Kaeko never gives proof?
Kaeko never gives proof?
Where did I say that? The point in using those names is to show discrepancy between how "pro" you look accepting one individual's findings over another. We could use Kirschy's findings as another example. Kirschy didn't necessarily provide proof of her findings, yet her information was welcomed and accepted by a slew of individuals in that thread.
Edit: And for that matter, Kaeko's doesn't always (If ever) give sufficient proof. Many times, it's pictures and text. Therein lies the burden of belief. It's unreasonably for him to provide concrete proof due to the complexity of technology (Photo and Filming editing). Consequently, we can only trust that what he says and presents is accurate (i.e. the blind trust) or reject the information. Now telling me this, how many people on BG do the latter as opposed to the former?
You need 2 things to reach a final conclusion (for example, let's use enmity here since it's my thing)
(1) The actual experiment or observation - basically what did you actually see happen.
(2) The interpretation of what happened given you believe it actually did happen.
When I wrote the enmity stuff all down, it was well received because I told you exactly what to do if you wanted to reproduce it. So if you thought I was full of it, you could go to west saruta and redo the entire thing and get exactly what I wrote. This is why methods are important. No one can actually be there to watch you to every single thing.
There was a person on FFXIWiki that goes by JKL that actually did his own enmity research and came up with the 10,000 CE and VE caps (very big). I later looked it up and he'd actually done it a month before I did, but everyone blew him off because he wrote no testing methods. His table is still on old wiki. He was right, but nobody believed him because he lacked methods, and therefore lacked credibility. Being credible is often more important that being 100% right (if that makes sense?).
#2 is simply can you come up with a cohesive and believable theory on how it all works based on your observations. I really only ran like ~30 dedicated "tests" but somehow shat out like a novel's worth of information on enmity. I used very simple tests and their results to build a theory. Once it was sufficient and reasonably accurate, I stopped. Is it enough to get published in some make-believe fantasy journal? No. Is it enough to appease most gamers and their enmity related questions and arguments? Probably.
Now the dangerous part here is once you build up credibility, people start believing everything you say and they stop checking your reasoning. That's why when someone questions something I do, I pay more attention. The opposite can be true as well, using Pchan as a BG example. People have biases against him (myself admittedly one of them after awhile), and automatically dismiss him, ruin his threads, etc..
BG is the best place for newer research overall because you have a lot of people with good grasp of the game (not always the ones that post the most mind you), AND are willing to ask you tough questions. If you want to be taken seriously, you deserve to be questioned. If you look up old patch days, when new enmity related things come out (examples like Innin/Yonin or Beguiling Collar), I still will post the full testing methods when I tell you the conclusion. Most people just read the bolded red because they couldn't care less how I got there, but for the few that do, the methods are always there. No one deserves a free pass, though admittedly some get one.
EDIT:
A good example of this will be when ff14 comes out. Someone out there is going to try to figure the enmity system out assuming SE doesn't give it away like Blizzard does for WoW. I would expect people to question every detail on how they reached their conclusions. If I end up trying to figure it out, would you be crazy enough to just accept what I said blindly in an entirely new game that no one can claim mastery of over another?
A lot of posters that know me in game or have talked to me will know I did a lot of stupid stuff that I had to either correct or be pushed to correct. I think a classic example would be nuking in an AF2 hat on ebony puddings, which you can see in some really old blog shots. I was asked by someone why I did that and only then did I realize it was quite stupid. Any one of the 'expert' rdms here would probably cry if they saw me try to solo someone on RDM on my new toon w/o breaking or borderline breaking ToS.
PLD hitting for 0-50 to a DRK hitting 50-400 (relic) is a big difference in hate. Once capped on CE the only spells I really need to spam are stun and dread spikes. On a mob like Khim I'll use sleep instead of stun.
Stun can work as good as a shield proc and doesnt require luck. DRK also has weapon bash for the oshi moments where shadows and stun are down, but that is very rare.
PLD can turtle much better then DRK but overall its not needed with good support and a DRK that can count to 3.
Good to see Therin is still around. I've been gone for two years and, jesus, I can even tell them that the whole idea of TPing in ACP body is retarded. PLD/WAR? I don't think I've been /WAR in years. Best time I ever had in dynamis was when I main tanked with /RDM.
I tried to suggest a better way of doing things to my current LS on Ouryu. They were using PLD/NIN when they sleep it on the ground and nuke it in the air. Why /NIN when you aren't even getting hit but once or twice? Better yet, swap it off to that NIN/DRK you're with and let him absorb 'em or just out right solo tank it. Eudon and I did this in Eden on Fairy and never had a single BLM pull hate in the 10 minute fights. They went all out, too. I just wish my PLD was up to par in gear so I could start using it again.
I never got into the math of PLD because I always seemed to be able to keep up with every tank/DD and do my job decently(Therin can say, he's seen me tank, he might not think I'm good though), but maybe I should sit down and start reading into all of this research into PLD.
Yeah, let me block that with my shield real quick - oops, didn't proc that time? Shit, it's like my shield wasn't even there...
If you can't consistently survive as a PLD and not as a DRK, there's essentially no difference in survivability. Shield procs are not consistent.
Earth staff doesn't help with getting ichi up. Sentinel is a get out of jail free card on a 4m20s timer. Potent self cures are a really big benefit, especially when limited on support and they have to decide between a status cure and a c4/5. Pld 2hour > drk 2hour for survivability.
Shield isn't reliable but it's positives are obviously better than a earthstaff when you can stay face to face with what you are tanking.
Again just to make it clear i'm not advocating pld over drk or rdm, i'm just responding to what tsuko said about survivability between pld and drk.
Adjustment in enmity for Sleep Sleep 2 Bind... Possible RDM, DRK tank nerf?
Most likely yes I think. It might also affect nin/drk as well but we'll have to see how much they reduce the enmity from sleep/blind/bind. All I know is that I'm very happy I waited to level /rdm even though I enjoyed using it on pld.
NIN/DRK is pretty boned, but DRK/NIN will still be fine in any situation it was good before.
Absorbs bro
/Wondering what RDM and DRK tanking will be like now that they "adjusted" enmity for sleeps etc