Give us back the old Paladin

[Mikey_R]

aDPS is far too subject to variances such as what jobs you bring with you into the fight and how well your team play them. Yes I understand that PLD not fitting in with the current job design was an issue but as I said, the job didn't need to be meta because the meta of GNB/DRK would never change. It just needed to be fun while not a hinderance to the party, that's exactly what it was in 6.28. It's just reinforcing that buff providers>non-buff providers and that's just even worse design than one job not fitting with that design.

Which is why the data uses the average over all the data they have to come up with the values, to eliminate the variability as much as possible.

To highlight why it is not fair to compare tanks under rDPS, let's take 2 jobs. Job 1 is pure sustain. It's rotation does the same damage through the whole thing, including the burst. The second job does an enormous amount of damage in the burst, but nothing for the rest of the minute. Overall, after a minute, they will go the same DPS though.

If you then add in raid buffs, which are multiplicative, the sustained job is going to get a bump, however, the burst job is going to get a massive bump, causing it's DPS to skyrocket. If you then take the average over a minute for both, the burst job is going to have a higher DPS than the sustained one. In this case, which tank is contributing more? It should be obvious the burst job is contributing more DPS to the fight because it lines up with the raid buffs better.

This is also why just using rDPS for everything is not accurate. A job using a raid buff gets all the benefits that the other jobs put in. This buff job didn't do anything except put a buff out, the one receiving the buff is the one that put the effort in after all. But, a selfish job gets no benefit from raid buffs, as you jus give that contribution to someone else.

There are pros and cons to both rDPS and aDPS and recognising where, when and how to use the data sets effectively is key, you cannot just look at one and use that as the king of metrics.

Tanks have no raid buffs, so they receive nothing from any other job, all that matters is how well they play into raid buffs, which is where aDPS comes into it, and is the reason why you should only measure tanks based on their aDPS. If a tank comes along that has a raid buff, then the discussion becomes more complicated.

[Lamarcy2699]

Which is why the data uses the average over all the data they have to come up with the values, to eliminate the variability as much as possible.

To highlight why it is not fair to compare tanks under rDPS, let's take 2 jobs. Job 1 is pure sustain. It's rotation does the same damage through the whole thing, including the burst. The second job does an enormous amount of damage in the burst, but nothing for the rest of the minute. Overall, after a minute, they will go the same DPS though.

If you then add in raid buffs, which are multiplicative, the sustained job is going to get a bump, however, the burst job is going to get a massive bump, causing it's DPS to skyrocket. If you then take the average over a minute for both, the burst job is going to have a higher DPS than the sustained one. In this case, which tank is contributing more? It should be obvious the burst job is contributing more DPS to the fight because it lines up with the raid buffs better.

This is also why just using rDPS for everything is not accurate. A job using a raid buff gets all the benefits that the other jobs put in. This buff job didn't do anything except put a buff out, the one receiving the buff is the one that put the effort in after all. But, a selfish job gets no benefit from raid buffs, as you jus give that contribution to someone else.

There are pros and cons to both rDPS and aDPS and recognising where, when and how to use the data sets effectively is key, you cannot just look at one and use that as the king of metrics.

Tanks have no raid buffs, so they receive nothing from any other job, all that matters is how well they play into raid buffs, which is where aDPS comes into it, and is the reason why you should only measure tanks based on their aDPS. If a tank comes along that has a raid buff, then the discussion becomes more complicated.

nDPS is a comparative measure to show how much damage a job can do with no buffs attached, rDPS is the value of damage a job individually provides to the party be it through raid buffs or pure damage, aDPS is a comparitive measure to show how well the job synergizes with the fight design/current job designs and as I said PLD did have an issue here and yes you are correct in this and it was rather disingenuous for me to use just rDPS but PLDs aDPS has remained close/slightly under to what it was in 6.28 whereas its rDPS/nDPS has taken a rather big loss. This means PLD is not in a much better state than it was before and is, in fact, in a worse one. Sure they can adjust numbers to make it higher as it synergizes better with the 60/120 design but then we still have the issue of the job not being very fun to play.