Fire/Fire, Fire/Rad, or Fire/NRG?

[Frosticus]

3 hours ago, Hjarki said:

There really isn't anything that interferes with a single target rotation in Fire. Everything's long cooldowns, AE or maybe tossing a Hold. Dominators simply don't spend all that much time with their primary set powers unless they're doing AE with them.

We are probably logging in to a different game, but the answer is char. A fire/dark would use char over dark blast. 

3 hours ago, Hjarki said:

Why would anyone value 'your experience' given the fundamental lack of understanding you've displayed thus far about the game mechanics? It's certainly not a valid basis for any argument you're attempting to make.

 

Thus far? ok. But you might just be projecting a little bit no? I mean look below.

3 hours ago, Hjarki said:

Neutrino Bolt has 53.36 dpa. Flares has 39.04 dpa. In most of those rotations, if you were able to use Neutrino Bolt would yield 10% - 15% higher dps for the rotation as a whole. I don't care what 'bar' you're using, that's a significant chunk of damage.

You said neutrino was a higher damage and  slower recharge t1. Out of 11 secondaries, neutrino does more damage and has a slower recharge than 2 of them. Do you still feel that is an accurate statement, or would you like to revise it?

 

Your above numbers for radiation demonstrate that you don't actually know how radiation works. Do you understand the contamination mechanic? If you do can you explain it and also explain why you are including it in your st analysis?

 

I was trying to politely hint that you should look at it again when I first asked why you think neutrino is superior, but you just doubled down on the misinformation. Oh well.

 

For those that care about accuracy:

Neutrino actually has a dpa of 44.45

Flares is correct at 39.04

 

I'm saying flares is best left unused in a set where all the other st attacks have 50% or higher DPA. You are saying neutrino is awesome and flares should be your most used power. I don't think we are both correct.

3 hours ago, Hjarki said:

Every other non-Epic AT in the game can get recharge, defense or both from primary, secondary or both. Dominators cannot. They must get all of their recharge and defense from pool powers and set bonuses.

Big whoop? It is trivial to hit perma dom in a final build as they often have plenty of access to purple sets. Every dom has full mez protection and aside from ice, can shut down entire spawns of bosses every 20-30 seconds. Their need for defense is far below what most squishies require to plow through most content and they get downright crazy when built, or buffed with solid def/resistance. Build to the strength of a dominator.

[nihilii]

Going to second the sentiment of not using T1 secondary attacks. There's just so many better options.

 

Personally I also strongly feel Char ought to be procced, including with the +dam ATO, and used as a part of your rotation. Those +dam stacks add up fast.

 

I see mentions of 80 DPS attack chains and I don't really want to dig into the numbers to see what they refer to (SOs only, Mids numbers?). But for reference, in real conditions a Fire/Fire dom can deal ~500 DPS solo, provided they use ATO procced Char in their rotation.

[Coyote]

3 hours ago, nihilii said:

Going to second the sentiment of not using T1 secondary attacks. There's just so many better options.

 

Personally I also strongly feel Char ought to be procced, including with the +dam ATO, and used as a part of your rotation. Those +dam stacks add up fast.

 

I see mentions of 80 DPS attack chains and I don't really want to dig into the numbers to see what they refer to (SOs only, Mids numbers?). But for reference, in real conditions a Fire/Fire dom can deal ~500 DPS solo, provided they use ATO procced Char in their rotation.

 

Agree with almost everything.

1) single-target Holds generally get proc-slotted, or the Dominator +ATO, or both

2) T1 is useful for leveling and exemplaring, for a FEW builds. Generally Savage and Earth since they don't have that many ranged attacks otherwise.

3) The attack chains were base damage, so you would at least double them for slotting and set bonuses, but once you add up a +Damage Alpha slot and procs used in some attacks, you can probably get 150% increase or move over the base numbers that Hjarki put, plus pet damage (and aura damage for some sets). So where he has a set at 80 DPS, it can probably reach 200 DPS on direct attacks, then another 40+ from the pets, and it's not a proc-optimized build, so those numbers aren't as bad as they appear.

