FF 5.X Alternative Raid Buff Alignment and Openers

[Esp]

Thanks to the feedback I’ve received, the NIN, DRG, PLD, SMN, RDM, WHM, SCH, and AST openers have been fixed. Also, multiple opener titles have been renamed and extra notes adjusted.

Thank you very much everybody!

What's sad is, this post here shows just how correct people are about the OP and their behavior. The criticism was on the mark.

[Nemekh]

While improved, the SMN sequencing is still not ideal.

The 5th GCD Bahamut also having a Ruin II in the opener from the R4 following the 2nd enkindle is pretty yikes.

I'm really not sure what your goal is here advising things that are losses.

Openers here, openers on youtube. Today sure has been eventful.

[Oxdarock]

While improved, the SMN sequencing is still not ideal.

The 5th GCD Bahamut also having a Ruin II in the opener from the R4 following the 2nd enkindle is pretty yikes.

I'm really not sure what your goal is here advising things that are losses.

Openers here, openers on youtube. Today sure has been eventful.

Ah. I see what you mean. Unless you have a 15% damage buff for the final R4, it's better to just R3 and R4 to double weave the Energy Drain and Fester. Thank you for pointing this out.

So I have to ask. I actually do encourage the use of openers where raid buffs and the like come out earlier if it gains you an extra cast overall. But if you still get the same number of casts across the board regardless of buffs coming out early or late, what's the problem then? It's common knowledge that not every class's strongest moves fit in the raid alignment of early raid buff openers and I've already proven that it is possible to line up raid buffs relatively uniformly here, so what's the issue then?

[HyoMinPark]

So I have to ask. I actually do encourage the use of openers where raid buffs and the like come out earlier if it gains you an extra cast overall. But if you still get the same number of casts across the board regardless of buffs coming out early or late, what's the problem then? It's common knowledge that not every class's strongest moves fit in the raid alignment of early raid buff openers and I've already proven that it is possible to line up raid buffs relatively uniformly here, so what's the issue then?

The issue is that you’re presenting information that is incorrect and suboptimal, and are presenting it as an “option” for optimal play, which it is not. You are also throwing around the name of The Balance and saying that you’ve spoken with theorycrafters about these openers in your document almost as a ways to legitimize what you have done, when the theorycrafters and job guide makers have already expressed that they do not condone this information, and have told you that they are incorrect and suboptimal. Not to mention, there are some roles/jobs that you consulted nobody about, and instead went with feeling as opposed to math. It’s disingenuous at best, and blatantly misleading to those who read it without additional knowledge of optimization.

If a player seeking to optimize or get into advanced play were to find your documents, and use your openers under the impression that they are viable or optimal, now you’re culpable for misleading players seeking to improve their gameplay. You lead them into forming bad habits, which they will then have to correct should someone point out “Hey, you’re doing this way wrong; that’s not how you optimal open on [job].” This could lead to frustration on both their part and the theorycrafters’/mentors’ part.

There is also no need to rearrange the current buff alignment for this new “uniformity”. Do you think the current theorycrafters did not pool their research and numbers to find the most optimal way to align raid buffs while also not costing jobs personal damage output? They’ve already figured the optimal way to do things—why change it or challenge it with something that is not optimal? What’s the issue with following what’s already established? Not everything needs to be changed/overhauled.

[Oxdarock]

snip

I'm just giving credit where it's due. I did talk to mentors and they helped me understand the peculiarities of each job, which led me to this alignment instead of the one from three months ago. They made guides and simulators which I looked over to get an understanding of each classes rotation to a certain extent. That said, they did not have a direct hand in making this list or endorsing it, and I stated as such in the disclaimer (which, not surprisingly, most people gloss over).

I just curious as to why people believe these are terribly subpar, especially in a situation that gives you the same number of casts whether you use raid buffs as soon as possible or delay them a bit. Here's what each class is using in this alignment, at 15 secs:

