[war]Parsing +10 dex allotment, basic "just 50" gear, currently maximizing for parry.

[Lhun]

lessthan>10chars

[tnkw]

I did went through the high post between you and the other forum members. I have to say that I agree with you more. Keep up the good work =D I know for a fact that I don't have the will to stand there and auto attacking mobs and try to gather data. Prop for ya.

[Lhun]

Here's some really lazy data from a level 49 fate. I missed combos tons, was clicking the mouse instead of using hotkeys, and having a conversation on the phone while my 3yo daughter was poking me. This is to simulate way below average results. Anyone who focuses can do way, way better. In about 6 minutes, I fought "Gozol Itzcan The Hatchet." The parser doesn't currently parse absorb very well.

"You Absorb" 6830 damage. (includes bath, path, beast) (I manually added "you absorb" lines)
I used thrill of battle 3 times. 3279hp
I used second wind 4 times. 2745

I evaded 13.475% of all his attacks. I obviously parried ~18.5% of all his attacks for 22%. damage.

He dealt 28232 damage total over 6 minutes.

Why am I not fully parsing a dungeon raid and why am I picking level 48 mobs? Because I'm just giving you basic data, I'm busy doing other things, and I'm not your servant. Go do it yourself if you want to know so bad. I already have.
At least I'm doing this. What have you all been doing besides saying I'm wrong?

If all you're going to do is insult me I'll publish my results to my FC and nothing else.

PS: my theory is that we have a constant 15% damage mitigation from passive abilities. Whatever people. Pick apart everything I say. Have a nice night.

[dandelions]

Lol... these are a bunch of numbers, which are currently meaningless unless you plan on using these as a baseline to compare to say, a Paladin with the exact same stats beating on the exact same mobs. You'd also have to run this for hours on end on multiple tests (minimize variance of RNG) before you could consider any of the data collected to be worthwhile.

Every post you make seems to confirm you have no clue what you're talking about.


Begin helping yourself by making a hypothesis, collecting a baseline data set, then changing only 1 variable, and recording more data. Compare the two, realize that correlation does not equal causation, state that it matches or disagrees with your hypothesis, think of outside variables that could have influenced the data (better yet do more tests to eliminate possible outside variables), and finally you can begin to make valuable posts on these forums.

[Lhun]

Lol... these are a bunch of numbers, which are currently meaningless unless you plan on using these as a baseline to compare to say, a Paladin with the exact same stats beating on the exact same mobs. You'd also have to run this for hours on end on multiple tests (minimize variance of RNG) before you could consider any of the data collected to be worthwhile.

Every post you make seems to confirm you have no clue what you're talking about.


Begin helping yourself by making a hypothesis, collecting a baseline data set, then changing only 1 variable, and recording more data. Compare the two, realize that correlation does not equal causation, state that it matches or disagrees with your hypothesis, think of outside variables that could have influenced the data (better yet do more tests to eliminate possible outside variables), and finally you can begin to make valuable posts on these forums.

This is not my job. You seem to have a very firm grasp of the scientific method.
How about you go do that for us and come back with the results. I look forward to them.

I would like to go play my game now and have some dinner.

Unlike most of you, I really appreciate what Hachiko and others have done to publish data on things we seem to disagree on.
I take no offense to it, and I think unless you have a devil's advocate, you can't truly sharpen your pencil and be ABSOLUTELY SURE what you claim is COMPLETELY TRUE.

If everyone just accepted "war is broken" and nobody challenged that assumption, we would never know HOW (or NOT) broken it actually is.

I'm hoping for a COMPLETE balance between the tanks, with an equal level of utility for both, in DIFFERENT boss types. I don't mind if one boss is better for PLD or another is better for WAR. That would be good. Right now people are saying EVERYTHING is better for PLD at endgame, and I PERSONALLY (and yoshi-p too apparently) think that's wrong. You're free and welcome to disagree. That doesn't bother me - just prove it! And use stats parsed from WAR, not PLD, to do so.

The big problem is that if it turns out War actually isn't all that broken, and it gets a significant buff, the same thing will happen to PLD that's happening to WAR right now: And that's BAD. VERY BAD, because it'll cause rampant nerfbat and buffing in an attempt to appease the players and fixed the huge imbalance they might actually cause. If they nerf PLD instead (which they might do) most people will FREAK OUT.

