yay my tv supports 480p and 1080i but not 720p D:
yay my tv supports 480p and 1080i but not 720p D:
[quote=Not Kuno]Originally Posted by Maguspk
That's stupid and doesn't make any sense. Avatar isn't a status ailment or contidition, it's something that has (gasp) abilties and traits of its own. It says Avatar, and a : and emmity, and then minus. Just like how gear says "wyvern: +50 HP" doesn't give the player +50 HP when he has a wyvern out.[/quote:c77e8]
I was simply explaining the logic behind the other side of the argument. Don't flame an idea just because it doesn't seem logical to you ;p
[quote=Maguspk]I was simply explaining the logic behind the other side of the argument. Don't flame an idea just because it doesn't seem logical to you ;p[/quote:d1843]Originally Posted by Not Kuno
Perhaps a better explanation of why people were confused (as seen in threads of other forums)...
Most items are set up as "Condition met: Effect received" such as "Blind: Evasion+15". Although "avatar" wouldn't be a status effect, it could be seen as a condition. So people thought that items dealing with avatars followed the same pattern where "Avatar: Enmity -3" meant the condition was an avatar was out and thus the player received enmity -3. However, it was pointed out that the wyvern item mentioned with the HP+ didn't work that way. I suppose it seems stupid, but depending on how you look at it, it might have meant different things based on pattern matching.
most of the time Avatar is used as an adjective.Avatar Perpetuation Cost -1
Avatar Critical Hit Rate +3%
Enhances Avatar Accuracy
Enhances Avatar Attack
Occasionally Converts Damage Taken of Avatar Element to MP
Avatar Elemental Resistance +20
the only other one that i know, possesive
Avatar Enmity -2 or Avatar's Enmity -2, would be simple to understand.Enhances Avatar's Evasion
Avatar: Enmity -2, makes it ambiguous, ":" implies a conditional of some sort.
also, i can't think of any situation where a SMN would want Avatar Enmity Minus, a lot of AF has crap stats but this stat makes SMN AF the only set that has something directly detrimental to the job.
I've personally always thought it's what it actually is ("Avatar:Enmity+10" giving the avatar ten enmity when in use) due to the use of the colon but I think it's exactly what you said that confuses so many people. Summoners need to use Avatars to solo but when they see their AF making that harder for them by taking away it's enmity that's when the confusion starts and beneficial theories as to how it benefits them are made. Like you said, no AF has detrimental stats so why should a Summoner believe theirs has?Originally Posted by layoneil
It's not detrimental, they just didnt plan on having summoners solo.
No job in this game was created soley to solo (seriously, I feel at times SE didnt make bst for solo either, due to the level gaps where you have to exp off horrible monsters , as any bst 67-71, worst stretch ever). It's a party based game. And Im guessing if they thought avatars were taking too much hate in their blood pacts, this would help the avatars not to tank.
avatars taking a few hits even in XP PTs is a good thing though. any hits an avatar pulls of the tank either saves a shadow or saves MP. how is that not detrimental?Originally Posted by Lordwafik
solo or not solo, i don't see when you would care that your avatar has hate.
AF1 is not supposed to make sense. SMN really doesn't have a 'set' place in a pt, so they just gave alot of random shit like SMN -enmity and pet -enmity.
lol, funny cause its true.Originally Posted by Not Kuno
I see what you're saying, however, AF1 sets usually represent stats for the job how it was meant to be played. And by "meant to be played", i mean "What square-enix had in mind when creating this job" (see NIN af, no enmity and shit, the original game had war and pld doing all the tanking). Im guessing SE didnt intend for any of this shit, and as we all know, whenever SE makes a mistake, they rarley(never?) go back, or fix it.Originally Posted by layoneil
sam was introduced as a semicapable tank! nice evasaion parry and HP, plus enmity.
What about DRK AF feet having +MND(this was added before cross reaper was put in), DRK AF body having +vitality, and DRK AF hands having +dex?Originally Posted by Lordwafik
War mask has +Int
Sekkite you missed my post about AF1.
AF1 is not supposed to make sense.
Blm feet have agi (omg /rng), body has vit, and gloves have fucking CHR. SE seriously just added random stats to pieces.
I've heard the "SAM was meant to be a tank" theory a lot, but I never saw what it originated from.Originally Posted by Nikko
I'm guessing people think that because of the things you mentioned, and a couple pieces of their AF has +enmity.
