[Requim]

Kaparu, you are just as fond of Excalibur to the same degree of other people's biases.

You already said that most of the DD weapons are just upgrades, added refresh is only relevant to low manning things (which storm fife is an option in many of these low manned events), you just said aegis could be mimicked by gear, and the one you are glorifying is often passed up for aegis.

So Kaparu, it seems the OP is really deciding between mnk or war, which would you suggest?

[Kaparu]

Not only am I going to disagree, I'm going to ask that you never give relic advise ever, ever again. You have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.

On topic: Truth be told, I don't like you, but my desire to be informative is taking precedence at the moment, so I'll be nice.

There are two types of relic weapons: ones that will make groundbreaking changes to your job, and ones that will simply be.. Well, as if you got a weapon that was better than what you were using. Bravura, Spharai, and Aegis are all going to fall under the latter category. The difference in performance will be there, but it won't be utterly astonishing. If you want the best of each respective weapon, any of those three choices won't let you down.

Then we have the former-type; These weapons are not only the best of their genre, but they can actually change the capabilities of the class they are equipped by. Gjallarhorn and Excalibur(Apocalypse as well, though no particularly applicable to you) are the respective holy grails of their classes. Going from a 3MP/tick Ballad to a 7MP/tick one is nothing short of amazing, and will eliminate any MP issues for whatever party you're in(not that I ever particularly feel it is, in most situations, but that is neither here nor there). On the same token (and my personal favorite of any relic weapon in the game), Excalibur will take one of the most capable tanks in the game, and turn them into an absolute monster, while leaving them just as sturdy as before. Properly equipped, the sword will single-handedly allow you to out-damage any Black Mage you can throw at a monster. Combining two essential and powerful roles into one machine of a job class is nothing to scoff at, and realistically speaking, more of a difference than any shield could ever hope to make.

That all said, upgrade a weapon for the job you want to play. If you want your Monk to be at its highest potential, upgrade Spharai. If you want to be able to five-man a wyrm, upgrade Gjallarhorn. If you want to Utterly destroy every other damage-dealer in your alliance on the parser while simultaneously tanking what you're killing, upgrade Excalibur.

Hi. Welcome to page one.

Just because I'd defend Excalibur's superiority to the grave, doesn't mean I won't acknowledge that you should upgrade for whatever job you enjoy playing the most.

And please, my bias is more than justified. The difference Excalibur makes isn't even remotely the same caliber of an upgrade as most other weapons. Going from a Hauteclaire to an Excalibur is in leagues with going from a Neckchopper to a Martial Bhuj.

[Saxonian]

Going from a Hauteclaire to an Excalibur is in leagues with going from a Neckchopper to a Perdu Voulge.

[Requim]

I missed that Kap, so I apologize. However, where is this info from Excalibur coming from?

1. You need to land the hit for a chance at the 10% (your cite) proc. Which these plds have what accuracy?
2. Even with a proc rate of 10% and capped accuracy that is an average of 2 per minute w/150 delay (your cite).
3. Does this added affect add to hate? If not, then gearing out for max swings will not hold hate.

How many proc rates are you actually seeing in your source? Even with a 150 delay, plds are often casting, using JAs, and otherwise not swinging, which only decreasing the amount of chances at proc.

So a 2k hp galka pld geared to DD would maybe about 2 procs for 500. That would give him average 1100 damage per minute or less if no procs. I'm not sure what the max hp gear is for the races, but I don't think most of them are breaking 2k. A pld with mediocre acc is going to probably get 1 proc in per minute for less than 500 (which doing 500 damage per minute is not hard).

Compare that with the other DDs that are always going to be decked out in DD gear that should be swinging every 3-5 seconds and having 1-3 WS per minute. I would hope the blms could get at least 1 nuke in a minute for more than 1k.

So it looks like a pld could keep up if he had the accuracy and he got lucky on procs. However, I doubt the pld would have capped acc even when trying and I could see the casting and JAs taking up at least a third of his melee time. Excalibur looks like it has some great potential, but I don't see it being nearly as revolutionary as you claim.