NIN: It's whole TA window, which contains most of it's strongest GCDs (1 Hyosho Ranryu, 2 Raitons, 1 Fuma-Raiton-Suiton TCJ, and ShadowFang) and almost all it's oGCDs (2 hits of Bunshin, DwD, Assassinate, and one Bhava (possibly two depending on how late TA is used).
DRG: Everything from a LS Full Thrust to the second Chaos Thrust. (It still retains the use of all the oGCDs even in the early raid buff opener).
MNK:
-Anatman Opener: If Anatman opener is delayed by 1 GCD (unfortunately), then everything from the 1 Boot to the second Demo falls under raid buffs.
-TK opener: The 15 sec raid buffs should hit everything from the first Boot to the last True, with Litany and Voice possibly reaching TK RoF is used around the same time as those buffs.
SAM: It fits Midare, Tsubame (basically the second Midare), Higanbana, Senei, and Shoha within 15 sec raid buffs whether they come out at 10 or 15secs.
DNC: The second Standard Step, Saber Dance procs, and a majority of Flourish moves all fit within raid buffs (though the more SDs you get, the more procs get pushed out, though since the only way to exceed SD's damage is to use FF/BS+FD1+FD3, the latter two being proc based, I don't see the problem with this so long as you don't lose a Flourish proc).
BRD: Pushes back the refresh of IJ, so more dot ticks from the first two Dots (can't say anything on the WM timings since that's proc based).
MCH: Fits hypercharge window, Drill, and HCS, as well as 6 (possibly seven) casts of both GR and Ricochet.
BLM: Fits 2 F4s, 2 Despairs, and 1 Thundercloud with Litany and Voice possibly reaching Xeno.
SMN: Fits all for R4s, 2 Festers, 2 Enkindle Baha, and 6 WWs (possibly the DeathFlare, but not sure on that one).
RDM: The entire melee combo, CaC, Displace, VerFlare, Scorch, Verfire, VerAero, Fleche, and possibly Jolt 2 (possibly Verstone if it procs). 8th GCD Embolden also provides a bigger boost to the melee combo, VerFlare, and Scorch, all of which are also buffed by Manafication.
PLD:
-FoF opener: Fits in 2 Atones, 2 Intervenes, a Goring combo, CoS, Requiescat, and 1 HS.
-Req opener: Fits Confeti, a gore combo, an extra FB and RB, 2 intervenes, and CoS.
WAR: Fits 2 ICs and 5 FCs under IR, as well as Onslaught and Upheave.
DRK: Fits nearly all of the LS's attacks, 5 Bloodspillers, 4 EoS without MP overcapping, AD, Salted, and Plunge (if you double weave it at least.)
GNB: Their entire Gnashing combo, as well as Sonic Break, at least 2 Burst strikes, 2 plunges, and an extra BZ.
WHM: The use of PoM allows for 3 Glares, plus a Dia, which is refreshed later while still managing to catch raid buffs.
AST: Isn't as frantic to play 3 cards before Div, doesn't waste a GCD of Lightspeed, and delays the refresh of Combust while still catching raid buffs.
SCH: Fits 4 Energy drains and refreshes Bio later with both casts catching the Pot window.

Admittedly, there are probably discrepancies in the timings, but this is the general goal. So again, if the number of casts is the same regardless of using buffs early or not, what makes the goal of a delayed alignment so subpar?

[HyoMinPark]

Admittedly, there are probably discrepancies in the timings, but this is the general goal. So again, if the number of casts is the same regardless of using buffs early or not, what makes the goal of a delayed alignment so subpar?

Because you never, under any circumstances, delay your buffs in your opening burst. There is no inherent reason to sit on damage for the first 15 seconds of the fight, and there has never been a scenario where players hold their bursts for 15 seconds. The sooner you get bursts out, the sooner your burst will come up to be used again. Buff alignment gets manipulated during a fight—be it in the middle or the end—not at the beginning.



You are still incorrect with DNC—again not counting for the fact that you’ve delayed Flourish in both of your proposed openers by a significant amount of seconds, thereby wasting your Technical Finish burst window on unnecessary, random proc chances because you want to Cascade > Fountain immediately after your opening Standard Finish as opposed to setting up Technical Finish immediately (which, in and of itself, reduces any sort of delays on your major damage dealing skills during your only burst window because you won’t have random Reverse Cascade/Fountainfall procs that you don’t want to overwrite). The optimal opener includes all Flourished procs, all Saber Dance procs, and the Standard Finish within the TF time frame without pushing any of them outside of the buff window in the opener. Your openers, by comparison will likely push your Flourished procs out of the burst window, meaning lost damage because they will not be buffed by Technical Finish’s +5% straight damage. I’ve already explained this to you—you do understand the concept of losing damage, yes? By losing damage, that makes your proposed openers subpar. An optimal opener wouldn’t result in unnecessary losses of damage, or of important skills falling outside of your major burst window.

Here is the optimal DNC opener for you to see what it looks like:
Pre-pull Standard Step (-15 seconds) > Pot (-2 seconds) > Standard Finish (pull) > begin Technical Step > Technical Finish > Flourish > Rising Windmill (pushes stronger procs into other burst windows, such as Trick Attack) > FD3 weave > priority based off of Saber Dance > Standard Finish > Fountainfall/Bloodshower > Reverse Cascade, and using feather procs as they appear.

You do not delay Technical Finish for a Cascade > Fountain combo. The removal of the 1-2 combo means the removal of Reverse Cascade/Fountainfall proc chances, which removes the unnecessary Flourish delay during TF, which ensures that all of your burst (including all Flourished procs) fall within the 20 second window of Technical Finish.

