It is still better to form shift to coerul stance and fire tackle - demolish back to where ever you're going.
If anyone has actually found a use for RoW, I'd love to discuss.
It is still better to form shift to coerul stance and fire tackle - demolish back to where ever you're going.
If anyone has actually found a use for RoW, I'd love to discuss.


Did you actually theorycrafted that or just speaking with no evidence?
From my point of view this will change at least the monk openner in 4.2 . You don't need to be smart to see that.
The opener hasn't changed. Here is a recent thread with that discussion.
As for my own personal "evidence", I ran o5s before the maint. I could find no use for it.


That's really odd I though gaining a GS stack for free with a OGCD would definitelly change something in the openner.The opener hasn't changed. Here is a recent thread with that discussion.
As for my own personal "evidence", I ran o5s before the maint. I could find no use for it.



Yeah I thought so too, but looking back on it I can see more value in keeping FT for our big LOL moment (which got 5% LOLLER with the Brohood change).
We knew the patch notes like, a week ago. To theorycraft you just need to know what's changing, it doesn't need to have happened already.
If someone wins an argument, they have learned nothing.
FOR DOCKHAND!
In another Sad but REALLY whiny "True Monk" thread
So you are using theorycraft from BEFORE the patch even droped as facts?
If you have alternative openers and uses where RoW is not a dps loss, please post them. Discussions are still being had post-patch and it appears the opener will not change at all. As I mentioned, I've run Monk post patch and cannot find a use for it.
Last edited by Rockette; 01-31-2018 at 01:23 AM.


Kinda curious why the pre patch argument is used here. The potencies nor mechanics were changed, the only thing it does is get a GL stack when using RoW. And a prerequisite for RoW is to: Be in FoW (loses 5% from FoFire) and use wind tackle at half the potency.
And yes I have used it after the patch and, outside of quirky, niche applications (and FoW being a DPS loss) RoW is just an alternative way to regain stacks if you for some odd reason have PB on CD and lost them.
The pre-patch argument is valid simply because there's a big difference between theorycrafting and actual experiment, even if the paramaters doesn't change much, it is STILL a change, one that theorycrafting alone cannot point out without the actual experimentation. I'm not saying it's proven now or no that the prepatch theory changed, but there are already rough drafts of another openner that increase dps even if its for a bit, SO its not "niche aplications" like you claimed, and like that reddit theory claimed, and my original post was just a trolling because, because I'm REALLY sick of drama queens atitude like OP one in the thread title, but then again, this whole forum is one big bad drama sometimes.Kinda curious why the pre patch argument is used here. The potencies nor mechanics were changed, the only thing it does is get a GL stack when using RoW. And a prerequisite for RoW is to: Be in FoW (loses 5% from FoFire) and use wind tackle at half the potency.
And yes I have used it after the patch and, outside of quirky, niche applications (and FoW being a DPS loss) RoW is just an alternative way to regain stacks if you for some odd reason have PB on CD and lost them.
RoW is useful in dungeons if, like me, you don't like spamming form shift constantly between pulls.
For primals and raids, will sit back and see what happens.
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|
Cookie Policy
This website uses cookies. If you do not wish us to set cookies on your device, please do not use the website. Please read the Square Enix cookies policy for more information. Your use of the website is also subject to the terms in the Square Enix website terms of use and privacy policy and by using the website you are accepting those terms. The Square Enix terms of use, privacy policy and cookies policy can also be found through links at the bottom of the page.

Reply With Quote



