Connecting the DoTs: A Summoner Guide

[Judge_Xero]

Looking at the scaling of Crit (which is amazing) I'm fairly convinced that Crit will be best (for all DPS classes).

I haven't seen any thorough DET VS SPD Dot testing, but the little bit I did showed results of
~52 SPD = 1% increase
~72 DET = 1% increase

So from a glance they just look so close when you consider the oGCD skills and the arsenal of SMN Dots.

So glad for people collecting data and creating the Simulator, because I think it would just be too hard to optimize otherwise.

[Minorinz]

So you give some anecdotal evidence about crit improving

It's common sense in some way, you don't need people to tell you that the sky is blue when you see that it is blue. You saying that you need people to convince you with evidence instead of thinking about it yourself with your own experience as a base assumption is not better than following the pack with your eyes closed. I'm pretty sure I'm not the only one thinking Crit > SS otherwise I'm at complete awe with the current smn community s:

Spell Speed increases the damage done by DoT spells.

I was setting a comparison of how good spellspeed is for blm other than it being a better multiplier/secondary stat base. The example of "chaining spells" question being clarified with arrow since it obviously reduces the recast of a gcd. IF we are purely considering the damage increase on a dot vs the damage increase on all out going damage on smn then it's det vs ss otherwise if ss is better than crit, then, congratulations, the game just broke!

[T0rin]

It's common sense in some way, you don't need people to tell you that the sky is blue when you see that it is blue. You saying that you need people to convince you with evidence instead of thinking about it yourself with your own experience as a base assumption is not better than following the pack with your eyes closed. I'm pretty sure I'm not the only one thinking Crit > SS otherwise I'm at complete awe with the current smn community s:

Did you just try to explain why it is more accurate to just 'go with your gut' rather than do analytical analysis of something? I'm sure a lot of people still think that Crit > SS, because that's how it was for a long time. Which really doesn't mean much of anything, since you know, stuff changes.

Thinking for myself and waiting on a proper analysis to be done are in no way related. If I want to know what is actually better, the only way to accomplish that is to wait until the analysis is done, or do it myself. Doing some parses and changing some gear is probably the least accurate way to come to an actual understanding of what is going on behind the scenes.

[Minorinz]

Did you just try to explain why it is more accurate to just 'go with your gut' rather than do analytical analysis..

I'm basing what i'm saying righ tnow off my parses and others' parses that were posted here. I've compared the damage output to understand that crit is actually really good. I haven't went too far with my calculations and simply accepted that crit is that good. As for det vs ss, from how smn works, yes, it's my gut feeling. I don't think the difference is huge to be making assumptions that ss is starting to get on crit's level to begin with. The damage formula will help to calculate the best gear set, from how I see it but it won't be to whether stack more det or ss because whatever comes with crit and the accuracy cap is welcomed.

[Havenchild]

Thinking for myself and waiting on a proper analysis to be done are in no way related. If I want to know what is actually better, the only way to accomplish that is to wait until the analysis is done, or do it myself. Doing some parses and changing some gear is probably the least accurate way to come to an actual understanding of what is going on behind the scenes.

Been watching the thread as always and this is where I had to draw the line. This is not a good way of thinking when aiming for high parses. Do not feel because the formulas dictate a number, that this is how it works in game, especially on a patch by patch basis. You should always value you're parses higher in the end no matter what. Sure, you can have a BIS or coefficients thrown at you all day, but if you can maintain higher numbers using another build, you should exploit that or come to understand that what works in game is far superior to any simulation or math done in a calculator. Going on behind the scenes and what gives the most damage don't always line up.

Now just to figure out how a few numbers of this stat may impact overall damage in theory, is different from how it will impact overall damage in execution. Regardless we should WANT to understand how each stat CAN affect the damage done by SMN / Pet anyway.

[T0rin]

Been watching the thread as always and this is where I had to draw the line. This is not a good way of thinking when aiming for high parses. Do not feel because the formulas dictate a number, that this is how it works in game, especially on a patch by patch basis. You should always value you're parses higher in the end no matter what. Sure, you can have a BIS or coefficients thrown at you all day, but if you can maintain higher numbers using another build, you should exploit that or come to understand that what works in game is far superior to any simulation.

Now just to figure out how a few numbers of this stat, may impact overall damage in theory, is different from how it will impact overall damage in execution. Regardless we should stand to understand how each stat CAN affect the damage done by SMN / Pet anyway.

