Haste Is NOT Exponential...
Haste is NOT exponential...
You're not hitting JA haste cap w/o desperate blows, anyhow. So, even if it were like that, it'd only apply to one job. All I'm saying is that I'm certain it counts towards the haste hard cap.
I like how the OP hasnt posted since the first or second page xD
Quetzalcoatl.Trauma said:
I like how the OP hasnt posted since the first or second page xD
[+]
Sylph.Tigerwoods said:
Quetzalcoatl.Trauma said:
I like how the OP hasnt posted since the first or second page xD
Hehe I've yet to be overly impressed by DNC but any job that can solo Darkness has potential so I welcome the day ^^
Leviathan.Duvessa said:
Siren.Kyte said:
It's calculated as JA haste, and counts towards the cap of that category.
Incorrect. It's calculated as job ability haste, but does NOT count towards cap. It's not technically haste. It does not affect spells, only your weapon delay.
It's been tested many times, it's definitely not added to any current haste cap.
here's the wiki quote
"Haste Samba is considered to be a "Job Ability Haste", much like Hasso, and as such will stack with Haste from other sources, such as equipment and magic, but unlike Hasso, it does not count toward the Haste cap."
Kirschy's responsible for a sizeable portion of our knowledge concerning haste mechanics (values in /1024, local and total caps, etc), so her word is a pretty reliable source here. Thought you'd appreciate an additional quote.
Haste vs Double Attack:
I skipped through everything except part of the first page so forgive me if this has been answered here. I asked this same question to my LS once saying that adding 1% haste @ 20% will reduce your delay the same amount as adding 1% haste at 0%. I couldnt wrap my head around the concept that everyone had stuck in their heads that every haste you added did more for you than the last 1% added. This is how it was explained to me.
You have a total delay of (for a nice even number) 400.
Adding 1% haste will reduce it by 4 for a delay of 396 right?
Ok moving on. If you have 10% haste already, your delay is 360. Adding another 1% haste will drop it to 356.
Now lets say you have 20% haste, your delay will be 320 and adding another haste will drop it down to 316.
1% haste at 400 delay (396 divided by 400)
0.99
1% haste at 10% (356/360)
0.98888888888888888888888888888889
1% haste at 20% (316/320)
0.9875
etc etc etc Even though your delay is going down by the same amount each haste you add. The decrease in delay is a bigger percentage overall. (This is the part I didnt see before it was explained to me) Dropping your delay by 4 at 400 delay. 4 divided by 400 = .01 And dropping your delay by 4 at 320. 4/320 = .0125.
(This is kinda tough to explain) Even though they both dropped by the same amount of delay, each time you add another haste its a larger percentage of your current delay.
Ex: 4/400, 4/396, 4/392, 4/388 etc (Math for dummies, the number being divided stays the same, while the other one gets smaller)
Whew, what a tough concept to explain lol
You have a total delay of (for a nice even number) 400.
Adding 1% haste will reduce it by 4 for a delay of 396 right?
Ok moving on. If you have 10% haste already, your delay is 360. Adding another 1% haste will drop it to 356.
Now lets say you have 20% haste, your delay will be 320 and adding another haste will drop it down to 316.
1% haste at 400 delay (396 divided by 400)
0.99
1% haste at 10% (356/360)
0.98888888888888888888888888888889
1% haste at 20% (316/320)
0.9875
etc etc etc Even though your delay is going down by the same amount each haste you add. The decrease in delay is a bigger percentage overall. (This is the part I didnt see before it was explained to me) Dropping your delay by 4 at 400 delay. 4 divided by 400 = .01 And dropping your delay by 4 at 320. 4/320 = .0125.
(This is kinda tough to explain) Even though they both dropped by the same amount of delay, each time you add another haste its a larger percentage of your current delay.
Ex: 4/400, 4/396, 4/392, 4/388 etc (Math for dummies, the number being divided stays the same, while the other one gets smaller)
Whew, what a tough concept to explain lol
[+]
It's basically that we're interested in what Haste does to damage... what Haste does to delay is unimportant.
Haste vs Delay does produce a linear graph.
Haste vs Attack Frequency/Damage Increase does not.
The thing people do when they see it as being linear is to compare it to delay which is as I said - useless.
Haste vs Delay does produce a linear graph.
Haste vs Attack Frequency/Damage Increase does not.
The thing people do when they see it as being linear is to compare it to delay which is as I said - useless.
To explain what I meant about it being semantic argument is; haste having a linear or non-linear is what you define the effect of haste is. Is it the effect on delay? or is it the effect on attack frequency?
When people say haste has increasing returns they are (or should be) referring to attack frequency.
