Are the numbers too high?

[Rydin]

but I do know, for example, that even a bit of healing potentcy goes a long way on my conjurer

That is subjective.... At level 50 each point of healing potency adds 1.25 hp of healing to Cure and 2.50 hp of healing to Cura

[Eldaena]

That is subjective.... At level 50 each point of healing potency adds 1.25 hp of healing to Cure and 2.50 hp of healing to Cura

How is it subjective if it's fact? Anyway, hq wand with two tier III healing hand materia, and I'm curing for almost 200 hp more than other conjurers. I know it's in addition to other gear as well, like my hq double melded hat. That's a big deal really. I honestly don't know if the hq gear has any difference, but the stats from the materia certainly do, alongside what the gear already had. Even if it isn't that much. (By which I mean even a few points more of the stat is having a large output, really.)

[Rydin]

How is it subjective if it's fact? Anyway, hq wand with two tier III healing hand materia, and I'm curing for almost 200 hp more than other conjurers. I know it's in addition to other gear as well, like my hq double melded hat. That's a big deal really. I honestly don't know if the hq gear has any difference, but the stats from the materia certainly do, alongside what the gear already had. Even if it isn't that much.

No.. the math isn't subjective.. saying it goes a long way is a subjective statement

[Eldaena]

I guess if you don't think 200 hp is significant.

[BruceyBruceyBangBang]

No.. the math isn't subjective.. saying it goes a long way is a subjective statement

I appreciate you bringing up the subject and I agree that naked stats are a tad bit too potent, but what does this even mean? This makes absolutely no sense.

[Rydin]

[SIZE="7"]KEAKO[/SIZE]

I just read your damage taken blog post...
Insightful
I reinforced what I was thinking though... Stats are not broken... The formulae aren't broken... My qualm is more with the theory behind the stats

A couple points I'd like to raise (Purely philosophical)

1. I'd like to see a steeper slope in terms of damage taken as you raise Def or VIT. Thats purely personal preference. the damage floor can stay where it is... but the damage taken at very low def should be increased, thereby raising the
slope ratio

2. I don't like that the slope is determined purely by DLvl (Although I don't mind that the damage floor being determined that way). Thats one of the reasons I said I prefer FFXII's formula to FFXI's... Although... FFXI only used a Dlvl modifier if the MOB was above you... still... Any level modifier is silly... Level already indirectly modifies your stats (by allowing you to equip higher level and therefore higher stat gear)

3. The fact that the efficiency of adding Def is such that you would have to get over 1200def before you even started seeing an efficient increase in damage taken, I don't like that. but lo and behold... A steeper slope would alleviate some of my angst.

4. I am interested to see your damage dealt test... seeing how Attack on a lvl 50 class can't be dropped below 450 or so on melee classes

[Majidah]

Lets just hold hands and chant until a mod walks in with developer feedback.

[Allistar]

In Final Fantasy... Most stats capped at 255, and even then you didn't get a stat that high unless you were definitely at level 99... and when you did.. you were ungodly....
At str 255 you were hitting just about everything for max damage

Final fantasy:
Attack on Best weapon: 134
Def on best body piece: 45

Final fantasy II:
Attack on Best weapon: 199
Def on best body piece: 75

Final fantasy III:
Attack on Best weapon: 156
Def on best body piece: 60

Final fantasy IV:
Attack on Best weapon: 255
Def on best body piece: 100

Final fantasy V:
Attack on Best weapon: 180
Def on best body piece: 18

Final fantasy VI:
Attack on Best weapon: 255
Def on best body piece: 128

Final fantasy VII:
Attack on Best weapon: 100
Def on best body piece: 100 (on accessory. no other gear used)

Final fantasy VIII:
Attack on Best weapon: 30
Def on best body piece: No def... VIT capped at 255 and you were God strong

Final fantasy IX:
Attack on Best weapon: 108
Def on best body piece: 62

Final fantasy X:
Attack on Best weapon: Str derived from Sphere Grid... caps at 255
Def on best body piece: Also Derived from Sphere grid... max is 255

