AST's weakness in end game

[Vlady]

In fact it is impossible. Only se can reliably do it from data gathered to calculate its average means. I did hours of tests worth and without buffs with my brother and get yelled down for supposedly coming up with magic numbers during the time astrologian were wanting buffs. I only reported what were my personal dps gains the two jobs parsed over not having a steady stream of balance/arrow/timed spear cards.

Using math to prove one side of the other works well but only when variables are constantly consistent which is less likely in healing compared to dps checks. 10 pages of theory craft has shown us over the course of a longer fight the white mage comes out ahead but during shorter encounters the astrologian has the advantage which seems a decent trade off. People need to get away with wanting nocturnal stance to let the astrologian be in essence a scholar. I would be for a unique shield mechanic as I have said countless times and or even nocturnal being a weaker offensive version of cleric stance but not suffer the healing penalties of cleric stance as a form of additional dps support. But in order for our utility to be buffed we cannot keep this healing power that we have right now.

[Ghishlain]

I did hours of tests worth and without buffs with my brother and get yelled down for supposedly coming up with magic numbers during the time astrologian were wanting buffs.

Vlady, I hate to beat a dead horse but maybe I can talk some sense now that the animosity has died down and it's easier to read one post then a million at once.

The reason why yourself and your brother was yelled down was because your numbers are magical. Let's take your example stating you increased a DRGs DPS by 800. An 800 DPS increase is rather absurd when you consider Balance adds 10% additional damage to a DPS and in order for a DPS to get this 800 DPS increase, they would need to be doing 8,000 DPS (10% of 8,000 DPS is 800 DPS).

Semantics is important when discussing math and theorycraft. If you told us the DRG in question had an increase of 800 damage (not DPS), it would be more believable. 800 additional damage divided by (pre-AST-buff duration of) 15s of Balance leads to a DPS increase of approximately 53.3. This value feels much more reasonable in a time period when players were still learning their rotations and gearing up for content at the beginning of HW.

Clarity is important when discussing these sort of variables in a theoretical environment. It's also why I take Tato's theorycraft earlier in the thread about increasing BLM GCDs via Arrow with a grain of salt because there's no way to quantify the amount of additional damage they're actually doing despite getting additional GCDs. BLMs are still mostly constrained to how quickly they can regenerate MP which is tied to Umbral Ice which is also tied to server ticks (similar to how DoTs are constrained to server ticks as well). They aren't as limited as SMNs but still have that small gap where they won't be able to make much use of Arrow. Also, Tato was comparing the GCD reduction on a single player versus a GCD reduction to the raid from Selene over the course of the same which again is another variable difficult to quantify because raid composition is different from group to group. It's just important to point out because that BLM w/ Arrow needs to contribute more DPS than the raid DPS added by having that many GCDs go off.

I hope you understand what I'm trying to point out and can see how it might avoid conflicts later down the line.

[TatoRazzino]

Vlady, I hate to beat a dead horse but maybe I can talk some sense now that the animosity has died down and it's easier to read one post then a million at once.

The reason why yourself and your brother was yelled down was because your numbers are magical. Let's take your example stating you increased a DRGs DPS by 800. An 800 DPS increase is rather absurd when you consider Balance adds 10% additional damage to a DPS and in order for a DPS to get this 800 DPS increase, they would need to be doing 8,000 DPS (10% of 8,000 DPS is 800 DPS).

Semantics is important when discussing math and theorycraft. If you told us the DRG in question had an increase of 800 damage (not DPS), it would be more believable. 800 additional damage divided by (pre-AST-buff duration of) 15s of Balance leads to a DPS increase of approximately 53.3. This value feels much more reasonable in a time period when players were still learning their rotations and gearing up for content at the beginning of HW.

Clarity is important when discussing these sort of variables in a theoretical environment. It's also why I take Tato's theorycraft earlier in the thread about increasing BLM GCDs via Arrow with a grain of salt because there's no way to quantify the amount of additional damage they're actually doing despite getting additional GCDs. BLMs are still mostly constrained to how quickly they can regenerate MP which is tied to Umbral Ice which is also tied to server ticks (similar to how DoTs are constrained to server ticks as well). They aren't as limited as SMNs but still have that small gap where they won't be able to make much use of Arrow. Also, Tato was comparing the GCD reduction on a single player versus a GCD reduction to the raid from Selene over the course of the same which again is another variable difficult to quantify because raid composition is different from group to group. It's just important to point out because that BLM w/ Arrow needs to contribute more DPS than the raid DPS added by having that many GCDs go off.

I hope you understand what I'm trying to point out and can see how it might avoid conflicts later down the line.

