Thread: 5.08 Patch - DPS still not balanced.

Originally Posted by whiskeybravo

I didn't say anything about 20% or 50% percentiles. I asked if whether that was before or after you inflated the disparity by 20-50%

"Nearly 2000" is an inflation of 20%. And 50% above the 1000 dps difference you see in lower percentiles.

Make sense now?

... lets try this one more time. The lower percentages are irrelevant. I only mentioned specific percentages for example purposes. But since you're so adamant over semantics when someone else already addressed how idiotic this whole argument is. I'll quote from 95% on both E4S and E3S, respectively.

Black Mage: 14,732
Red Mage, 13,175
Dancer: 12,869

Black Mage: 14,408
Red Mage, 12,882
Dancer: 12,772

Citing Black Mage as being nearly two thousand above the bottom is an accurate assessment.

Originally Posted by whiskeybravo

That's not what I said at all, actually. I asked if you are really going to claim that them being predominantly found in optimization kills has no bearing whatsoever on the statistics.

And I'm the strawman lol

Nice try, but you missed the point entirely. Speed killers cannot impact the statistical average drastically because:

1) They typically play whatever is optimal, thus it was long determined before they even started speed killing
2) People are still playing the weaker jobs at a competitive level. Some are even speed killing with them.

Bluntly stated, the mere idea speed killers playing the big three would result in such a massively one-sided lead in overall damage is such a laughable reach in logic, it borders on embarrassing you'd even suggest it.

Originally Posted by whiskeybravo

And I'm the strawman lol

Originally Posted by whiskeybravo

The NIN calling the BLM op

:lulz:

If you aren’t the strawman, why make unnecessary quips like this?

Originally Posted by ForteNightshade

Citing Black Mage as being nearly two thousand above the bottom is an accurate assessment.

Why did you include DNC? You only mentioned RDM, DRG and BRD in your original comment.

Shifting the goal posts? It's OK. But 1500+ would've been a more reasonable claim. 500 dps is a pretty significant number relative to the disparities that are present. Surely you could agree?

Originally Posted by ForteNightshade

Bluntly stated, the mere idea speed killers playing the big three would result in such a massively one-sided lead in overall damage is such a laughable reach in logic, it borders on embarrassing you'd even suggest it.

Weird, I'm not finding the word massive in any of my comments. For your points:

1) It should be obvious how early clear groups are able to gear up their dominant jobs faster than others.
2) If there are high skilled players gearing up dominant jobs faster than others, and purposefully seeking to establish such "dominance", this fact would not be impartial to any statistics being gathered, particularly early on.

Doesn't have to be massive, which is why I never alluded to it being such. Within the intricacies of the statistics however, it should at least be considered as having the possibility of influencing them. If we are dealing in the range of 10% disparity, even finding 1% becomes relatively meaningful.

Originally Posted by ForteNightshade

The lower percentages are irrelevant.

It depends on the discussion. If the argument is that some DPS need to buffed because it's more difficult meet damage requirements with them compared to other jobs, then looking at the bare minimum damage requirements and it's statistics is absolutely relevant.

Originally Posted by Kabooa

Sorry for the delay. I'm trying to get another clear I ultimately don't deserve.

gdi

No one is arguing that you don't deserve the clear, that's not this is about. The whole point of the exercise was just to bring up that in the current state of the balance, taking specific classes more than ever before has become a factor into tipping an enrage wipe into a clear and vice-versa. That's something people want corrected above all.

Originally Posted by whiskeybravo

Why did you include DNC? You only mentioned RDM, DRG and BRD in your original comment.

Shifting the goal posts? It's OK. But 1500+ would've been a more reasonable claim. 500 dps is a pretty significant number relative to the disparities that are present. Surely you could agree?

Why include DNC in this comparison? Perhaps because DNC is at the bottom at the 95th percentile? Where you expecting a DPS not at the bottom to be named to make a comparison between the damage values of the bottom DPS versus the top DPS at the percentile quoted to you? That’s not shifting any goalpost. Your comment, however, is grasping at straws at the very best. And another strawman...that you keep saying you aren’t making.


EDIT: Ah, I do see what you’re trying to grasp at—the comment about BLM being nearly 2,000 rDPS against RDM (which is true). That doesn’t change the fact, however, that DNC is lower than RDM, which makes it even lower than BLM. The difference between RDM and DNC at the 95th percentile for All Bosses is 177 rDPS, E3S is 110 rDPS, and E4S is 306 rDPS. If you’re going to cling to these rDPS values to attempt to discredit the argument, again: you’re grasping at some very thin straws. The issues is still the same: BLM is nearly 2,000 rDPS above RDM at the 95th percentile, and nearly 2,000 rDPS above DNC.