What source are you looking at where a pld is out parsing blms? That's all well and good that they have the potential, but if you could direct me to parses with multi procs per minute I would be appreciative. In theory it sounds fantastic to give a tanking job a weapon that could turn them into a pretty decent DD, but I just don't see the landing proc rates to be realistic on anything important.

[Hyriu]

Did you even read/searched the PLD forums before making that fucking post?

If you have an Excalibur, you change your gear around to get the most out of it, if you have Atonement you change your gear around to get the most out of it.

[Saxonian]

I don't think he has ever seen how fast a Pld with Marchx2+haste + 25% haste gear swings

[pathwriter]

I don't see the relevance in Hagun's base damage when its easily made up for in fTP.

Which shows that you either have never been around an Amanomurakumo or the ones you've been near suck. The weapon changes Samurai from being a job whose damage comes almost exclusively from weaponskills to a job whose, to use a WoW term, white damage actually matters, too.

That's approximately what Excalibur achieves, too: more damage during the TP phase. More damage is good, I won't deny, but it doesn't change the job.

Your assessment of Apocalypse is practically identical to the one I give of Bravura. The Drain effect from Catastrophe or the damage reduction from Metatron Torment (ignoring that the latter has far more favorable WS mods) both improve survivability in merit situations.

It's very strange how firmly you tie your opinions to your opinions. There's always this air in your explanations of "This is based on solid fact," but actually digging into what is being said, it pretty much boils down to "I'm going to bludgeon you to death with my current obsession." You did the same thing when you were leveling Monk and then, whoops, you lost interest and moved onto Red Mage or Ranger or whatever other shiny thing caught your attention. I suppose I wouldn't care except that you do change your opinion with some regularity and not because something in the game has fundamentally changed.

[[Cookies]]

A sam with katen and rina is really busted from a skillchain point of flexibility.

a normal sam has 13/16 elements on the SC chart ( talking individual ones not ones you cam make, you do not get a fragmentation one naturally)
A relic sam can have 15/16 ( all but darkness)
a blu has 14/16

rina > katen> gekko> kasha> rina> katen> etc can all be spun to infnatiny making endless level 2 scs if you have some sort of OMG tp supply ( having a reaveratler + tp wing comes to mind)

a normal sam can only start out doing level 1's like this where the most level 2s can be made would be fragmation> distortion> fusion> gravation> darkness assuming you have the mytic ws.

relic sam can do something like fragmentation> distortion> fusion> gravation> fragmentation> etc till you run out of tp resorces to end at fragmation or fusion for a light> light finisher.

let me ask this what gives more damage total ( remember SC damage)
take 2 hr, med having 200 tp befor hand and that 100 tp use JA ready (6 ws i think)

yukki > > gekko> frag (60% ws dmg)> gekko> disort (75% of ws dmg) > kasha> fusion (100% of ws dmg)>rina> gravation (125% of ws dmg) gekko> darkness (225%)

or relic sam:

gekko> kasha> fusion (60% of ws dmg) >rina (75% of ws dmg)> katen> fragmentation (100% of ws dmg)> kasha > light (200% ws dmg)> katen> light (225% ws dmg)

Samurais should only really use Kaiten in merit-esque situations where skillchains won't matter. They won't want to use a different weaponskill as they may end up losing aftermath and you can self skillchain with Kaiten anyways.

And lastly, you can drop ~2-3 million gil and mimic what an Aegis does.

You can? ._.

[Saxonian]

He's referring to the magic damage taken bit, but even then it's not entirely true since with the shield you can replace some MDT gear with MDB to further lower magic dmg, not to mention that you take less dmg from shield blocks & block more often which cannot be replaced with another shield.

[Kaparu]

Which shows that you either have never been around an Amanomurakumo or the ones you've been near suck. The weapon changes Samurai from being a job whose damage comes almost exclusively from weaponskills to a job whose, to use a WoW term, white damage actually matters, too.

That's approximately what Excalibur achieves, too: more damage during the TP phase. More damage is good, I won't deny, but it doesn't change the job.

Your assessment of Apocalypse is practically identical to the one I give of Bravura. The Drain effect from Catastrophe or the damage reduction from Metatron Torment (ignoring that the latter has far more favorable WS mods) both improve survivability in merit situations.

