offers a group heal that samurai does not) but against the notion that it needs to do more because other classes have damage buffs.

or are we talking damage buffs ? in that case "perfect balance" would mean that every class has the exact same rpds at every percentile (obviously not realistic) so the next best thing would be "highest rdps class depends on circumstances/level of play and not "samurai is allways top" which is what you get if you let samurai have the highest rdps when at the actual top because the drop off off buff classes is comperatively steep.

[tearagion]

and if samurai is top until 90-95% than it is "ahead in average dps" the original argument was that samurai needs to be ahead when we look at the top, you can't only look at the top 1% and than talk about averages.

What are you talking about? Buff classes scale more with player skill, assuming the only variable is cooperation (something that deteriorates usually the lower you go) SAM and BLM should be comparatively better the lower you go.

[Akiudo]

What are you talking about? Buff classes scale more with player skill, assuming the only variable is cooperation (something that deteriorates usually the lower you go) SAM and BLM should be comparatively better the lower you go.

exactly, better the lower you go, meaning not best at the absolute top otherwise they will allways be best at every level. that was my whole argument from the very beginning.