This discounts the reality that there may be minor differences in execution between parses. I can do 10 different parses with the exact same opener and routine and come up with 10 different results, without changing anything. Unless you execute everything perfect, every single time, no, this is a really bad way to come up with an analysis of which secondary stats are better. Any given kill, take A1S for example, can vary, simply because of RNG. Resins go out on different people. Spasers go out on different people. Number of jumps before kills vary. Etc. etc. Changing gear between one attempt and the next doesn't do anything to quantify the real differences between your potential. And this is what is important, your potential, not your execution.

If we were robots, and the fights had no RNG, and we executed everything exactly the same way every time, then comparing two parses would be a legitimate way to determine which gear (stats) were better. But in reality, we aren't. But you know what is? A simulation.

If you can maintain higher numbers with inferior gear, it is not an issue that the inferior gear is actually better, it is an issue with how you play the game.

And all of this analysis should be able to be proven out in the game. If the math says that SS is worth X and Crit is worth Y and Det is worth Z, that should actually be provable in the game. This isn't just some exercise for funsies, the whole point is to determine the actual outcome of something happening in the game, to determine a real value to something more than an anecdotal guess.

If the reality is that SS > Crit > Det, and someone can pull higher numbers with a Crit heavy set than an SS heavy set, that just means they are screwing something up when using the SS heavy set, or that the method for determining the value of SS vs Det was flawed. You're proposing a really bad hypothetical, simply to get behind the idea that a flawed human execution of something is more analytically accurate than a mathematical analysis.

[Havenchild]

snip

There's two things kinda wrong with your statement. The first is, that there would be a better rotation than the one you found before that would better utilize the let's say for purpose SS, you have gained. In theory this is true, but in actual in game use it's not. Maybe on Striking Dummy? But in a fight? Highly Unlikely for the exact reason you mention, disconnects of a fight, RNG that can mess around with you and such. That is what slightly reduces the use of Spellspeed as well. How many casts it gave you over the course of the fight actually almost never changes or changes very little because of how fights play out. Now if we are looking at SS, like a modifier similar to DET, that's completely different.

The second way you are wrong, I would take you back to the 2.5+ series a sec. Many people stood by on calculators and sims alone, but several people could not pull the numbers I was able to do, when I would sacrifice yes, main stat for secondaries.
Many people claimed I was wrong regardless of reasoning and logical testing in game showed otherwise. It was only after I showed parse data relative to what I was saying, that people began to question how things actually worked again with SMN.

Turns out, that the old damage calculator was slightly off and the NA scene largely as a whole, didn't actually understand that DET scaled higher with more main stat. However the JP scene was more privy on this. Turns out I was proving the JP calculators in game without even knowing of either calculators existence. Have I tried builds from multiple people before? Absolutely, and executed my rotation the exact same way because even then, when Spellspeed had stronger influence on our cast times and such, it still never changed my rotation or gave an extra cast. Many people went full INT builds by maximizing ilvl, but that stuff was bloated with Spellspeed.

RNG has been existent in raiding for a long time. In T10 with charges/ tethers, T11 tethers, T13 Megaflare/ Earthshakers, T6 Flower debuff, T5 Dread stun....etcetc.

Now understand this does not take away from the fact that, now in Heavensward, Spellspeed is different, because it is. However, regardless, you should still go by what you see in game. A simulator is not server code. Nor are simulators always updated where as patch by patch, things can be tweaked behind the scenes without notice. If you would recall, stat scaling has been adjusted before between patches.

You don't have to trust what you see in game, but that's on you. However, I would strongly recommend against saying any Simulator or Calculator as the top result over what actually executes in-game better. That's not bad advice, that's kinda just common sense, I think.

Any other method isn't scientific. You need to eliminate as many variables as possible when conducting tests.

Do you guys think, that it is impossible, for someone to have little to no human error involved, when they understand the rotation they execute that much? I don't think so, and I feel a lot of people that post ridiculous numbers on DPS boards make it there with very little human error in between runs. You are definitely correct in, it's not based on science but what works in-game.

[T0rin]

snip

The simple reality is that if the game doesn't back up the numbers, then you need to look at the numbers. The odds of there being human error involved are just as likely in a mathematical analysis as there are in executing a rotation in the game. That doesn't take away from the merit of either, it just means that you need to be very diligent about both. If the analysis is done right, then nothing in the game short of player error should counteract the data. Going back to your pre-3.0 example.. if the analysis is saying one thing and the reality is showing another, that points to a potential flaw in the analysis, but does not discount the idea that the analysis should definitively be able to prove out what is analytically better than something else.

And this is comparing dummy parse sims vs real fights, of course there will be differences in the impact of different stats. What if you wrote a sim that actually simulated real fights with normalized RNG on mechanics?

[Minorinz]

There's two things kinda wrong with your statement. The first is...

Omg i love you, and I totally get what you are saying. I think about it this way too.