It's very strange how firmly you tie your opinions to your opinions. There's always this air in your explanations of "This is based on solid fact," but actually digging into what is being said, it pretty much boils down to "I'm going to bludgeon you to death with my current obsession." You did the same thing when you were leveling Monk and then, whoops, you lost interest and moved onto Red Mage or Ranger or whatever other shiny thing caught your attention. I suppose I wouldn't care except that you do change your opinion with some regularity and not because something in the game has fundamentally changed.

Yes, Amanomurakumo will alter where your damage comes from by a fair amount, but the difference is not as astronomical as you make it sound.

Giving yourself a Cure IV every time you weapon skill is hardly a mediocre Phalanx-esque effect in merits, and nothing about a Bravura makes Warrior any more of a feasible end-game tank.

And lastly, and least relevant, what exactly do my changing interests have to do with the validity of my arguments? I develop my opinions by analyzing facts.



And Sax, the primary perk of Aegis is that it allows you to maintain capped magic damage reduction at any given time. The fact that you're allowed to be sloppy with your Ichi casts is just a bonus, and nothing worth fawning over.

[Saxonian]

And Sax, the primary perk of Aegis is that it allows you to maintain capped magic damage reduction at any given time. The fact that you're allowed to be sloppy with your Ichi casts is just a bonus, and nothing worth fawning over.

Yes I know, but you still can't ignore the small perks it gives, I'm just stating how it is, & getting hit by an AoE right after using :Ni is unavoidable and it happens sometimes, so Aegis helps there. I'm not siding with anyone just stating it how it is, because personally given the choice between sword & shield I would easily take sword.

[pathwriter]

And lastly, and least relevant, what exactly do my changing interests have to do with the validity of my arguments? I develop my opinions by analyzing facts.

Because your bias dictates your analysis. It's human nature to spin the results to suit the hypothesis, but it's obnoxious in this situation and outright dishonest in things that matter. Relics do more damage, except Gjallarhorn, and that's pretty much it. When we start debating which weapon is better than another, especially when we do so gleefully pretending that the weapons are what is being debated and not the job wielding it, then ranking things in order of usefulness becomes an internal popularity contest.

I acknowledge my bias towards Spharai, because that's the item I'd get if I had the wherewithal to get a relic, but I don't devote time to explaining why Spharai is better than all other relics. I can happily drag out justifications for it, the same as you can do with Excalibur, but I don't. Lately, the only thing I've really had to say with regards to relics is "Dear god, don't get Gjallarhorn." Not because the horn is bad, of course, but rather because of player perception around the rotten thing and how irritating it is for me to be forced to play Bard at all times, much less how intolerable that would become with a Ballad +2 horn. Even then, the only item that I stoutly oppose is the same one that everyone stoutly opposes: Claustrum.

You make a big point about saying, "Get what you want," and then explain at excruciating length why "What you want" should be "What I think is best (Excalibur today, maybe Gungnir tomorrow -- ooh, look, a shiny object!)." The fickleness is what bugs me more than the reasoned debate, though, because you tend to just walk away from your previous reasons as though they had no weight and, indeed, after seeing you do so a few times, it really does make all of your rationalizations meaningless. Take it as personal advice or a flame, but you change directions like a weathercock and your opinions are equally fleeting.

[Kaparu]

I'm not entirely sure how you're wanting me to respond to that. Yes, I'm biased towards Excalibur, because its wielded by a tank, and that just so happens to be my flavor of the month. That doesn't change the fact that Excalibur is a more prominent upgrade than an Amanomurakumo or Spharai. As I've acknowledged, and will continue to acknowledge, they - like all relic weapons - are extremely good at what they're meant to do. But on the same token, that doesn't change the fact that that is all they are, just better versions of the weapons that preceded them. Excalibur, Yoichinoyumi, Annihilator, Apocalypse, and Gjallarhorn actually expand the capabilities of your class, something a Bravura could never hope to mimic.

You should upgrade a weapon for whatever class you enjoy playing the most, because unless its a Gutler or a Claustrum, you're likely going to be asked to play it excessively. That said, if you ask me what weapon is going to give you the most bang for your buck, I won't hesitate to tell you, nor will I withhold why such is the case.