The only deviation from this opener is if you have Dance Partner’d a DRG, in which you weave in Devilment BEFORE you start Technical Finish because it compliments the DRG’s burst better. This is the only deviation, as NIN no longer calls for it since the changes. You do not, however, change when and where Techincal Finish is used. It is only delayed when mechanics call for it (such as the party being too spread out during certain phases: you wait until everyone’s gathered to deploy it), or if you are aiming for a kill time in which you end the fight with a burst window (like E4S: kill times at ~12:30 call for use of Technical at 12 mins so that the party ends the fight while bursting, thereby gaining a higher parse).


By the way, this disclaimer is misleading:

Again, I’d like to stress that by no means does this list claim that all the openers listed here are optimal for every encounter.

These openers are not optimal for any encounter, as you do not delay raid buffs in your opener. Your guide can easily mislead, which is probably why so many people are against it. I’m against it for that reason, and because it is more a push of your personal agenda regarding the viability of Tornado Kick usage. I’m sorry—your resolve to prove TK is viable can be argued as admirable—but you should never change the way jobs function or burst to fit in and optimize a single skill like Tornado Kick.

[ForteNightshade]

Admittedly, there are probably discrepancies in the timings, but this is the general goal. So again, if the number of casts is the same regardless of using buffs early or not, what makes the goal of a delayed alignment so subpar?

The fact you have to ask this speaks volumes on why you aren't qualify to theorycraft. Delaying buffs without rhyme or reason is a net loss. Earlier you claim delaying buffs comes down to if you'll lose a usage. While true to an extent, your delays on Dragoon work against it. You aren't buffing the strongest ability in our wheel house, and needlessly delaying all our oGCDs. I actually tested your rotation on a dummy compared to the actual Dragoon rotation and the differences are staggering. Simply retaining the oGCDs doesn't account for the fact you're delaying them with absolutely no benefit. Chaos Thrust is stronger than Full Thrust by a whooping 160 potency due to the DoT. Holding buffs for the weaker ability results in a loss no matter how you slice it. And the results don't lie.

These aren't alternative openers. They're simply inferior guesswork with zero purpose.

[ZyrinMisharuji]

I just curious as to why people believe these are terribly subpar, especially in a situation that gives you the same number of casts whether you use raid buffs as soon as possible or delay them a bit.

I will reiterate my previous post:

1) The current openers listed on Balance are already optimized to push out maximum DPS under raid buffs. The mathematicians on Balance 100% consulted mentors for every job and bounced back and forth when building their openers so that not only does their own job do as much DPS as possible within that window, but also other jobs can push out maximum DPS under their windows using the buffs your job provides (unless you're a tank/SAM/BLM/WHM)

2) Delaying buff windows at the beginning of a fight is never optimal. The ONLY way I could see it being that way is if the boss became untargetable after like 3 GCDs which will never happen (I hope). Delaying buff windows is something you do at later stages of the fight to optimize your kill time and that optimization also depends on how quickly you can kill the boss. In my last post I used Voidwalker as an example and went with a 9:17 or so kill time and in a situation like that you'd delay the 2 minute buffs at the 8 minute mark to align with the 3 minute windows at the 9 minute mark so everyone is ending the fight on maximum buffs to push their DPS just a little further. Other examples become in a fight like Eden Prime where the 3 minute windows come up during add phase, so you'd hold those buffs for when Eden comes back and everyone just does a re-opener. tl;dr never, ever, ever, ever, ever delay openers it is not and will never be optimal.

[Sabora_Makingai]

PLD:
-FoF opener: Fits in 2 Atones, 2 Intervenes, a Goring combo, CoS, Requiescat, and 1 HS.
-Req opener: Fits Confeti, a gore combo, an extra FB and RB, 2 intervenes, and CoS.


This makes me want to cry. FoF opener is all messed up. FoF has no effect of HS whatsoever. you shouldn't have FoF up when Req is up EVER. CoS shouldn't be used before FoF as you're just leaving potency on the table. also you can get all 3 atonements into you first FoF + 2 goring combos, a RA combo, and the last tick of FoF should be the activation of req. You first req window can contain all 4 HS with the confi finisher. After that it changes slightly to accommodate a 60s rotation. It all just hurts. This is not an alternate opener and will only cause confusion.

[Karshan]

My only question is : why ?

Why are you doing doing this, posting completely suboptimal openers ? When everything has already been mathed out, and even MODELED with spreadsheets and all to be the best possible pps output, taking into account all buffs alignment as well as dealing with the rotationnal gimmicks they might introduce afterwards ? Why ?

Is this the advanced version of the infamous Ice Mage meme ?