 

To throw my two cents in on the T1:

Dominators can use set bonuses, and there are good ones in the ranged attacks. If you need Recharge you can go with Decimation, and if you need Ranged Defense you have Thunderstrike. While leveling these attacks are useful, and still useful for some sets when exemplaring. I always slot them early, but often keep them later on since I exemplar enough. If I were playing almost exclusively at high level, granted, I may respec the slot out.

Some of them are especially good (extra damage from Savage, high KU chance from Earth, -ToHit from Dark) and may be worth using more. But they generally don't fit into a maximal DPS chain unless you're soloing AVs and building for ranged defense, so that you can't use melee attacks.

[Hjarki]

6 hours ago, Frosticus said:

We are probably logging in to a different game, but the answer is char. A fire/dark would use char over dark blast. 

Slotting Char for damage means you can't slot for it Hold sets, which are incredibly potent. Now, with Dark Blast, an argument could be made for slotting a set like Cloud Senses for the same reason. However, Char can't be a simple drop-in replacement for Dark Blast because the recharge is too long.

 

Much of the problem is that you seem to make all sorts of assumptions without understanding the consequences of where those assumptions lead. It is possible to make a build where you use Char for damage rather than hold. However, it is far from certain that is an optimal solution for what you're trying to accomplish. In the case of basic dps, it certainly isn't.

6 hours ago, Frosticus said:

You said neutrino was a higher damage and  slower recharge t1. Out of 11 secondaries, neutrino does more damage and has a slower recharge than 2 of them. Do you still feel that is an accurate statement, or would you like to revise it?

Dark Blast 37.56

Stone Spears 37.55

Charged Bolts 37.55

Power Bolt 37.55

Flares 39.04

Ice Bolt 43.57

Shuriken Throw 54.97

Psionic Dart 42.02

Neutrino Bolt 53.36

Call Swarm 48.92

Thorny Darts 32.12

6 hours ago, Frosticus said:

Your above numbers for radiation demonstrate that you don't actually know how radiation works. Do you understand the contamination mechanic? If you do can you explain it and also explain why you are including it in your st analysis?

I'm just pulling the raw numbers. If you've got a decent model for handling Contamination beyond simply using the raw numbers - which is admittedly not ideal - feel free to present it.

6 hours ago, Frosticus said:

I'm saying flares is best left unused in a set where all the other st attacks have 50% or higher DPA. You are saying neutrino is awesome and flares should be your most used power. I don't think we are both correct.

What I've demonstrated is that your approach does not yield optimal dps. The difference is that I'm presenting a model that can be analyzed and critiqued while you're guessing.

6 hours ago, Frosticus said:

Big whoop? It is trivial to hit perma dom in a final build as they often have plenty of access to purple sets. Every dom has full mez protection and aside from ice, can shut down entire spawns of bosses every 20-30 seconds. Their need for defense is far below what most squishies require to plow through most content and they get downright crazy when built, or buffed with solid def/resistance. Build to the strength of a dominator.

Dominators already tend to run much lower defenses than other builds. You can only depend so far on control effects.

4 hours ago, nihilii said:

Going to second the sentiment of not using T1 secondary attacks. There's just so many better options.

 

Personally I also strongly feel Char ought to be procced, including with the +dam ATO, and used as a part of your rotation. Those +dam stacks add up fast.

 

I see mentions of 80 DPS attack chains and I don't really want to dig into the numbers to see what they refer to (SOs only, Mids numbers?). But for reference, in real conditions a Fire/Fire dom can deal ~500 DPS solo, provided they use ATO procced Char in their rotation.

The 80 DPS is 80 base DPS (unenhanced). Since we're just comparing across sets, it doesn't really matter what the enhancements are as long as they're common to all comparisons. Likewise, the choice of Char isn't relevant to such a comparison since it's common to all Fire/* Dominators.