[pathwriter]

Excalibur, Yoichinoyumi, Annihilator, Apocalypse, and Gjallarhorn actually expand the capabilities of your class

Except that they don't. Either all relics do (except you know) or they don't.

"Expand the capabilities of your class"? What kind of touchy-feely backwash is that? You do more damage. That's it. Namas Arrow and Coronach have a low cap on Enmity, I get that, but the weapon itself still does more damage than any other option and a Ranger will still have to watch his enmity, although less so after Coronach (I'll acknowledge that a Ranger using Coronach might have his playstyle alter, although most Rangers I've seen don't understand the concept of "holding back" regardless). Excalibur does more damage. Apocalypse does more damage. Gjallarhorn... is grossly over-rated. In fact, Gjallarhorn doesn't "expand" a damned thing. It reduces Bard to "Ballad bitch forever." Ooooooh, impressive.

Bravura? Does more damage. Amanomurakumo? Does more damage. Spharai? Does more damage. In fact, it does more damage AND improves a core Monk tanking ability without having to use a so-so weaponskill, which makes it practically unique. Gungnir, Guttler, Mandau, Ragnarok, Kikoku, and Mjollnir? All just sources of more damage. I've even heard of Genbu being solo'd exclusively by virtue of Aegis's Shield Bash enhancement, so I'll even say that Aegis lets you do more damage. It's. Just. Damage.

If you want something to have the potential to fundamentally change a job, get a mythic weapon. Then cry yourself to sleep because the things are mostly terrible. If you want to do more damage on your job of choice, get a relic weapon, except Gjallarhorn. People say things like "Duelist's Chapeau and Morrigan's Coat completely changed how I play Red Mage." Nonsense, you're still casting the same spells you've always done. Scholar fundamentally changed how mage jobs are played, Dancer changed how melee jobs are played (solo). Gear in this game doesn't. Whether it's a Trainee Axe or a Bravura, you're still swinging it. Spharai doesn't turn Monk into a healer, in spite of Monks often occupying that sort of slot in previous FF games. Excalibur just lets you do a little more damage and get hate a little faster.

[Spartan]

First, Yoichinoyumi is as much (if not more) of a game changer for SAM as it is for RNG.

Second, I'd place Aegis and Amanomurakumo in a middle tier between Excalibur and Bravura, because while Amano does only deal more damage, it does something the others don't. That being, changing where the damage comes from (melee damage and skill damage are not simply relative in the same fashion throughout all events in this game), adding an actually good (great, even) weaponskill, and opening up a metric fuckton of skillchain possibilities.

As for Aegis, I think you're underestimating it far too much. Simply put, no one is perfect. That safety net is very valuable, as a tank missing an Ichi cast is, though it should be rare, one of the worst things for a group to encounter fighting big shit. While tanking is not that hard, true, everybody fucks up some time. The difference here is that the tank fucking up means, a lot of the time (especially in low-man scenarios), that the whole group is fucked. Not only that, but the magic damage cannot be ignored either. Either way you think about it, the Aegis still comes out measurably ahead. You cannot simply mimic it with a few million gil. If you're talking about having constant magic damage reduction for fast cast mobs and such, the Aegis obviously wins because maintaining the same about of magic damage reduction would make your idle set suffer tremendously. If it's a blinking scenario, an Aegis can macro in up to 26 magic defense, along with MND and HP that a non-Aegis simply can't match using all those slots for MDR. Also, I don't think you quite grasp the usefulness/popularity of bloodtanking. Aegis, by itself, pretty much makes bloodtanking feasible on big shit. Finally, as it should be obvious to you, Aegis compliments Excalibur tremendously. Just equipping an Aegis allows for much more leeway in one's idle set, further accenting the awesome power of the sword.

To the person doubting Excalibur: All that is needed to utilize an Excalibur is a new idle set and some sushi. You should still blink casting shadows, Flash, Cures, when shadows are down, and of course, when using Atonement. It really has very little effect on anything you would tank /NIN anyways, while adding almost one thousand points of essentially free damage per minute.

To Path: Comparing Bravura's Aftermath to Apoc's with regards to how much they improve your survivability is akin to comparing a fortress to a grape. DRK/SAM with an Apoc is practically fucking indestructible. a WAR/SAM with Bravura will take a few points less damage per round. Borderline uncomparable, apples and oranges even. And this isn't even going into the real tanking aspect, either.

