Has silencega always been faster than CS stun?

[Tubbers]

http://img147.imageshack.us/img147/5...hancsstxi7.png


Edit: Dammit, meant to put this in random question thread and can't delete it.

[Izzy]

It did not say his stun was interrupted, therefore his stun did go off, it just had no effect and the silencega went off after it.

*EDIT* I see you have two chainspell stunners. Almost positive your stun had no effect. Two chainspell stunners just end up fucking eachother up. Do one next time.

[Tubbers]

Second person was dispelling, not stunning.

[Izzy]

Second person was dispelling, not stunning.

Ok. But I'm still pretty sure your stun had no effect. You have key filters on so you can't exactly see what happened.

[Tubbers]

That's another thing though, I don't use any filters. The only conclusions I could get from it were lag + chat log glitch or Bahamut is a cheating jerk.

[Kaylia]

It did not say his stun was interrupted, therefore his stun did go off, it just had no effect and the silencega went off after it.

*EDIT* I see you have two chainspell stunners. Almost positive your stun had no effect. Two chainspell stunners just end up fucking eachother up. Do one next time.

I dont understand why 2 chainspell stunner would end up fucking each other. Even if the 2nd get no effect, the first one is going to land stun again like he would normally solo

[Wizerd]

It's possible the first stun was just very short. Chainspell spells are instant, so your stun landed at the same timestamp as it started casting. It could easily have worn off by the time Bahamut started casting Silencega.

What I am wondering about though is if you had no filters on, where was the "Bahamut is stunned." or other stun message? It looks like the screenshot was taken by you, so it should have shown up. There was plenty of time according to the picture.

[Tubbers]

Like I said, I'm stupefied, I always have logger plugin active, and it showed it getting stunned when I cast stun after that (after silena), but about 4 or 5 times in the fight it either simply didn't get stunned or it said "no effect" when it clearly wasn't moving. I think it was either massive lag or hax.

[Teorem]

Log suggests that you're using the spell window to cast Stun, and that the first one did complete. If it didn't complete successfully, you would not have gotten the "Unable to cast spells at this time" message when you selected it from the menu again. The third attempt resulted in the "...is unable to cast spells" message because you were silenced by then.

Whether Stun landed successfully or not doesn't matter because if you stun an enemy early enough into their casting, they can in fact get the spell off successfully if the Stun effect wears off before the normal interruption point.

As a side note, the only thing I'm wondering is why, as a Chainspell Stunner on an enemy that can cast Silencega, that you didn't have Echo Drops.

Edit: Proof of the claim I made above regarding stun

http://starflare.usc.edu/ffxi/linked...eating_imp.jpg

[Suiram]

I've seen that glitch where stun wears early and a spell or WS gets off. I think it only occurs when, as in your screenshot, there is a second stun that has no effect. Also, the only times I've seen it have been when the first stun was a shield bash or WS stun, so maybe that's also required (Head Butt being essentially a WS stun).

[Theraven]

Log suggests that you're using the spell window to cast Stun, and that the first one did complete. If it didn't complete successfully, you would not have gotten the "Unable to cast spells at this time" message when you selected it from the menu again. The third attempt resulted in the "...is unable to cast spells" message because you were silenced by then.

Whether Stun landed successfully or not doesn't matter because if you stun an enemy early enough into their casting, they can in fact get the spell off successfully if the Stun effect wears off before the normal interruption point.

As a side note, the only thing I'm wondering is why, as a Chainspell Stunner on an enemy that can cast Silencega, that you didn't have Echo Drops.

Edit: Proof of the claim I made above regarding stun

http://starflare.usc.edu/ffxi/linked...eating_imp.jpg

What you claim is not normally the case though. It may be a glitch that happens every once in awhile or on certain mobs or something but normally if the mob is successfully stunned, no matter how far into their casting they are the spell will be interrupted. The easiest example is something like Elementals or Puddings that cast AM. If you stun when they start casting it will always wear off before they reach their interruption point because the spell just takes so long to cast. They just sit there still trying to cast until the spell is interrupted, and it always is, no matter how long stun lasts. I think it's just a glitch, like the glitch where you stun groundskeepers (obviously before it's too late) and meltdown still goes off.

[Ambir]

I dont understand why 2 chainspell stunner would end up fucking each other. Even if the 2nd get no effect, the first one is going to land stun again like he would normally solo

They don't. People see the "no effect" message and believe its a negative, where it really just means the mob is actually stunned more often. Two people chainstunning is better 100% of the time than one person.

The messages you see aren't necessarily in the order that the events actually occurred. You very often see Stun wear off before you actually cast it, which is obviously impossible. Here, either the stun wore off just before the mob started casting, or Bahamut actually started casting before the Stun was cast. The messages are just out of order.

And wow, to the person that though that spells will still go off after being effectively stunned during casting, just wow...

[Teorem]

I've seen that glitch where stun wears early and a spell or WS gets off. I think it only occurs when, as in your screenshot, there is a second stun that has no effect. Also, the only times I've seen it have been when the first stun was a shield bash or WS stun, so maybe that's also required (Head Butt being essentially a WS stun).

I've seen it plenty of times soloing, without a no-effect follow-up stun:

http://starflare.usc.edu/ffxi/linked...ating_imp2.jpg

I see no reason to believe it's not an issue of timing, analogous to how if someone gets hit with something that would normally interrupt a spell's casting (eg., a melee hit) in the first portion of the casting process, it's not interrupted. This is fundamental PLD tanking material: time your casting so that if you can't avoid getting hit, that you get hit early so your Cure gets off 100% of the time.