Final fantasy XI:
Attack on Best weapon: 137
Def on best body piece: 69

Final fantasy XII:
Attack on Best weapon: 150
Def on best body piece: 61

ok... My decently well geared Lancer has:
Damage output 151
Attack 588
Str 296
Piety 276
Def 541

Def on best body piece in the game: 182 (Sentinel Cuirass)

Those are high numbers that, first of all, are not very typical of what we've come to expect in Final Fantasy

I know all numbers are relative.... But if thats the case.. everything else should also scale up
Take the Cobalt mitt gaunlets that everyone loves to put on gives 3 strength
3 strength.....

but when your damage output is 151, Str is 296 and Attack is 588, how can you convince me that my damage dealer should be wearing gloves that give 3 str?
Why wouldn't I just put on some Level 18 Leather Mitts
I know you're thinking that I can't put Tier IV materia on the Leather Mitts.... so you'd miss out on 30 attack power with a Tier IV heavens fist

But 5 different stats make up your attack... so you'd be missing 5% of 1 of 5 damage stats

whats the point of this thread? what am I saying?
whats the tl;dr?
If the stats are going to be higher... then there needs to be a bigger stat boost from better gear and Materia....


Its why people say gear doesn't matter or stats don't matter
they do... the stats work fine...
but if the content is balanced for my lancer wearing Cobalt Mitt Gauntlets and we've already proven that wearing a level 18 pair of gaunlets is not noticeably worse.... then thats how people go into battle wearing anything

IMO the numbers are definitely too big/exaggerated...in every aspect

[Rydin]

on MOBs +/-10 levels he was able to control one stat while increasing another and see change the entire time up to 345 VIT

It would take the highest VIT gear and double melds on every applicable piece to hit 400 VIT... It is possible though
maybe we should....
What was your VIT and DEF, what MOB were you fighting and how much damage were you taking when you capped the VIT increase?

If you're really lucky and you could get 5 melds on each applicable piece... plus the right gear... you could get +300 Vitality... for like 560 Vitality on a Glad... I definitely don't see that happening though

[Kaeko]

Ok going to actually respond to Zangetsu's attempt to debunk the testing, specifically on VIT.

In the "initial testing on R52 Mongrels", it shows that for VIT of 178 all the way up to R269, the damage floor or "cap" as you refer to, is the SAME. So going from 178 VIT to 269 VIT did NOT change the cap.

Regarding your belief that we did not test VIT high enough, you are mistaken. You believed that we only tested to 269, but if you look at the post, it CLEARLY states in the actual body of the post AND the conclusions that the tested VIT range was 252 to 345. If you want to make the argument that a tier exists beyond 345 go for it, but going beyond 345 starts to border on the realm of impracticality in game.

Regarding the argument that DEF is somehow tiered (your example of going from 599 to 600 produces a 30 damage decrease)... First of all, we have offered an extremely large data set that would practically flood this thread if we were to post the raw data here. It clearly showed for at least 40 cases that there was a steady linear decline, not some sort of tier function. Not to be snarky or anything but I have never seen you offer any data in any of your posts suggesting anything regarding any stat at any time. Even a basic methodology like what mob, what level, etc. is not present.

We have the same goal in that we want to know how stats work. We offer our methodology in detail so that players like yourself may attempt to debunk it. That is what you are trying to do and we appreciate this. However, in your attempts to debunk it, you offer no alternative that has any test, data, or logical observational conclusion to support your counter-argument. As such, I (with all due respect), personally cannot take your theory(ies) all that seriously. This is not some personal attack on you. I only mean that if you expect us to defend our findings and detail our methods to be picked at, we only ask you produce the same.

****

Regarding the actual topic, I'm happy everyone has differing opinions. I just find it frustrating when they base their opinions of false or generally unproven ideas. If you're going to argue 1 way or the other, at least try to have the most accurate depiction of how things really work before you go at it. I stated this on like the 3rd page of this thread (buried somewhere in there), but

It's like we have to stand up before we can learn to walk - we have to know and AGREE on how stats work before we can complain about how they are broken.

Cheers