However, its hard to envision just how SE could possibly have expected a SAM to be able to tank. It's one thing to say NIN wasn't meant to tank, but then they found a way to do it. It's another altogether to say SAM was meant to tank, and yet they are incapable of it (in practicality). Sure, a SAM can get hate, but they can't do anything with it except drain the WHM's MP reserves.
Granted, a SAM is more sturdy than a DRK, but just try having a SAM tank your next xp party not counting low level PTs when any melee can tank, and x-burn parties at 75. Or better yet, ask one to tank your next HNM. If SE had even considered the possibility of them being tanks, they'd be able to do it at least semi-effectively (and would be like WAR, where some WAR's suck at tanking, and some especially skilled WARs can tank wyrms without breaking a sweat).
I'm not saying that there isn't a pimped out SAM somewhere that can tank sometimes in some situations, just like Avesta will someday prove that RDM can solo Dynamis Lord. But you'd think if SE "originally wanted SAM to be tanks", they could actually perform the job with some measure of success, even if not as efficiently as a PLD or NIN.
At least they've acknowleged they like the idea of NIN being a tank now, even if they didn't originally expect it. I'd call Guesh Urvan a testament to that. Anything that hits a fully buffed PLD in kaiser gear with shallops tropicale, sentinel, defender, both +VIT etudes from one bard and both highest Minne's from another BRD, using Phalanx from the Hoplon Shield enchantment, and Earthen Ward, for 1600 on a normal non-critical hit pretty much screams Ninja.
I was responding to Lordwafik's post.
Quite a bit of RDM AF1 makes no sense, feet have AGI and Parrying skill and gloves have DEX and Shield skill (I may have mixed up the Parrying and Shield, been a while since I looked at AF1 feet/hands). The body also has +5 CHR (huh?)
MNK AF1 though, is pretty useful.
all that stuff ur talking about happened much much later, after SE is adjusting to players somewhat. Once ninja is an established tank, its not strange that they added mobs that destroy PLDs. (although i prefer pld kiting than a ninja tank for toreador cape)
I dont think a SAM would do that bad with a defense set up, maxed parry / eva, tanking some of the older mobs. Also, whos to say they would play exactly like a PLDs job? Long long ago, like jan after NA release, i remember making a PT w/ 2x SAM tanks in VoS.. and although it sucks by todays standards, i think it was doable (not optimal).
But yah, all those things yoj mentioned that a sam seemingly has little hope of tanking well, were added much after the jobs identity and role had been more clearly defined.
Well, Guesh Urvan was an example of something I know SE added to reflect how we've chosen to play the jobs.
But as far as SAM tanking, look at what mobs were around when Zilart was introduced.. like KB, Nidhogg, and Aspidochelone. Or perhaps the sky gods (a little later, but still in the same "era"). Can a reasonably and affordably equipped SAM tank any of them? Even Genbu or Aspidochelone? You don't need Kaiser PLDs and SH+1 NINs to tank those (though obviously, the better equipped you are the easier your job is), though I doubt even pimped out SAMs could tank them anyway.
But, if we're limiting ourselves to Zilart release time, what is the best equipment a SAM could wear at the release of Zilart that would allow them to effectively tank kings and gods, or even just simple xp party mobs?
My thoughts aren't necessarily that a SAM cannot tank anything ever at all, but rather, if SE really *had* intended SAM to be a tank option, it wouldn't be so hard and impractical for them to do so. This is true even when considering what was available at the Zilart release.
I'm not a melee guy so I probably don't know what I'm talking about too much, but there are abilities and things that do seem like Square intended SAM and MNK to be tanks.
I think Square intended SAM to be a Parrying tank. It has a number of very tank-like abilities. Third Eye lets it avoid a few hits on a timer, ala Utsusemi. They have Parrying of A+, which completely negates damage. There are riceballs with hidden killer effects on them for you, too. Is it completely infeasible for a SAM/NIN to hold hate with WSes, avoid hits with Utsusemi, Third Eye, Parrying and food-induced intimidation? And they have more HP and VIT than NINs, don't they?
Monk also has abilities that would go well with tanking, but maybe don't in reality. Dodge just gives you free evasion, with no trade-off. They have Counter and Guard and Counterstance to help out with that. And then, of course, they have a ton of HP and some limited self-healing ability.
I've heard of people tanking with MNKs with special equip builds, but I'd like to see someone seriously try it with a SAM. I've heard that some people have tanked well with SAM though the dunes, but maybe Parrying, even when capped, doesn't happen often enough to help it last much beyond that.