In every case I've seen it, the stun-causing spell/ability shows up in the log right before the enemy uses something, and that something doesn't get stunned if the stun effect wears off before point at which you should get "The _______'s casting is interrupted."

If you are casting Stun or using an ability as a reaction AFTER you see it in your log, then it does get interrupted (which I am not at all debating, I've stunned things plenty of times successfully, too).

Edit: Another example:

http://starflare.usc.edu/ffxi/linked...ating_imp3.jpg

I probably have more somewhere, but I stopped tracking how often I got screwed by Heraldic Imps after the 200th or so soloed merit.

[Halon50]

The Teorem has spoken.

I do remember seeing posts saying that during the first 10% and last 10% of a spellcast, any melee hits won't prevent the spell from going off, though to me this just indicates that the game delay between combat messaging and animations are off by approximately 10% of a non-fastcast-enhanced spell.

There are also cases of UDP packets getting received out-of-order, causing animations and possibly in your case combat messages to be displayed out-of-order. The best example I can think of this would be in heavily congested areas such as Dynamis or Besieged, where your attack or stun animations are displayed far after the effect has landed. In a fast and frenetic fight such as Bahamut v2, it's quite possible that your combat spell message (i.e. "Tubbers starts casting Stun on Bahamut.") was sent server-side after the server had sent your client the "Bahamut starts casting Silencega.", but that particular event was delayed by clogged Intarnets tubes just long enough to cause confusion in your message log.

[Suiram]

I suppose its possible that there's some glitch where if you start casting before a mob starts casting then the stun has to stick the full duration. However, it seems more likely to me that on SE servers your stun fires and wears before the enemy's casting initiates, but the 'wears off' message on your client doesn't occur until later in the chatlog than it actually is relative to the rest of the information, creating the appearance that the stun effect overlapped with the casting when it didn't.

[Teorem]

However, it seems more likely to me that on SE servers your stun fires and wears before the enemy's casting initiates, but the 'wears off' message on your client doesn't occur until later in the chatlog than it actually is relative to the rest of the information, creating the appearance that the stun effect overlapped with the casting when it didn't.

Except this is completely contrary to the first screenshot I included.

I started casting Head Butt.
The Imp started casting Blizzard III.
Head Butt landed.
Then I hit the Imp twice.
Then I cast Temporal Shift, which had no effect because it was still stunned (a status condition check I assume was made server-side)
Blizzard III lands successfully, killing me.

If the stun effect from my Head Butt wore off before the Imp started casting Blizzard III, then Temporal Shift would have successfully stunned the Imp, since there was a delay long enough for me to get a round of melee hits in and cast Temporal Shift (at least a second total). So I don't see how the first screenshot doesn't show that there is a distinct overlap between the period of time where the imp is stunned and where it's casting Blizzard III. There was no latency at all in the areas where I soloed during these screenshots and I had a very good network connection.

Anecdotally, I have seen spell effects/debuffs wear off on targets basically as soon as they're applied and it has always been the case that you see the line showing the effect wearing off before you see the line saying that you completed the action causing the effect, eg.:

Teorem starts casting Stun on the Heraldic Imp
...blah blah blah...
The imp is no longer stunned.
...blah blah blah...
Teorem casts Stun on the Heraldic Imp.
The Heraldic Imp is stunned.

I also recropped the second image from my last post because the first "The Heraldic Imp is no longer stunned" message was missing its context.

[Suiram]

Yeah, that is a good point. When I made my last post I was still thinking of the first screenshot as the case of some other kind of glitch like I have seen a handful of times before with BLM stun overlapping with shieldbash on HNM. I guess the whole thing just needs to be investigated further.

Edit: One other thing to consider though, when looking at chatlogs like that, is that "starts casting" messages are presented at the appropriate time relative to other casting and WS initiation messages, whereas damage dealt, taken, evade, and shadows taken from melee attack rounds display after the swinging animation completes, and the head butt damage and the shadow lost/damage taken from the Imp's spell wait until after their respective animations as well. I'm not certain how stun effect wearing fits in, which is central to this question.

[Robert]

A bit offtopic, but aren't petrify/stun/terror essentially the same (i.e. if you're one you can't be afflicted with the other) with the exception of terror freezing you in place and of course the difference in durations? My point/question is, on Temperance, I was casting Ichi, got Induration'd but knocked into the wall I was tanking it against and thus remaining in the same place, Stona'd in time and my Ichi still casted, no picture but I don't imagine it would be -that- difficult to reenact. I wasn't aware this could happen

[Kaylia]

Petrify and Sleep will be interupted only when the spell go off, if you still have the status. Stun will interupt you no matter what. Not sure about terror, but it's probably like petrify and sleep.

[arshesney]

Every time something "bad" got off whenever I was slow at stunning I always got the "no effect" message. This make me wonder if there is a time frame where it is too late to stun the ws or the spell and stun really has no effect.
I don't think it ever happened with a spell honestly, but I remember damn well the gigaflare I (we) ate with the mocking "stunned > no longer stunned > no effect" messages in log, or the meltdown (on firesday ofc) from groundskeepers.
I'm pretty positive that if the stun hits and wears during ws charging, the ws will go off: this can obviously only happen with slow weaponskills.

Sometimes Bahamut is a bitch tho, it happen for him to open with the petrifying move, but I try to always stay between 16'-20' from him, so these annoying AoE have less chances to hit me.