I'll add to that the fact that having to dodge lowers how effective the Arrow card is. The results of comparing Arrow to Selene were not to be taken as a final argument. I honestly believe that a BLM can add more DPS in that many GCDs than the group wold simply because they're the job that benefits the most from attack speed due to resource refresh. My calculation could have been adjusted in several ways, and I could argue that I could throw those balances around the party and add those GCDs. Anyway, theorycraft is just theory and can only show ideal situations. Fights change that a lot.

[Vlady]

Vlady, I hate to beat a dead horse but maybe I can talk some sense now that the animosity has died down and it's easier to read one post then a million at once.

The reason why yourself and your brother was yelled down was because your numbers are magical. Let's take your example stating you increased a DRGs DPS by 800. An 800 DPS increase is rather absurd when you consider Balance adds 10% additional damage to a DPS and in order for a DPS to get this 800 DPS increase, they would need to be doing 8,000 DPS (10% of 8,000 DPS is 800 DPS).

Semantics is important when discussing math and theorycraft. If you told us the DRG in question had an increase of 800 damage (not DPS), it would be more believable. 800 additional damage divided by (pre-AST-buff duration of) 15s of Balance leads to a DPS increase of approximately 53.3. This value feels much more reasonable in a time period when players were still learning their rotations and gearing up for content at the beginning of HW.

Clarity is important when discussing these sort of variables in a theoretical environment. It's also why I take Tato's theorycraft earlier in the thread about increasing BLM GCDs via Arrow with a grain of salt because there's no way to quantify the amount of additional damage they're actually doing despite getting additional GCDs. BLMs are still mostly constrained to how quickly they can regenerate MP which is tied to Umbral Ice which is also tied to server ticks (similar to how DoTs are constrained to server ticks as well). They aren't as limited as SMNs but still have that small gap where they won't be able to make much use of Arrow. Also, Tato was comparing the GCD reduction on a single player versus a GCD reduction to the raid from Selene over the course of the same which again is another variable difficult to quantify because raid composition is different from group to group. It's just important to point out because that BLM w/ Arrow needs to contribute more DPS than the raid DPS added by having that many GCDs go off.

I hope you understand what I'm trying to point out and can see how it might avoid conflicts later down the line.

I am not arguing the issue that a dragoon burst going from 1600 to near 2400 might not be taken seriously but the flames of hell falls down upon me by the entire forum for standing for the parses I made against the dummies using balance at the time he burned his cooldowns but yet you calculating 0% overheal is a oops that no one seemed to have mind in your statistics. It was quite fun having people whisper me nightly cussing me out when I have never met them before but I digress. The astrologian thread #30 per week is getting old. When the tip starts to go back from healthy debate to absurdity and silliness then yes I will come out to put things back into perspective.

[Ghishlain]

I am not arguing the issue that a dragoon burst going from 1600 to near 2400 might not be taken seriously but the flames of hell falls down upon me by the entire forum for standing for the parses I made against the dummies using balance at the time he burned his cooldowns but yet you calculating 0% overheal is a oops that no one seemed to have mind in your statistics. It was quite fun having people whisper me nightly cussing me out when I have never met them before but I digress. The astrologian thread #30 per week is getting old. When the tip starts to go back from healthy debate to absurdity and silliness then yes I will come out to put things back into perspective.

There are two differences between you and I in that respect:

1. I'm willing to put my thoughts on the table and illustrate them for everyone to dissect
2. I'm willing to own up to my own mistakes once I see the fatal flaw in my argument

Vlady, during the time you were being badgered, you never produced any proof of your results or the methodology of your testing for others to examine. Instead you stated something as though it were fact and even though your results were easy to debunk just on simple math alone. Despite this glaring contradiction, you were stubbornly adamant about your results. When questioned, you would never present a counter argument - instead opting to bulldog your way into other aspects of the discussion while never answering the questions presented to you.

If you had been more honest with your testing and humble with your attitude, you could've avoided much of the negativity that was pressed towards you.

While I don't condone the juvenile and asinine behavior some posters / in game players may have directed towards you, you certainly didn't do yourself any favours by presenting yourself in the way you did.

Just some food for thought and my two cents. Take from this what you will. I'm not here to try to take a chunk out of you, I'm just here to hopefully make you see some reason into why ire is directed to you in the way it is.

[Vlady]

I understand you try the approach few on the forums do which is quality over quantity posts. Most of your points are concise and professional. I understand I am human and do not know everything and yes I have been proven wrong and will be on countless times but still I only posted my results and how I came to those results. Had things not gotten ugly I would have acted in a more suitable manner. I will apologize now to you ghislain. I think you are a good choice for the forums.

[OpheliaHeartilly]

... only when variables are constantly consistent ...