Thread: Some interesting numbers on 4.0 BLM

Originally Posted by soslinky

snip

That's kinda obtuse though.
Because optimally you never use 3x Umbral Hearts.
The optimal aoe rotation is Flare>Foul>Flare.
Why do we need 3 hearts then? Just a nice, prime number xD?
I'm not disagreeing with you. Just shaking my head. I mean, this is a core job mechanic that's... just for aoe... most other jobs don't have to deal with this (imagine Bahamut being only worth it on aoe or something).

Originally Posted by RulerOfPotaoes

You can't buff Foul because of SAM damage... it would render SMN's Akh Morn useless and SMN AoE damage got gutted so much that now BLM does better aoe damage. If anything Foul potency should be nerfed or if kept at the same potency then Akh Morn should be buffed.

Aight, level with me for a second. These are orthogonal things.
The fact that I want 4.0 BLM revised and fixed says nothing about SMN.
I think SMN needs help even more badly than BLM- I think it's absurd that your single target is so low, I think it's absurd that your new, powerful tools are locked behind a 2 min clock, I think it's absurd that your aoe got gutted (what was that Bane nerf xD) and I think it's absurd that such a high-ceiling job is also so punishing.
Even if all these changes were to magically go through, that doesn't mean SMN would be ok or anything- if I could also magically change SMN, I'd do things like make that clock shorter, revert the Bane nerf and a bunch of other stuff.
I'm not asking BLM to be buffed in detriment of other jobs. I'm considering jobs that are doing well right now (RDM, NIN, BRD, MNK and SAM) as a baseline, and figuring out how to bring the other 4 (MCH, DRG, SMN and BLM) to speed.
Since I have limited play time, I went with BLM first (it's like my one true love). I'm certain once I finish levelling my SMN I'll be here ranting about how it sucks too.
In my head, it makes no sense that there's never a reason to use 3x Umbral Hearts if you're playing optimally, or that a harder, 4.0 rotation yields less pps.
It also makes no sense that a job with such limited utility is beat in single target dps by like, NIN. NIN, the king of raid damage utility.
You can grab this very same argument and apply it to SMN.
For example, I think Akh Morn should not come off as an Egi move, but as a SMN move, not getting that 80% damage multiplier.
Just... a long rant, because I do feel for you SMN folk.

Originally Posted by StouterTaru

The exact same was true during HW; you could ignore F4 and still out dps 90% of similarly geared dps in the df, or you could maximize dps and squeak out 15% more damage.

But it was stronger than the 2.X one.
The 4.0 rotation is actually weaker than the 3.X one, which is the biggest issue.
Also, I had a mistake in my math when I wrote that. If you check the numbers, the 2.X loses to the 4.0 one by like 4ish%, not 10.

Originally Posted by StouterTaru

1. If you replace B3 with Transpose, and put in half a second of no damage, your 4.x beats out 3.x
2. Your math ignores Thundercloud procs, which would have a larger boost to a longer rotation (less clipping).
3. Your 2.x rotation has 6x F1

You need to sacrifice a F4 to use a TC proc on 4.0. You simply don't have enough AF time to use TC on 4.0.
Alternatively, you TC and replace a F4 for a Fire. This is not the case for 3.X, where you can TC without sacrificing a F4 cast. TC procs make 3.X better. I'm doing 4.0 a favor, if anything.

Transposing is normally a dps loss. You have on average one second and a half of 0 pps (which is already a disaster).
Even if you used some third party thing (like ACT) to keep track of the mana ticks (which I don't want to at all, and shouldn't even be considered), the problem doesn't end there because your F3 to get back into AF3 is also now a 3 second cast (more lost pps).
To make it worse, since you're going into AF3 from UI, you're now even more vulnerable to the mana tick situation, because you might get this odd mana value where you're left with less than 2.4k at the end of the AF cycle (since you came off UI and not UI III).
Your transpose suggestion will just make 4.0 worse, but you're free to show me I'm wrong with pps napkin math or parses.
There's a reason the highest rated BLMs are using mostly the 3.X rotation and not 4.0 one.

Has for the 2.X comment, I forgot B4 in there, which is actually a good catch. Let me update that.
That, the difference is 4% if you B4 on 2.X, or if you a pure 2.X rotation (no B4), about 3%.
Okay, not 2%. I get 3~4% depending on how I use 2.X. The problem holds as before.

EDIT: so I went ahead and calc'd this for you. If you get a super quick mana tick (<0.5s), your pps comes at around 143 (you gain one pps). However, if the tick takes one second or more, you're losing pps (140.8 for one second, and average is 1.5seconds...).
Further, over two rotations, you better pray you get a fast mana tick off transpose, or you're always losing pps on average. It's completely silly that a server tick can mess a rotation up so badly.
At any rate, 3.X beats either of these options in any circumstance other than Foul not being ready for your UI cycle.

Originally Posted by StouterTaru

snip

Like I said, your suggestion yields ~143 pps (~1pps over the "standard" 4.0 rotation, so that's still an improvement).
However, this is still less than 3.X.
You're right in that it does allow you to TC more comfortably, but the HW rotation can also TC comfortably (and has actually a bit more versatility than your proposed solution), so I'm not sure how this will beat it out.
I'd also add that this solution is a worse in terms of dealing with movement (you have like 1.5 seconds of leniency in UI, which is super tight, so if you have to cancel anything during your UI cycle you're in big trouble) and that you lose a very nice window to weave an ogcd as you go into AF (you'll likely have to deal with Ley Lines and/or Triple animation lock).

Still, here's the pps table for reference:
http://imgur.com/0jU707g