Dragoons: Crit Class with no Crit?

[xyaie]

what is your source for this? did you get this from that one guy who basically ran a few tries and drew some excel spreadsheets?

http://forum.square-enix.com/ffxiv/t...otation-Reborn
I was a part of the theorycrafting that went into this. its 51 pages with probably more theorycrafting in the first 2 post alone than most of the DPS forums combine. those exact numbers are from easymodeX (he made the finished product).

as for the crit formula:
http://valk.dancing-mad.com/?page_id...riticalHitRate

he cites his info and his test quite well. so far its stayed very consistent with my "actual" results within a reasonable margin of error.

[ShinigamiB06]

http://forum.square-enix.com/ffxiv/t...otation-Reborn
I was a part of the theorycrafting that went into this. its 51 pages with probably more theorycrafting in the first 2 post alone than most of the DPS forums combine. those exact numbers are from easymodeX (he made the finished product).

as for the crit formula:
http://valk.dancing-mad.com/?page_id...riticalHitRate

he cites his info and his test quite well. so far its stayed very consistent with my "actual" results within a reasonable margin of error.

ill have to sit down and carefully read the whole thing before i can actually say anything in regards to those numbers. but from a quick peak, I am not sure i can accept those trials for critical hit chance. It will most likely sound stupid to the masses, and admittedly there is a very high chance that I am wrong, but i cant shake this feeling that critical hit chance is not a linear number that simply increases with higher value. To put it more clearly, I feel like the critical hit chance stat works alongside other stats in order to calculate the real critical hit rate percentage.

Here is why i believe this: In the numbers presented in the graph, with 340 CHR you have a ~6% chance to land a critical. with 440 CHR you have effectively increased that to ~12% chance. So if these numbers truly have a linear relationship, then by definition decreasing you CHR from 340 to 240 you would literally have ~0% chance of a critical hit. And if you further decreased that number you would go into negative values. So i think its fair to say that we have all landed a critical hit with less than 240 CHR (unless that is the starting value stat at level one LOL)

That is why I have always said: "numbers may not lie, but they dont tell the whole truth"

just for the sake of completeness, i feel the person should test if changing the strength stat or any other stat changes the frequency of criticals.

[Viridiana]

Here is why i believe this: In the numbers presented in the graph, with 340 CHR you have a ~6% chance to land a critical. with 440 CHR you have effectively increased that to ~12% chance. So if these numbers truly have a linear relationship, then by definition decreasing you CHR from 340 to 240 you would literally have ~0% chance of a critical hit

Your base crit rating at level 50 (where testing was done) is 341. Your base crit rate is ~5%. The values given apply to increases beyond the base level, at which point it becomes linear.

[Cassandaria]

I think Dragoon gear doesn't have a crit bonus on it (despite the big numbers coming from crit) simply because as a dragoon, you have a guaranteed crit 100% of the time it's off of the cooldown. And it's not a very long cooldown either, so putting extra crit would unbalance other abilities from other classes and they are trying to keep all of the classes balanced.

[pandabearcat]

The only possible "crit" based class is bards.

Please, my god, please understand that "big crits" are meaningless.

In fact, because of life surge, you actually want crit LESS than before, because of your autocrit ability.

The more autocrits you have, the less crit you need, aka, monks, especially.

Not a single damn class is a crit class over any other class aside from bard.

And its been found that bard doesn't...really even favor crit much more than any other class.

People need to stop thinking "oo big numbers" and think that crit is the only thing that contributes to those numbers.

Instead, think this: Would you rather have fewer crits, but bigger crits, or more crits but smaller crits?

Suddenly thats not so easy to answer. And thus, why we have stat weights.

[EasymodeX]

And its been found that bard doesn't...really even favor crit much more than any other class.

I still completely disbelieve that ROB graph.

[pandabearcat]

I still completely disbelieve that ROB graph.

Yea, idk, but I did check the sim and there wasn't anything wrong with it as far as I can see.

It is exceedingly simple compared to the current sim too, but had more detailed metrics.

If it makes you feel better the reason the # of procs was curving downwards was likely because I treated double procs as the same proc (obviously), as the game treats it that way.

That means as crit gets higher,

crit+crit - crit*crit is the chance each TICK event will proc.

As you can see, if you take the derivative (the change per change, as it were) = 2 - 2*crit, it is a linear line down.

So the rate of change will decrease linearly, which is why the graph is inverted like that.

Mathematics!

[EasymodeX]

As you can see, if you take the derivative (the change per change, as it were) = 2 - 2*crit, it is a linear line down.

So the rate of change will decrease linearly, which is why the graph is inverted like that.

Mathematics!

Oh, I thought the graph reflected the # of ROBs procs, not the delta / 1st derivative of # of ROB procs. I get the negative acceleration since the two potential ROB procs (one from each DOT) partially conflict. mIsrEAd

[Gooner_iBluAirJGR]

The only possible "crit" based class is bards.

Please, my god, please understand that "big crits" are meaningless.

In fact, because of life surge, you actually want crit LESS than before, because of your autocrit ability.

The more autocrits you have, the less crit you need, aka, monks, especially.

Not a single damn class is a crit class over any other class aside from bard.

And its been found that bard doesn't...really even favor crit much more than any other class.

People need to stop thinking "oo big numbers" and think that crit is the only thing that contributes to those numbers.

Instead, think this: Would you rather have fewer crits, but bigger crits, or more crits but smaller crits?

Suddenly thats not so easy to answer. And thus, why we have stat weights.

Are you upset?

[pandabearcat]

Are you upset?

I am merely the enemy of misinformation.

Also bad math.

Also I think, you will find that if you had 0 crit, and instead 900 determination, your damage would be higher.

Well...maybe not, the scaling might favor crit at that point.

But I hope you know it is entropy that is the bane of players everywhere, and as crit thrives on it, it is not good.

Lets say you need to do 100 damage to kill a mob.

I would much rather have 100 damage attack bar none, perfect, average, unfluctuating damage, than have 80 damage, but have a 80% chance to crit.

The EV of 80 damage, 80% chance to crit is 80*(1.5*.8 + .2) = 112 damage.

It is higher damage, by 12%!

But guess what, 20% of the time, you're going to fail that boss.

I'd rather do less dps and be more consistent.

Obviously with more attacks this becomes moot and everything approaches average, but I wanted to point out the fallacy of relying on your "big" crits.