Do you want that?

[Tanaya]

This is not my job. You seem to have a very firm grasp of the scientific method.
How about you go do that for us and come back with the results. I look forward to them.

I would like to go play my game now and have some dinner.

That's not how the burden of proof works.

The way how it works is if you present a hypothesis that goes against the status quo, it is your job to prove that your hypothesis is correct. The burden of proof is not on the ones who does not believe your hypothesis.

In other words, you can't halfass your research and then tell someone else to prove your point.

[Giantbane]

so what have we learned? I have an average around 19.00% parry rate with my early level, and a few +1 accessories.

Actually i think your parser is misleading you. Assuming I'm reading this right, you parry 83 hits out of 439 swings (18.91%). However, if you look closer, you'll notice that the monster only hit 356 times and missed 64 times. I'm willing to bet you can't parry a miss, so I don't think it should be counting those. So a more accurate representation is likely to be 83/356 = 23.31% parry rate.

My parry is 477 and my dex is 202. If I brought my dex up to 211, I would hit the next parry rate, which would make this number much higher.

perhaps my understanding of the plateaus is poor, but doesn't each step only boost the base rate by 1%? That doesn't strike me as a much higher number. What am I missing?

This stat is pure damage mitigation based on a percentage, and scales quite nicely with DPS.

Lets say a mob does 10 times that damage in 6 minutes, for a face melting 850dps.

With JUST parry ALONE, no protect, no foresite, no no self healing, ignoring dodge, WITH MY TERRIBAD STATS, mitigated 41dps doing absolutely nothing.

Was anybody debating this? I didn't see it.

I think people had two issues with your posts:

1) 25% parry rate + 25% parry amount = 15% overall mitigation (in all caps no less). See below

2) You were very insistent that WAR parry needed to be included in the comparison to PLD because it would bring the classes closer together. However, PLD can also parry and they get shield block so it does not seem like this is going to influence things in the WARs favor. You are likely (at least as I understand it) correct that the block check happens first. And you have inferred (also correctly as I understand things) that given equal gear, mitigation provided by WAR parry % is likely to be > mitigation provided by PLD parry % (while holding a shield). However, with your insistence that including parry and shield block would bring greater parity, you're implying that the mitigation provided by WAR parry % > mitigation provided by PLD parry % + PLD shield block %. This implication makes no sense to me. Many others also took issue with this apparent assessment.

PS: my theory is that we have a constant 15% damage mitigation from passive abilities. Whatever people. Pick apart everything I say. Have a nice night.

I reread the first few pages of the damage mitigation thread. I have absolutely no idea how you expected anyone to come to the conclusion that this is what you meant. Most reasonable people will read what you had posted in the other thread and take away that you were insisting high parry + 211 dex was providing 15% damage reduction based on your parses.

[Coramac]

Actually i think your parser is misleading you. Assuming I'm reading this right, you parry 83 hits out of 439 swings (18.91%). However, if you look closer, you'll notice that the monster only hit 356 times and missed 64 times. I'm willing to bet you can't parry a miss, so I don't think it should be counting those. So a more accurate representation is likely to be 83/356 = 23.31% parry rate.

Most games use a 1 roll hit table. FFXIV may not, but I wouldn't count it out.

[Hachiko]

Most games use a 1 roll hit table. FFXIV may not, but I wouldn't count it out.

Considering the way block / evade works, i.e. first check for evade, then check for block, then check for parry, then checks for crit, then deal damage, I think it's safe to bet it's a 1 roll hit table.

I think that's the order anyway. I don't know when crit is actually checked.

It's worth looking into. If PLD get lower parry numbers they likely also get lower crit numbers. Theoretically you could move crits pretty close to off the table. 20% block, 20% parry would be 64% of attacks being "crit candidates" with a shield, but for a WAR 80% of them would be crit candidates. It would mean that PLD would take roughly 20% less dmg from crits baseline.

Could be wrong in this, but to my knowledge you cant block or parry a crit. That's mostly an assumption.