[Hesper]

Is there is a maximum amount of double attack you can have before it caps out? For example (hypothetical only), if you have plus 20 to double attack and I add more double attack will it have an effect? Thanks in advance for any help!

[Dazd]

Not sure if there's really anyway to test if it caps out or not. As far as I'm concerned the more the better as long as it doesn't include making stupid gear choices over something that is better anyway.

[Kerayu2]

Good question, I don't think anyone has really tested it extensively since DA has diminishing returns compared to haste when it comes to equiping. I would think that it does have a cap though.

[Byrthnoth]

Highest DA rate I can imagine would be Full Ares 7% as a WAR 10% with 5/5 DA merits 5%, Brutal Earring 5%, Pole Strap 2%, Rune Halbred 5% (latent active), Soldier's Ring 2% (latent active), eating niro de seppia 1%, and getting lucky Fighter's Roll 24%. That would be 61% DA rate.

I've heard that it caps at 50%, but I really doubt that's testable without a random combination of crappy gear like the one above. Basically, as far as I know you don't have to worry about capping with any reasonable gear set.

Just because it deserves to be huge and in every thread remotely related to the subject:

[Alistaire]

/bored so here goes:

10% base
5% merits
7% ares set (2% listed stat + 5% presumed set bonus)
5% brutal earring
5% rune halberd (lol, yeah)
2% soldier's ring
2% tau ring (only in salvage)
2% pole grip

24% fighter's roll @ 11 (obviously with war in the pt)

So if you're a full-ares war in salvage using Rune Halberd under 75% hp and have a cor hit 11 on war roll...62% double attack.

If it does cap it's probably @ 50% (anything lower would defeat the purpose of Fighter's roll too often) so the good stuff:

10% base + 5 merits + 5 brutal + 2 pole grip + 24 maxed war roll = 46%. Tau ring is hot for salvage (dex+5, salvage: da+2%) and Ares Pants, good for ws, would put you @ 50%.

Edit: wow, people post here often enough I got beat while typing this? I missed the food, other guy missed Tau ring

[Hesper]

Ah, wow thank you everyone for all of the feedback. I didn't have a day off until today to check back -- thank you so much!

[pathwriter]

Just because it deserves to be huge and in every thread remotely related to the subject:

I have got to be reading that chart incorrectly. That or the data being presented are meaningless (as is often true of charts).

Adding any Double Attack shows a decrease in attack rounds, which makes sense because the monster dies faster. Increasing Haste has the precise same result: you swing faster (rather than twice per round), thus increasing your number of attacks within X timespan, thus the monster dies faster. However, that chart appears to imply that attack rounds are the objective measure of utility when comparing these two factors, which is nonsense.

A meaningful chart would show a decrease in mob lifespan (hard to quantify, but I'm sure it can be done) or an increase in DPS or TP/s. I'm not disputing that Haste is better than Double Attack, but that chart is pure propaganda. That or I'm completely nuts (there's always a chance that it is both).

[Agana]

Its a chart so it must be right! XD

EDIT: also notice how i got pwningness and time mixed up.

[Phlow]

I have got to be reading that chart incorrectly. That or the data being presented are meaningless (as is often true of charts).

Adding any Double Attack shows a decrease in attack rounds, which makes sense because the monster dies faster. Increasing Haste has the precise same result: you swing faster (rather than twice per round), thus increasing your number of attacks within X timespan, thus the monster dies faster. However, that chart appears to imply that attack rounds are the objective measure of utility when comparing these two factors, which is nonsense.

Technically, with the logic you provided, the graph is correct, but it's making a retarded point. With more double attack, you would technically have less attack rounds before the monster died because you would be attacking twice in a round. Haste would speed up your attack rounds, and since you were not attacking twice, you would have more attack rounds.

... Which is fucking common sense and people knew that without this lame graph.

What this guy is trying to say is expressed rather simply:
- 50% haste means 50% less delay, thus two attacks to every one. (added 50% haste for one more attack)
- 66% haste means 66% less delay, thus three attacks to every one. (added 16% haste for one more attack)
- 75% haste means 75% less delay, thus four attacks to every one. (added 9% haste for one more attack)
- 80% haste means 80% less delay, thus five attacks to every one. (added 5% haste for one more attack)

See the trend? Haste has exponential growth, meaning every extra % haste builds on the last one. Think of it this way, the faster you can swing your weapon, the faster you can start on the next round's "wait time".

Contrary to DA, where 10% DA gives you 1.1 attacks to ever one. It's linear, not decreasing as the poster's picture would suggest.

On topic: I heard 50%. But haven't tested it out.

Edit: Path, nevermind about that opening paragraph. I thought you were disagreeing with the graph being even valid, which was my initial reaction given it has finite numbers, but looks like someone mspainted the lines. We actually arrived at the same conclusion.

[Auraeon]

I think the biggest difference between Haste and Double Attack is the fact that Haste is basically always in effect and having more of it increases potency, and Double Attack only has a chance of working while adding more of it just makes that chance higher...

I think it's pretty reliable to say capping Haste is going to outperform capping Double Attack no matter where that Double Attack cap might be. Because like Phlow said, 80% Haste gives what, 5 attacks per one attack round without Haste? Double Attack, even at 100% proc rate, would only give 2-4 depending on if you're using dual wield or an H2H weapon. So either way, you're getting more attacks from capping Haste.

Correct me if I'm wrong here.