 

In terms of how to slot Char, that's a judgement call. However, there are a few notes I'd make:

• As I noted above, you're losing one of your best powers for slotting recharge/defense. Since Dominators are further away from their targets than almost any other AT, this can be a problem.
• It compromises your ability to use your single target Hold as a Hold. With Fire/Fire, you don't really have a backup plan if the enemy resists your Holds heavily.
• Slotting the ATO into the ST Hold limits its availability for AE, where you arguably need the +damage more. At the end of the day, pylon times are nice but give you a deceptive view of the utility of dps. Most of your single target damage isn't done against AV/GM - where you're the beneficiary of the full team/league buffs - but against individual enemies in the midst of spawns. Having to prioritize your lowest damage attack in the middle of your AE to get a damage boost for your AE is likely to be counter-productive.
• Slotting the ATO reduces the damage you're getting from your Hold procs, not just in the sense of eliminating the possibility of another damage-dealing proc but in lowered proc chances on all the other procs slotted into the power.
• Slotting the ATO forces you to break the set. For most Dominators, this isn't a big deal since you don't need the Ranged Def anyway (in virtually all decent melee-centric Dominator builds I've seen, Winter sets are used for typed rather than going for positionals). For */Fire Dominators, it is a big deal since Ranged Def tends to be your primary form of Defense and the ATO is one of the best places to get in.

As for using T1 powers, bear in mind that you're forced to take them anyway, so you've already dedicated a power to them. There's a good chance you also need that power for recharge/defense, so it's not uncommon to slot that power. Given that, why would you stand there doing nothing when you could instead be dealing damage? Even in the most extreme case - the gradient between Flares and Blaze, a half-second of doing nothing to get to your Blaze more quickly doesn't improve your dps.

 

I get the impression that you - and Frosticus - tend to favor a model where you eschew defenses in favor of hoping your controls cover it. I see these Dominators in game all the game and, frankly, they're not all that much to the team because even one extra death tends to be a far greater burden than doing 2% less dps on the final AV/GM fight.

 

 

 

Edited June 27, 2020 by Hjarki

[nihilii]

42 minutes ago, Hjarki said:

• It compromises your ability to use your single target Hold as a Hold. With Fire/Fire, you don't really have a backup plan if the enemy resists your Holds heavily.
• Slotting the ATO into the ST Hold limits its availability for AE, where you arguably need the +damage more. At the end of the day, pylon times are nice but give you a deceptive view of the utility of dps. Most of your single target damage isn't done against AV/GM - where you're the beneficiary of the full team/league buffs - but against individual enemies in the midst of spawns. Having to prioritize your lowest damage attack in the middle of your AE to get a damage boost for your AE is likely to be counter-productive.

Base duration of Char is a healthy 12 seconds against +3s (+4s post level shift). It's going to recharge in ~4 seconds, and in permadom you're going to hold a boss in 1 Char and an EB in 2 Chars. From your perspective of using Char as little as possible I can understand it is worrisome, but you have to understand once Char is used as a regular part of the attack chain, then there will always more than enough mag to keep the target held. The difference between 12 seconds and 24 seconds is essentially meaningless in this scenario. I don't even make an effort to mez stuff beyond throwing Fire Cages + Flashfire/Bonfire.

 

42 minutes ago, Hjarki said:

I get the impression that you - and Frosticus - tend to favor a model where you eschew defenses in favor of hoping your controls cover it. I see these Dominators in game all the game and, frankly, they're not all that much to the team because even one extra death tends to be a far greater burden than doing 2% less dps on the final AV/GM fight.

That is a curious impression. If anything, I actually play my doms like blasters: in addendum to the above, more often than not I eschew actually using Flashfire/Bonfire because it peeves me to spend that much animation time on mezzing when I could just rely on defenses and attack instead.

The notion is truly bizarre to me. Someone who wanted to rely on controls as much as possible should be more likely to slot Char as a hold, not less.

Edited June 27, 2020 by nihilii

[Frosticus]

2 hours ago, Hjarki said:

Dark Blast 37.56   44.47

Stone Spears 37.55  44.47

Charged Bolts 37.55 44.47

Power Bolt 37.55 44.47

Flares 39.04

Ice Bolt 43.57 51.58

Shuriken Throw 54.97 44.47 - you included envenomed dagger buff

Psionic Dart 42.02

Neutrino Bolt 53.36 44.47 - you included contamination, but it doesn't work the way you think it does

Call Swarm 48.92

Thorny Darts 32.12 38.04

You realize nearly all of these are incorrect right?

You have 3 out of 11 correct.  27.3%... that report card isn't going up on the fridge.