But haste has never been exponential, its a geometric (1/X where X is 0.2 to 1) growth.
When people say haste has increasing returns they are (or should be) referring to attack frequency.
But haste has never been exponential, its a geometric (1/X where X is 0.2 to 1) growth.
What haste does to damage, is increases it :D
Not on a per hit basis, but from all the extra swings :D
I'd much rather get an extra hit from my big *** axe than a little extra damage per swing. It would take quite a few swings with that extra damage to equal the damage from one hit. Not to mention the TP from that hit. Get enough of those "extra" hits that you wouldnt have gotten without the haste and suddenly the damage from the WS makes the gap even bigger.
I'm a haste advocate :D
Not on a per hit basis, but from all the extra swings :D
I'd much rather get an extra hit from my big *** axe than a little extra damage per swing. It would take quite a few swings with that extra damage to equal the damage from one hit. Not to mention the TP from that hit. Get enough of those "extra" hits that you wouldnt have gotten without the haste and suddenly the damage from the WS makes the gap even bigger.
I'm a haste advocate :D
Haste itself isn't exponential... but the percentage of your remaining delay it reduces is...
If your delay is 100, then 1% haste would bring to to 99, an effective 1% reduction... If your delay is 100 and you have 50% haste with spells etc. (50 delay) then 1% haste will decrease it to 49, 49/50 is 2%... 2% reduction in delay.
Anyways I didn't read the thread lol I'm just sayin'
If your delay is 100, then 1% haste would bring to to 99, an effective 1% reduction... If your delay is 100 and you have 50% haste with spells etc. (50 delay) then 1% haste will decrease it to 49, 49/50 is 2%... 2% reduction in delay.
Anyways I didn't read the thread lol I'm just sayin'
I made a smartass comment that I took back after I saw you edited your post.
Oh lol, I didn't even see your comment -.-
Cerberus.Eburo said:
Oh lol, I didn't even see your comment -.-
It would appear that I am a better ninja than you!
Sylph.Beelshamen said:
Valefor.Argettio said:
Im glad I wasn't around for this mess, but Axle has hit the nail on the head.
Its a semantic argument based on Veggeto/me/others using poor language to explain that the effect haste has on damage done is a 1/X relationship (not exponential, but personally I haven't used that term).
Its a semantic argument based on Veggeto/me/others using poor language to explain that the effect haste has on damage done is a 1/X relationship (not exponential, but personally I haven't used that term).
It surprises me that you classify this argument as being semantic.
Saying haste is exponential(assuming the OP's haste-delay table is correct) is wrong, it's not poor language. Failing to successfully describe CORRECT game mechanics would be poor language, however being so lazy as to reinforcing WRONG ideas doesn't belong in the semantics department. :)
They will try to tell you its an argument of semantics, but its really the average person just being ignorant and uneducated. This is the same final analysis that came out of the "Double Attack is NOT diminishing returns" thread. I spent pages upon pages trying to teach people on this board the correct definition of diminishing returns and finally came to the realization that the average person will simply not do their own research. They parrot the ideas of the masses and walk around with an incomplete understanding of the debate at hand. When you try to explain it to them using the academic truths they rebel and call YOU stupid for not understanding the simple game mechanics.
Do yourself a favor and don't post about this sort of thing. 70% of the responses will be moronic attempts at humor, 25% will be people defending the wrong side of the argument with somebody else's incorrect math, and maybe 5% will be people who actually get the point but their post will be overlooked because "they MUST be wrong" too.
[+]
Pretty sure it ended when I pointed out that you can demonstrate increasing/decreasing returns with respect to DPS for haste and DA under the formal definition, actually.
Plus with calculus you can find a general dy/dx of any point on the graphical function and it will be a negative number; hence gradient is always negative, hence a decreasing trend.
Haste is awesome !
all ya need to know :D
KSS ( Keep Simple and Stupid ) for the ppl that got no math background
now if u do got some
you would see that haste is a lot better than w/e u can come up with :P
too lazy atm , just got off Calculus 3 college class @....@
/sigh >< tired too , cya guys
all ya need to know :D
KSS ( Keep Simple and Stupid ) for the ppl that got no math background
now if u do got some
you would see that haste is a lot better than w/e u can come up with :P
too lazy atm , just got off Calculus 3 college class @....@
/sigh >< tired too , cya guys
Fenrir.Nightfyre said:
Pretty sure it ended when I pointed out that you can demonstrate increasing/decreasing returns with respect to DPS for haste and DA under the formal definition, actually.
No, you're just making a point that this thread was never trying to discredit in the first place. Notice this quote from page 2:
Leviathan.Duvessa said:
We aren't discussing damage returns, Lorielain, but yes you're somewhat correct on most of that. We're discussing attack speed returns specifically. Haste itself is not exponential. As was stated before, damage per second is.