[Byrthnoth]

I have got to be reading that chart incorrectly. That or the data being presented are meaningless (as is often true of charts).

Adding any Double Attack shows a decrease in attack rounds, which makes sense because the monster dies faster. Increasing Haste has the precise same result: you swing faster (rather than twice per round), thus increasing your number of attacks within X timespan, thus the monster dies faster. However, that chart appears to imply that attack rounds are the objective measure of utility when comparing these two factors, which is nonsense.

A meaningful chart would show a decrease in mob lifespan (hard to quantify, but I'm sure it can be done) or an increase in DPS or TP/s. I'm not disputing that Haste is better than Double Attack, but that chart is pure propaganda. That or I'm completely nuts (there's always a chance that it is both).

I'm moderately sure you're reading the chart wrong. It's Marginal Benefit, so the 20% of trait mark is the percentage increase in number of attack rounds (even fractional attack rounds) from going from 19-20% Haste and 19-20% Double Attack.

So say you have 19% DA and are wondering if you should put one more merit into it. Right now you attack 100 times and swing 119, if you put one more merit in you'd swing 120. So 120/119 is the marginal benefit of that last DA merit (0.84%, in this case.)

Now you have 19% Haste and you're wondering if you should buy HQ Dusk Ledelsens for the extra 1%. In the time that it takes you to attack 100 times with 0% Haste, instead you're attacking 123.4567 (funneh number) times when you have 19% Haste. When you have 20% Haste, you'd instead attack 125 times. 125/123.4567 = 1.25% increase in number of attack rounds.

Whether or not this is an accurate measure of damage increase depends upon the situation you're trying to apply it to. On a long continuous fight like JoL, it will be accurate. In a merit party, the effect of haste will be slightly diminished, though as you mentioned attempting to compensate for that will simply give headaches. This is something that can be made in 5 minutes and approximates the truth.

[pathwriter]

That's an incredibly bass-ackwards way of trying to prove a point if your interpretation is correct. This is why I distrust charts, too, because even "simple" things are not simple. Using that chart in the way you suggested would be pointless, too, both because nothing is cut-and-dried in the field and because I cannot think of any situation where you would reasonably have to debate between equipping Double Attack or Haste. Anyone who seriously believes that Ares's Flanchard would be better than Byakko's Haidate in the TP phase should share some of the spiritous liquors they're imbibing.

[Byrthnoth]

/shrug. Any time you make a gear decision you compare the marginal benefit of the two pieces, so it makes perfect sense to plot that.

Haste and Double Attack are just easy to graph because they're both multipliers of damage that are often compared. As soon as there is a trade-off, the graphs become three dimensional and really not worth my time to make. If your situation is complex enough, it would probably be easier to just get the gear and parse it, because it probably won't behave exactly as the model predicts anyway.

[Agana]

The model is wrong in the sense that Adding Double attack would never decrease the amount of hits in a finite time span (let's say 30 seconds). That is how the chart represents it, which is wrong.

The only problem with double attack in the game, is that no matter how much you get, you can only "Double Attack" once in an attack round. If all double attack equipment were to stack with each other, IE meaning you could essentially triple attack with 2 seperate pieces of equipment that both had double attack on them; then double attack would be much more valuable. As it stands, the max amount of attacks gained from 100% double attack is 1.

And aside from going off on a tangent, the OP never asked if haste beat double attack, they were just wondering how much double attack is possible. So much for shoving your ideals onto other people.

[Auraeon]

Well, its safe to assume the cap is 40% or higher, because the automaton attachment Coiler maxes out around about there. I'd say it probably caps at 50%, but the thing is, who cares? I'm guessing no one is going to want to cap double attack when you can stack haste with those armor slots you'd be using up.

[Byrthnoth]

Someone said it was irrelevant whether or not DA capped because Haste > DA, so I tossed out the chart to show it. I guess next time I'll define Marginal Benefit. Not that it would matter, because if you read what I wrote in the second post you wouldn't still be misunderstanding the graph.

[Kerayu2]

The only real relavance of stacking DA would at best be fore Multi-hit WS I would think, or even WS in general, so long as it didn't adversly remove better gear from a given slot. Only thing I pointed out is that no one tested cap out of DA primarily cause it wasn't as benificial as stacking haste. Only time anyone really stacks DA is if either Haste or accuracy gear doesn't already go in that spot for tp gain, usually doesn't leave alot of options.

[Maxeon]

If the chart showed increase in # of attacks (over time) instead of change in attack rounds, It would be a better gauge of the potency of haste vs DA. (I believe this is the point pathwriter is/was trying to make as well)

As already stated, both increase your total # of attacks.
DA's increase is linear (I think?)
Haste's increase is exponential.

As far as haste cap, IDK the value, 50% seems popular. :3

[Phlow]

I'm moderately sure you're reading the chart wrong. It's Marginal Benefit, so the 20% of trait mark is the percentage increase in number of attack rounds (even fractional attack rounds) from going from 19-20% Haste and 19-20% Double Attack.

Not that it would matter, because if you read what I wrote in the second post you wouldn't still be misunderstanding the graph.

Edit: Ah, found out what was being miscalculated. Percent change in gain or something would have been a better descriptor of the Y-Axis. However, I'm not sure I like the way this graph portrays this information.

I did the number as well for marginal % change and came up with the same graph. So yeah, he did it right.

[Maxeon]

^ Attacks gained by stacking haste vs stacking DA.