 

That is a LOT of misinformation you are spreading and basing  your argument off of as the t1 guy. I took the time to correct them for you. I hope it helps others as I sort of doubt your ability to adapt to new information.

 

2 hours ago, Hjarki said:

I'm just pulling the raw numbers. If you've got a decent model for handling Contamination beyond simply using the raw numbers - which is admittedly not ideal - feel free to present it.

You are pulling numbers all right. It is clear they are originating somewhere near your rear end.

Log into your /rad dom. It isn't complicated.

 

You are including the toxic damage of contamination into your single target numbers. That isn't how contamination works. You'd know that if you had a /rad dom, or even logged one in long enough to try neutrino bolt.

 

If you don't know the numbers please stop posting misinformation and then doubling down when corrected. It helps no one.

[Hjarki]

1 hour ago, Frosticus said:

You realize nearly all of these are incorrect right?

Your 'corrected' numbers are damage/activation (and you got Psionic Dart and Call Swarm wrong). The numbers I posted were damage/animation numbers - something you probably should have realized when you discovered that every single number was off by precisely a factor of the power's activation time.

 

In any case, it doesn't really matter because even in your 'corrected' version, they refute the point you're making (albeit less effectively since failure to include the activation time makes them less accurate about a statement of the quality of the T1 attacks).

 

In terms of Envenomed Dagger/Contamination, I already invited you to present the numbers with a model that better reflected their mechanics. Contamination damage is still damage generated by a single target attack, even if it isn't against the primary target. Envenomed Blades is perma-able, so it's not entirely unreasonable to claim that we should count that damage. If you've got a different approach to modeling the behavior of these effects, then present it.

 

I submit that you need to take a step back and stop trying to 'win' an argument you're clearly ill-prepared to even engage in. The goal is not to 'win'. It is to inform - and you're subtracting from that process, not adding to it.

 

[Hjarki]

3 hours ago, nihilii said:

That is a curious impression. If anything, I actually play my doms like blasters: in addendum to the above, more often than not I eschew actually using Flashfire/Bonfire because it peeves me to spend that much animation time on mezzing when I could just rely on defenses and attack instead.

The notion is truly bizarre to me. Someone who wanted to rely on controls as much as possible should be more likely to slot Char as a hold, not less.

What I'm getting at that while many of these notions may seem reasonable in a vacuum, Dominators start from zero in both the defense and recharge categories. This means that the slotting on virtually your entire build has to be focused on these two goals long before you can start to worry about issues like proc slotting.

 

Given that, it's reasonable to presume that what you consider a 'decent build' includes defenses that would ordinarily be considered woefully inadequate for the tactics you're using and you're bridging the gap with inspirations/temporary powers/ally buffs/etc. or hoping that your control effects will keep you alive.

 

 

[Frosticus]

Sigh, this is painful.

 

how much damage does dark blast do at lvl 50?

How long is its cast time?

 

If you get this wrong will you revisit this subject once you have gathered a bit more information?

 

You are exceedingly confrontational, which is tiresome. But more importantly,  you are using the wrong information. 

[Coyote]

1 hour ago, Hjarki said:

Envenomed Blades is perma-able, so it's not entirely unreasonable to claim that we should count that damage. If you've got a different approach to modeling the behavior of these effects, then present it.

 

Waaaaait, that's a wrong approach to calculation. You're calculating a +X buff BECAUSE it's up 100% of the time, but you're not using temporary buffs even if they're higher. Like, if there is a powerset with +2X buff that's available 50% of the time, then the overall average buff would be the same.

 

Several other powersets have +Damage buffs that are up part of the time. It's not fair to them to include Martial Combat's +Damage buff because it can be up 100% of the time, but not include Fire's larger buff because it's only up part of the time. If you will include the +Damage from a click buff, then all powersets with a +Damage click should get the benefit of their build-up power, even if you average out the buff uptime. Also, +Damage buffs show better on unslotted powers, so doing a "base damage" calculation with +Damage powers will favor the powersets with more +Damage, but at higher level with slotted powers a +20% buff will only give about +10% damage.

