upcoming rdm changes?

[OneTrueMiqote]

.

If you want to be pedantic about this, sure. The argument was about both different aspects, one regarding the prog itself and focused on seeing more mechanics, and one regarding the dps check once all mechs have been seen. What you agreed on was an argument for and the focus on the former. The context you gave was on this focus, and I said such focus is not correct because of the other important aspect.

.

First of all, as many comments before you have pointed out, no one said to only look at a single percentile.

There are basically 2 points you're making. You are saying to look at all data (as more than just percentiles). I've responded to this before, "they did not say you should only balance off percentiles, but rather if you do, you should be balancing off the high end."

You're also saying "dps output at 95% doesn't tell you anything about the dps output in prog". This is false. There is certainly a correlation between dps percentiles (and by extension, top percentiles) and how much one can expect to output in a fight. Specifically I am talking about the part to meet the dps check, as this is where the damage matters. At this point in the fight, most players would aim to optimize for damage and utilize the most out of their job's kit, which is what is shown by seeing a job at its fully realized potential.

And also the plethora of reasons to why top percentiles should be prioritize over other percentiles mentioned by others here.

[Gruntler]

The argument was about both different aspects, one regarding the prog itself and focused on seeing more mechanics, and one regarding the dps check once all mechs have been seen.

Neither of which are 95th percentile barring week 1 stuff.

First of all, as many comments before you have pointed out, no one said to only look at a single percentile.

Then there should be mentions of a range, not a single cutoff point.

There are basically 2 points you're making. You are saying to look at all data (as more than just percentiles). I've responded to this before, "they did not say you should only balance off percentiles, but rather if you do, you should be balancing off the high end."

Which is if one is balancing for speedruns and mastery. Which, if that's the argument, then that'd be an effective technique.

You're also saying "dps output at 95% doesn't tell you anything about the dps output in prog". This is false.

If you present a hypothesis and call it data, I'm going to call shinanegans.

There is certainly a correlation between dps percentiles (and by extension, top percentiles) and how much one can expect to output in a fight.

Shinanegans

Specifically I am talking about the part to meet the dps check, as this is where the damage matters.

Shinanegans

At this point in the fight, most players would aim to optimize for damage and utilize the most out of their job's kit, which is what is shown by seeing a job at its fully realized potential.

Shinanegans.

If your hypothesis were true, then you would see a uniform distribution where job performance at median percentiles would be proportional to 95th percentile. You do not. If your hypothesis were true, you'd see more players acheiving 95th percentile during prog--which is mathematically impossible.

If you want to see what jobs are doing during the 'beat dps checks' phase of prog, you look at people progging, because that's DIRECT OBSERVATION. 'We expect jobs to do x in prog' is a question you can directly answer by looking at prog, and only hypothesize by looking at players that are not progging. Direct Observation > Extrapolation in all cases.

You're trying to make the argument that extrapolation is preferable to direct observation when we have access to direct observation. There is nothing more that needs to be said after that--it's a bad argument on its own merits. Everything else is trying to justify bad practice.