[Kaparu]

If you throw a Hauteclaire-Paladin at Khimaira as the sole source of damage, you're going to sit there for a long, long time while he whittles it away. If you throw a properly-geared Excalibur-Paladin at Khimaira as the sole source of damage, you're going to sit there for a long, long time while he whittles it away.. Minus a few hours. That's expanding the capabilities of a class. As things stand right now, Black Mage is fully capable of dealing melee damage, its just absolutely awful. If you gave a Black Mage a weapon that single-handedly allowed the class to deal a Kraken Club-Dark Knight's caliber of melee damage, you'd still just be doing more damage, but to a degree that shouldn't be belittled with such a label.

Annihilator and Yoichinoyumi bypass the predominant issue with the class's ability to deal large amounts of damage in extended or short periods - the volatile enmity accrued through using Sidewinder. The weapons allow a Ranger's VE to decay at a rate comparable to its accumulation, expanding the capabilities of the class.

Apocalypse not only allows a Dark Knight to frivolously use Hasso without regard to their safety in merit-esque situations, but it also makes them an extremely potent tank against most end-game enemies.

And while I personally would never consider upgrading Gjallarhorn, there's no denying the potency of more than doubling a Bard's ability to restore a player's MP.

EDIT: Spartan, while 25% magic damage reduction sounds like a lot on paper, the impact it has is fairly minimal in most situations. You really value such reductions when the attacks will quite easily kill you, and in such instances, one has plenty of time to swap to an equipment set that will be more than sufficient. Its true that it allows a Paladin to equip an extra heap of MDB, but when you've already reduced the damage by half, another 20% isn't going to give you the returns you would hope for.

And as far as blood-tanking goes, all of its minuscule benefits(that quite frankly never outweighed the increase in damage-intake) went out the window when Atonement entered the picture, if you're fighting anything significant. Its a means to entertainment, not ideal tanking.

[pathwriter]

That's expanding the capabilities of a class.

We have a very different grasp of the English language, I see. Even pretending that what you're saying is the same thing as what you mean, it's no different for any other weapon (except Annihilator and, depending on perspective, Spharai and Kikoku).

I've never said that Excalibur does less damage than any of its counterparts, with or without Enmity accumulation, merely that it doesn't change how the job (job, I know it's been all of a week since you canceled your latest account, but try to stick with the local jargon) works. Even this talk about "With Catastrophe, Dark Knight can tank blah-blah-blah" is nonsense. Dark Knight can tank without it. An Apocalypse owner will need fewer Cures, but even you have said, "Anyone can tank anything," which is true, and any relic owner will need fewer Cures while tanking something because, get this, relic weapons DO MORE DAMAGE!

Like I said, this whole discussion is an elaborate farce. What is being discussed is not the weapons themselves but the jobs that wield them. Why get Excalibur or Gjallarhorn instead of Bravura or Guttler? Because people value Paladin and Bard more than Warrior and Beastmaster. That's all this is.

[Kaparu]

I'm going to have to ask you to reread the first paragraph. You're belittling an augmentation with a label that you mean to apply to all cases concerned, when such isn't an accurate reflection of the reality of the situations in the least.

A Bravura is going to do more damage than a Perdu Voulge.

An Annihilator is going to do more damage than a Hellfire +1, and allow its user to use a shooting and weapon skilling script during Ixion, go to the supermarket, and still be alive when they get back.

If you can't see the difference between the two, I don't see the point in discussing this any further.

[pathwriter]

Go ahead and reread my first paragraph, then. It's in a parenthetical, but I use those a lot.

[Kaparu]

How in the hell can you agree with that sentiment, yet chalk Apocalypse and Excalibur up to simply a case of dealing more damage. There differences the weapons make are astronomical, while the difference that a Gungnir would make isn't. What's the problem? I mean hell, if one desired to do so, you could utilize Excalibur in the same way that you'd utilize a Yoichinoyumi. Your damage output would go up dramatically, and nothing would give you a second glance, by virtue of most of the damage coming from enmity-free additional effects.