 

So, in the end, it takes a more complicated analysis to calculate the DPA of a power if you will include a +Damage buff from the powerset. It's probably better to just note that some sets have better +Damage than others, and not actually throw them into the numbers of a single unslotted power.

[Coyote]

1 hour ago, Hjarki said:

What I'm getting at that while many of these notions may seem reasonable in a vacuum, Dominators start from zero in both the defense and recharge categories. This means that the slotting on virtually your entire build has to be focused on these two goals long before you can start to worry about issues like proc slotting.

 

Given that, it's reasonable to presume that what you consider a 'decent build' includes defenses that would ordinarily be considered woefully inadequate for the tactics you're using and you're bridging the gap with inspirations/temporary powers/ally buffs/etc. or hoping that your control effects will keep you alive.

 

Just to note, I run perma-Dom builds (not at perma-Hasten levels unless Force Feedbacks fire) with capped Range/AoE defenses. It may be possible to run them with capped Melee/Range (but I generally figure that if I'm in melee, the victim whose face is being ripped off isn't able to argue about it), I think it may actually be easier to cap Melee than AoE. And my Hold is usually slotted with the Dominator ATO so I'm getting the +Damage out of it, though not much damage directly from it. So while the builds ARE a bit tighter, they're not impossible to manage.

[Hjarki]

1 hour ago, Coyote said:

Waaaaait, that's a wrong approach to calculation. You're calculating a +X buff BECAUSE it's up 100% of the time, but you're not using temporary buffs even if they're higher. Like, if there is a powerset with +2X buff that's available 50% of the time, then the overall average buff would be the same.

I was not making any sort of claim about Martial Combat. Frosticus claimed that only two sets had lower damage T1 than Radiation, so I pulled all the numbers for all the T1 - without regard for any special considerations so as to provide a stable baseline - to demonstrate that he was, in fact, wrong. Frosticus then decided to focus on Martial Combat - about which I made no claims at all and accurately reported the listed damage - in an attempt to deflect the conversation. So it's not "my" calculation and it has absolutely nothing to do with the point I was making. Indeed, you'll note I explicitly stated there were different ways to model this and invited him to provide his own if he was so inclined.

 

He gets this way from time to time. He wants to be seen as an 'expert', but never puts in any of the work required to actually know the game well enough to be an expert. Then he gets upset when people call him on it and starts flailing around trying to 'prove them wrong' while desperately avoiding the actual subject of conversation.

 

Bear in mind, this never had anything to do with Martial Combat at all. It had to do with his claim that skipping the T1 power - all T1 powers - would yield higher dps than using it in a rotation. It's only his continual attempts at deflection that led us to the point where he's try to mock me for using accurate numbers delivered without any bias as information.

 

Edited June 27, 2020 by Hjarki

[Frosticus]

2 hours ago, Hjarki said:

Your 'corrected' numbers are damage/activation (and you got Psionic Dart and Call Swarm wrong). The numbers I posted were damage/animation numbers - something you probably should have realized when you discovered that every single number was off by precisely a factor of the power's activation time.

 

In any case, it doesn't really matter because even in your 'corrected' version, they refute the point you're making (albeit less effectively since failure to include the activation time makes them less accurate about a statement of the quality of the T1 attacks).

 

In terms of Envenomed Dagger/Contamination, I already invited you to present the numbers with a model that better reflected their mechanics. Contamination damage is still damage generated by a single target attack, even if it isn't against the primary target. Envenomed Blades is perma-able, so it's not entirely unreasonable to claim that we should count that damage. If you've got a different approach to modeling the behavior of these effects, then present it.

 

I submit that you need to take a step back and stop trying to 'win' an argument you're clearly ill-prepared to even engage in. The goal is not to 'win'. It is to inform - and you're subtracting from that process, not adding to it.

 

Nope. you are pulling your numbers directly from mids, which has them incorrect in many cases for dom t1's.

I posted the correct DPA for every t1. 

Damage per activation adjusted for arcana-time. 

 

If you are going to count envenomed then you should include embrace of fire, build up, aim, power up, etc with their expected uptimes. Nice try though.

Contamination doesn't affect the target you are attacking. It is a tiny little aoe. No person that understands the mechanic would include it in a st scenario.

You don't understand contamination, but refuse to accept new information. You are discussing things in bad faith.