Originally Posted by whiskeybravo

Why did you include DNC? You only mentioned RDM, DRG and BRD in your original comment.

Shifting the goal posts? It's OK. But 1500+ would've been a more reasonable claim. 500 dps is a pretty significant number relative to the disparities that are present. Surely you could agree?

If you've actually read my responses, I've mentioned the bottom five several times and only specifically mentioned those jobs to avoid repetition in my replies. At this point, you're arguing semantics because your actual argument has no grounds otherwise. It's getting rather sad when all you can rebuke is the difference between "1,500+" and "nearly 2,000"

Originally Posted by whiskeybravo

Weird, I'm not finding the word massive in any of my comments. For your points:

1) It should be obvious how early clear groups are able to gear up their dominant jobs faster than others.
2) If there are high skilled players gearing up dominant jobs faster than others, and purposefully seeking to establish such "dominance", this fact would not be impartial to any statistics being gathered, particularly early on.

Doesn't have to be massive, which is why I never alluded to it being such. Within the intricacies of the statistics however, it should at least be considered as having the possibility of influencing them. If we are dealing in the range of 10% disparity, even finding 1% becomes relatively meaningful.

Nor did I imply you said it. Once again, I implore you to read my replies if you're going respond. What I said is your comment implied a contributing factor for the big three having such a dominant lead in overall damage was due to them being apart of speed kills. It's both a flawed and disingenuous presence because it's wholly reliant on the remaining jobs not being competitive. As that isn't the case, it has little relevant impact. In fact, we needs only look at the tanks to disprove this nonsense. Warrior is vastly underrepresented yet percentiles consistently show it being close enough to the remaining tanks that balance isn't an issue.

Originally Posted by whiskeybravo

It depends on the discussion. If the argument is that some DPS need to buffed because it's more difficult meet damage requirements with them compared to other jobs, then looking at the bare minimum damage requirements and it's statistics is absolutely relevant.

That isn't how balancing works because it gives an inaccurate assessment of the job's performance. How many times do I have to spell this out for you?Looking at percentages where people have serious rotational or mechanical issues will result in false conclusions such as the assumption Black Mage isn't dominating Red Mage because at say, 20% the gap is much smaller than 95%. Only the latter is relevant because it depicts two players at equal skill, playing the job at a high level where overcapping or dropping resources won't skew the results.

Originally Posted by ForteNightshade

If you've actually read my responses, I've mentioned the bottom five several times and only specifically mentioned those jobs to avoid repetition in my replies. At this point, you're arguing semantics because your actual argument has no grounds otherwise. It's getting rather sad when all you can rebuke is the difference between "1,500+" and "nearly 2,000"

No, your comment that I had a problem with, which is what we've being going back and forth about, clearly claimed BLM was nearly 2000 above RDM. It's not. It's about 1500 by your own example.

The problem is actually that you're clearly just not interested in playing fair. Otherwise you wouldn't have had to include dancer in order to justify your exaggeration of the disparity.

Just keep shifting those goal posts.

Originally Posted by ForteNightshade

Nor did I imply you said it. Once again, I implore you to read my replies if you're going respond. What I said is your comment implied a contributing factor for the big three having such a dominant lead in overall damage was due to them being apart of speed kills. It's both a flawed and disingenuous presence because it's wholly reliant on the remaining jobs not being competitive. As that isn't the case, it has little relevant impact. In fact, we needs only look at the tanks to disprove this nonsense. Warrior is vastly underrepresented yet percentiles consistently show it being close enough to the remaining tanks that balance isn't an issue.

Please quote where I either said massive or dominant lead as a result. And if you can't then stop putting words in my comments or implying I said things I didn't. Just because you can't wrap your head around the concept doesn't mean you get to make stuff up. I know there is some word that's defined as "an intentionally misrepresented proposition that is set up because it is easier to defeat than an opponent's real argument." but I just can't think of it.

Originally Posted by ForteNightshade

That isn't how balancing works because it gives an inaccurate assessment of the job's performance. How many times do I have to spell this out for you?Looking at percentages where people have serious rotational or mechanical issues will result in false conclusions such as the assumption Black Mage isn't dominating Red Mage because at say, 20% the gap is much smaller than 95%. Only the latter is relevant because it depicts two players at equal skill, playing the job at a high level where overcapping or dropping resources won't skew the results.