Why its lasted this many more pages up to now is just people being stubborn.
[+]
Ragnarok.Faiye said:
Notice this quote from page 2: Why its lasted this many more pages up to now is just people being stubborn.
Leviathan.Duvessa said:
We aren't discussing damage returns, Lorielain, but yes you're somewhat correct on most of that. We're discussing attack speed returns specifically. Haste itself is not exponential. As was stated before, damage per second is.
Ragnarok.Faiye said:
Why its lasted this many more pages up to now is just people being stubborn.
Pot, kettle, etc.
Edit: This needs to be locked. If people don't want to understand, they don't need to understand. We can enjoy being better with more haste, and they can suck more. Doesn't matter to me.
Ragnarok.Faiye said:
Fenrir.Nightfyre said:
Pretty sure it ended when I pointed out that you can demonstrate increasing/decreasing returns with respect to DPS for haste and DA under the formal definition, actually.
No, you're just making a point that this thread was never trying to discredit in the first place. Notice this quote from page 2:
Leviathan.Duvessa said:
We aren't discussing damage returns, Lorielain, but yes you're somewhat correct on most of that. We're discussing attack speed returns specifically. Haste itself is not exponential. As was stated before, damage per second is.
Why its lasted this many more pages up to now is just people being stubborn.
Ragnarok.Faiye said:
Fenrir.Nightfyre said:
Pretty sure it ended when I pointed out that you can demonstrate increasing/decreasing returns with respect to DPS for haste and DA under the formal definition, actually.
No, you're just making a point that this thread was never trying to discredit in the first place. Notice this quote from page 2:
Leviathan.Duvessa said:
We aren't discussing damage returns, Lorielain, but yes you're somewhat correct on most of that. We're discussing attack speed returns specifically. Haste itself is not exponential. As was stated before, damage per second is.
Why its lasted this many more pages up to now is just people being stubborn.
Stop arguing useless things! Nobody gives a ***about how Haste is static or whatever compared to useless stats! All anyone cares about when they add Haste for melee purposes is DAMAGE!
Arguing that Haste doesn't have an increasing effect because you're not comparing it to anything useful is completely pointless. Haste does not display an increasing trend against every single variable in the game? I am truly shocked. It does against the only useful one in this consideration.
Fenrir.Nightfyre said:
Ragnarok.Faiye said:
Fenrir.Nightfyre said:
Pretty sure it ended when I pointed out that you can demonstrate increasing/decreasing returns with respect to DPS for haste and DA under the formal definition, actually.
No, you're just making a point that this thread was never trying to discredit in the first place. Notice this quote from page 2:
Leviathan.Duvessa said:
We aren't discussing damage returns, Lorielain, but yes you're somewhat correct on most of that. We're discussing attack speed returns specifically. Haste itself is not exponential. As was stated before, damage per second is.
Why its lasted this many more pages up to now is just people being stubborn.
In regards to the thread on Double Attack, the overall point remains the same as this thread. Diminishing returns applies to units input to units output, double attack is an example of constant returns x%DA = y%increase in attacks. Comparing the % difference from one tier of DA to the next is a comparison of the relative % increase and falls outside of the definition of diminishing returns. The point I was trying to make is by the end of the thread people were saying "its a semantics arguement...the return can also be the DoT!"
In short, stop erroneously trying to apply economic and mathematical labels to FFXI, it just makes you look ignorant and uneducated.
EDIT: Nevermind, I'm not getting dragged into your *** again.
-_-...
People do not ask "how many more times does Double Attack make me hit"? People ask "how much more damage does Double Attack make me do?" - why can damage not be an output of a function primarily designed with the output being damage?
There is no point whatsoever in useless comparisons!
Neither Haste nor Double Attack have constant returns in a way that anyone cares about. What people want to know is how it changes their damage, not how it changes how many times they hit - this is where the horrible misconception comes into play that haste only helps if you're full time engaged to something for x amount of time!
People do not ask "how many more times does Double Attack make me hit"? People ask "how much more damage does Double Attack make me do?" - why can damage not be an output of a function primarily designed with the output being damage?
There is no point whatsoever in useless comparisons!
Neither Haste nor Double Attack have constant returns in a way that anyone cares about. What people want to know is how it changes their damage, not how it changes how many times they hit - this is where the horrible misconception comes into play that haste only helps if you're full time engaged to something for x amount of time!
All FFXI content and images © 2002-2024 SQUARE ENIX CO., LTD. FINAL
FANTASY is a registered trademark of Square Enix Co., Ltd.