 

Lean in to your ignorance though. I expect as much at this point.

 

edit: the OP's question has been addressed quite well by numerous people. @Hjarkioffers up some interesting information that is founded on incorrect numbers, but is worth considering if you feel your dom will often sit in one spot attacking the same target indefinitely and your primary set is disabled for whatever reasons. Everyone plays differently after all.

Edited June 27, 2020 by Frosticus

[Hjarki]

3 minutes ago, Frosticus said:

Nope. you are pulling your numbers directly from mids, which has them incorrect in many cases for dom t1's.

I posted the correct DPA for every t1. 

Damage per activation adjusted for arcana-time. 

You posted the damage per activation numbers. The damage per animation numbers are the ones adjusted for arcana-time (damage per activation does not include any information about the activation time). Two of the numbers you posted were damage per animation, the rest damage per activation (which is a trifle confusing). All of the numbers I posted were damage per animation.

4 minutes ago, Frosticus said:

If you are going to count envenomed then you should include embrace of fire, build up, aim, power up, etc with their expected uptimes.

I didn't count anything. The numbers I provided were the raw information, which is how sensible people do it because otherwise you have to go into a long explanation about why you're modifying the raw numbers. If your comments about whether or not to count Contamination or Envenomed Blades weren't so transparently off-topic and irrelevant to the overall issue, it might be a worthwhile discussion about how to model such things.

5 minutes ago, Frosticus said:

Contamination doesn't affect the target you are attacking. It is a tiny little aoe. No person that understands the mechanic would include it in a st scenario.

'No person' apparently doesn't include the game designers or the people who created Mid's.

 

In any case, if you're done with your attempts to de-rail the conversation, why exactly is it that - contrary to more than a decade of knowledge about the game - you believe that skipping parts of a rotation yields more damage than including them?

[Frosticus]

Where's the toxic damage that you added to your single target numbers?

[Frosticus]

I thought Neutrino bolt did more damage? 

@Hjarkisaid so

[Hjarki]

12 minutes ago, Frosticus said:

Where's the toxic damage that you added to your single target numbers?

Again, they are not 'my' numbers. They are the numbers in game and in Mid's.

 

You need to stop trying to de-rail the conversation with irrelevancies. You don't like the numbers the game and Mid's use for Radiation Assault? Fine. It's been noted. It also has precisely zero to do with what was being discussed. It has nothing to do with the original question and it has nothing to do with what you were responding to.

[nihilii]

2 hours ago, Hjarki said:

What I'm getting at that while many of these notions may seem reasonable in a vacuum, Dominators start from zero in both the defense and recharge categories. This means that the slotting on virtually your entire build has to be focused on these two goals long before you can start to worry about issues like proc slotting.

 

Given that, it's reasonable to presume that what you consider a 'decent build' includes defenses that would ordinarily be considered woefully inadequate for the tactics you're using and you're bridging the gap with inspirations/temporary powers/ally buffs/etc. or hoping that your control effects will keep you alive.

I don't think that's a reasonable presumption at all.

 

I certainly use insps freely as they drop (why wouldn't you?), but I don't really see this dom as needing them on +0/x8, +1/x8 solo... and probably wouldn't need them even on higher difficulties if I used controls actively - but again, why spend 3s on Flashfire when you can pop 2 lucks that will be replenished from mob drops?

More importantly, I'm confused as to where this even comes from. You're not so subtly suggesting I die a lot for minimal gains, then insinuating I'm theorycrafting and hoping things will work out. It's as if you see my different opinion on Char and ATO slotting as a personal attack demanding retribution, but that's really not what I meant. Shooting for maximum defense and recharge is just as valid a build goal if that's what you want out of your character.

[Frosticus]

46 minutes ago, Hjarki said:

Again, they are not 'my' numbers. They are the numbers in game and in Mid's.

The game has some issues accurately displaying information for powers that reference other powers as part of their action.  Most people posting numbers know this limitation of the engine and verify data first.

 

No dev or mids representative is in this thread promoting misinformation though. Only you are. Be accountable for your own words and actions. The derailing of this thread was when you posted inaccurate "rotations" based on the wrong data and a poor understanding of game mechanics and the AT. You've been shown where you are incorrect and sharing inaccurate information, but rather than being a reasonable person, you are instead leaning in to it.