You don't have to spell anything out for me since I'm well aware of what the statistics represent. So let me spell something out for you since it's such an apparently a difficult concept:

After some number of weeks the percentiles begin to become gear locked. It doesn't matter how well you play if you can't get an orange until you get weapon, therefore percentiles to do not automatically represent a given level of "skill". After some point in time your item level and gear simply has a much larger influence on breaking through to higher percentiles. That is why gear acquisition must play a role in the spread of the statistics. If the more dominant jobs are gearing up faster, it pushes their higher percentiles to a further degree compared to jobs which aren't being played as much. By the very same token as people start gearing up more jobs and running them through, the higher percentiles get pushed further out of reach for those lacking the same gear. Even if the jobs are played at an identical skill level the higher percentile is out of reach until you get the gear. To further illustrate this point, we can compare the number of e4s logs between DRG (10,312) and NIN (2,399). This would certainly seem to indicate there are more geared DRGs out there than geared NINs, and so the overall average of the 95th percentile DRG would be higher than the overall average of 95th percentile NIN - because the 95th percentile NIN doesn't have as many players pushing it's average up. Another way of putting it would be NIN is further away from realizing it's full potential compared to DRG. It doesn't have to be a large degree for this to make sense, as I stated previously even 1% is relatively meaningful within the current operating margin.

I looked at the 25% percentile for reasons I expressed in a previous comment. Upon doing some quick math, indeed at the lowest percentile with which a group can clear (full group of 8x 25%'ers) the group with the combination of weakest jobs will be 500 short of e1s enrage, while a group with dominant jobs will clear with 2500 to spare. I didn't care to do the other turns since I'm sure it'll play out similarly, but that's a pretty big difference with several different things that can be inferred. For one it aligns with the claims being made in this thread that it's more difficult for certain comps to meet damage checks. Fair enough. But on the flip side, we are talking about 25% which means there's plenty of room for improvement. Therefore the claim that taking certain jobs is a detriment, while it has some merit, is really more of an obfuscation of the facts. The fact is you only need to be a little above 25th percentile (as a group) in order to clear e1s (at least) even with the worst composition of jobs.

The second point these particular statistics illuminate is the disparity between a group of upper and lower jobs, again in this situation -500 to +2500 around enrage. That's something that should be looked at, do the upper jobs need that big of an advantage or do the lower jobs need to be boosted by at least enough to clear in the same situation? I haven't made a claim one way or the other, everyone will have their own opinion. Personally I think they could meet in the middle a bit.

You're basically making up an argument that I never disputed. I simply wanted to know for myself what the minimum requirements looked like and it's relevant statistics. Never did I make a claim that balance should be focused on the lower percentiles, again that's something you made up on your own for argument's sake. Citing the lower percentiles for an example to back up a claim is not the same as basing a philosophy of balance around them.

And I'll go one step further. If you won't bother to look at the lower statistics relative to the argument that DPS needs to be adjusted because enrages, then you clearly aren't interested in that being a real issue. By focusing on the upper statistics of potential, you are focusing on the ego of a job instead of it's actual utility, because the upper statistics don't indicate any sort of relationship with "hitting enrage". It doesn't matter if you compare a 95th DNC to a 95th BLM, they're both killing it and in neither case is their contribution detrimental to the team in any sense whatsoever.

To hearken back to Lynn's comment with which I sort of disagree, we do need to provide feedback, but it needs to be reasonable feedback. There is no place for exaggerated claims and incomplete pictures. The actual situation calls for something in the range of ~5% one way or the other. There are slight issues with DPS checks, and there are slight issues among players who feel their efforts aren't proportionately accounted for. The latter having a worse impact on the community. They've already said they are addressing some issues, clearly it's ongoing effort and we know very well how they like to take their time. In the meantime, there's no actual issue in jobs clearing content, only hypothetical situations. Any group putting in the effort will get their kills if they haven't already. The main issue is perception which we as players have a huge role in shaping, possibly even more than the devs.

If anyone is wondering what are numbers for other floors:

E2S:
40% lowest jobs - 71360
20% top jobs - 71591

E3S:
50% lowest jobs - 72243
20% top jobs - 72082

E4S:
60% lowest jobs - 75281
30% top jobs - 75846

But hey, it's totally fine as long as lower jobs can improve to 40/50/60%, right? While 20/20/30% top jobs are already fine - look at them, stallions!

P.S. For the love of god, please, stop mention how all jobs can clear - if you don't understand how it's absolutely irrelevant to the balance between jobs i suggest you learn first what the term "balance" means...