Quote Originally Posted by nguyenmb View Post
But just because noone has disproved your math yet doesn't mean there isn't a flaw in there. Actually, I think you should already know your flaw, the fact the you haven't accounted for the actual battle, party dynamics, and communication - the hard things to model yet many of you discount people's anecdotes when you haven't been able to do it theoretically.
Well then, does WAR in Defiance out-DPS PLD in Sword Oath because some guy on the forums said so? It doesn't take a particularly detailed model to see the absurdity in such claims. The most rudimentary understanding of game mechanics will suffice. Honestly, it's not hard to tell where the weaknesses in theorycrafted numbers lie. Those of us who make them are acutely aware of the assumptions we made to come up with the numbers. You cannot talk down the reduction in healing bonus from using Inner Beast; it isn't listening. Neither does Eos snub a tank because it's carrying a sword. The sorts of silliness that show up in these are generally easily dismissed, and that's why you see a lot of "but your maths can't describe the game" flat denials as rebuttals.

(Your examples are also rather poor -- it's pretty easy to quantify the mitigation from Mountain Buster, for example. It is functionally no different than dropping a percent-reduction cooldown which acts on those attacks. You can by extension estimate 5s, 10s, 20s, and 30s effective health pools depending on desired interval length.)

Quote Originally Posted by Leiron View Post
THe majority of BC turn 5 groups that completed it were PLD/PLD.
War/War has been among the rarest combinations and I know of no group who used such a composition and completed BC turn 5
I still have yet to see a WAR/WAR T4 run. Getting about time that there should be enough Myth stuff to go around that 2 WAR might do it.