 

No one forced you to post wrong information about rad assault, or all the t1's DPA's, that's all on you. Be accountable. check more than mids and if something seems a little off, log into the game and try it on the test server.

 

 

 

[JnEricsonx]

Why is it every topic I start seems to bring about hostility?   I swear that's the last thing I want.  I'm no min-maxer, I go by OG Spock's 2009 view, "Do what feels right." 

[Coyote]

3 hours ago, Hjarki said:

his claim that skipping the T1 power - all T1 powers - would yield higher dps than using it in a rotation.

 

Remember something when arguing on a forum... it's possible for two sides to both be right.

Without agreeing on preconditions, I believe that it's possible for his claim to be 100% correct, if he's using different base assumptions than you are. Specifically, with high recharge and a proc-slotted primary Hold, which is a very reasonable (though not the only way) to build a Dominator, it is possible to have a rotation where the Hold fills in for gaps so that the T1 isn't needed. And a proc-slotted Hold will have higher DPA than a T1 blast, so this kind of rotation would have higher DPS than a rotation with a T1 in it... for all secondaries.

 

It's just a matter of starting from a different premise. You're looking at the secondary only and building rotations out of them, and he's looking at a full build. Both are reasonable approaches, as looking at a full build sometimes minimizes differences between powersets (like a Blaster filling in with Char from the APPs minimizes DPS differences)... so if you want to compare only secondaries, then you don't care about full builds. But it's also reasonable to look at a full build with the idea that it is possible to make a full build for a character that skips the T1 regardless of the secondary and improves the DPS, so why care about T1 differences?

 

So he makes a claim, and it's right with his presuppositions, and you make a claim that's right with your presuppositions, so sometimes before an argument starts, it's good to step back and clarify "this is what I'm starting with, and this is why". That way you see when differences arise because of real disagreements, or just because of arguing about different situations.

[Coyote]

15 minutes ago, JnEricsonx said:

Why is it every topic I start seems to bring about hostility?   I swear that's the last thing I want.  I'm no min-maxer, I go by OG Spock's 2009 view, "Do what feels right." 

 

You got us.

It's a Sekrit Forum Conspiracy, where a bunch of us get together and troll a random poster's thread by arguing in it until we drown out whatever the OP wanted to talk about. Then, we follow him from forum to forum and keep doing it 😉

Fortunately for you, it's almost the end of the month, so we're going to pick a new target in a few days. Just hang in there until July 😛

[JnEricsonx]

Funny thing is, everything's so damn crazy now, I'd only partially have a hard time believing that.

[Frosticus]

 

 

52 minutes ago, Coyote said:

It's just a matter of starting from a different premise. You're looking at the secondary only and building rotations out of them, and he's looking at a full build. Both are reasonable approaches, as looking at a full build sometimes minimizes differences between powersets (like a Blaster filling in with Char from the APPs minimizes DPS differences)... so if you want to compare only secondaries, then you don't care about full builds. But it's also reasonable to look at a full build with the idea that it is possible to make a full build for a character that skips the T1 regardless of the secondary and improves the DPS, so why care about T1 differences?

 

So he makes a claim, and it's right with his presuppositions, and you make a claim that's right with your presuppositions, so sometimes before an argument starts, it's good to step back and clarify "this is what I'm starting with, and this is why". That way you see when differences arise because of real disagreements, or just because of arguing about different situations.

It's almost like I said:

On 6/25/2020 at 3:19 PM, Frosticus said:

I haven't looked closely at the above posted "attack rotations" but at a glance I can tell you my fire/fire doesn't use flares, my grav/dark doesn't use dark blast, and my plant/earth only uses stone spears cause I like the animation.

fire/fire has char, which is a great attack even with minimal proc/damage slotting

grav/dark has lift, nuff said

plant/earth usually has so much ffback going that you never need spears, but I did say i have it because i like the attack.

 

Sorry this thread went downhill so rapidly. Hopefully at least the corrected information helps someone at some point. I know I was a bit disappointed in /rad when it didn't perform like the tool tips suggested.