Max Theoretical DPS?

I believe the point was curiosity. That's why it's an hour long fight against a stationary, idle dummy with endgame base stats and no mechanics or special resistances.

Over a long enough timeline, including one use of whatever 1hrs available, and optimal buffs for the job, what does the graph look like? It's not for recommending jobs over other jobs or anything, just a theoretical novelty.

EDIT:
To expand on that, the question of pdif is a valid one, but base enemy stats and buffs are specified. So, if every job caps attack on WoC with a full complement of buffs (I like the 6buff/3job model), then we can consider the exercise to be an attack capped scenario for all jobs. If not, then that helps differentiate jobs. Same for accuracy. Does one job need an acc buff where another doesn't? Can every job cap acc and atk with 3 supports on that mob, and do they sacrifice anything to do so?

This curiosity just gives certain job a bad name that they don't deserve that is.

Most of the real zerg fight will have attack capped + end in 2-3 min. That's why WAR RUN performs so well. The scenario set by OP (1 SP allowed in an hour, attack not capped)just gives WAR RUN unfair disadvantages that they don't deserve.

Same can be say penalty to prep for certain offensive buffs, such as AM3 bonus/drain3 souleater/scarlet dmg bonus etc. How can you possibly set a fight length of 1hr but remove the penalty of offensive buffs prep time? That's just contradicting and unfair to jobs that don't need time to prebuff to hit the dps ceiling.

If they seriously want to compare the theoretical DPS ceiling of every job, then every job should be allowed to fight in situations that absolutely favors them, and compare their DPS ceiling/peak dps, instead of creating a situation that allows certain job to shine but the other job performs like ***.


Every job should be allowed to cap acc/attack in a theoretical DPS discussion, IMO.

Like I said, the correct answer is whatever the OP wants it to be. Whenever anyone starts setting unrealistic conditions on something, then we know it's just to confirm an answer they have already arrived at.

Curiosity is a lousy excuse for insisting on using bad math. Given that the proposed environment is going to be quite literally impossible to replicate in-game, it's like expecting a serious answer to "How long would it take for me to fly around the world.. by flapping my arms?" The given scenario is equally implausible, and really needs to be adjusted to the realm of possibility at the very least.

I'm pretty sure that there are no mobs that will let you attack them for 60min. They will either die before then or kick you out when the 15-45min timer runs out. It also bugs me that SPs are used once in 60min when they would have 45min cooldowns. This smacks of intentional handicapping those jobs with high damage SPs.

I also don't think the logic behind having blanket/universal buffs is actually logical.. If you want to answer "What is the maximum theoretical DPS for each job?", then you need to actually tailor the environment to cater to each job individually, which would include mapping out BIS gear for each and every relevant situation, custom buff menus, and most likely other stuff that I'm forgetting because I haven't slept yet, in order to determine what each job's actual maximum theoretical output is.

Without diving too deeply into this, I would go with my gut and bet on WAR.

We all know the potency of Mighty Strikes (with an appropriate gear set) and Savagery Warcry.

Outside of the SP phase of the battle, WAR has a lot of flexibility to remain competitive.
I'd wager swapping to Great Axe for longer skill chains would maintain its lead. Full Break in the chain would help it keep its edge.

Looking further, times of changing buffs to add ballad/refresh while WAR could compensate for the adjustments elsewhere would allow for the introduction of a Raetic Greatsword.
Adding Raetic could also allow for different skill chains, per Skarwind's posts in the DRK thread.

It really comes down to how much stronger other options are outside of the SP phase.

All true. I mean, one could find a 60min target by using non-ilvl weaponry, but this would be equally useless and difficult to comparably achieve across all jobs.
I took the OP's proposal to mean, "Which job has the most favorable equipment, job ability and weapon skill spread?" because it is the framework on which we dress our strategies that matters more than anything else.

Which comes back to what Saevel has been saying in this thread, all along.

I was up all night thinking about theoretical math when I thought....what if in theory it was a waste of time ?

In theoretical math when you get to the FFXI section you will notice a lack of monk.

So just to get to the central thesis of this thread and forum in general:

All jobs are equal because we can't agree on a set of conditions. But MNK is always garbage except for that one Ambuscade.

Yes?

In theory this would be an interesting topic but my conclusion is that it's a lot math and looks like work.

So you are saying it's a pointless time waste with endless bickering...sounds about right !

The contender list shuffles if you block any player input after engaging, as though the target has a permanent, irresistible Amnesia aura.

Fact.

Monk .. ok thread is over I win!

Let's have this same theoretical discussion in a controlled setting:

This month's ambuscade
Fighting from the front (100% block rate)
Total white damage (no weaponskills) through boil, no running
DD who takes the most damage wins parse (and subsequently dies)

I'll take "Four letter words" for $500, Alex.

Drk soul eater +last resort calablog wwee

Ok taru taru what is m... m... m... m...

Wow, I dont check this thread for a day and every one has gone all crazy... pretty par for the course now that I think about it.
When I read the first page, and OP asks for maximum theoretical DPS, and then later in the thread he references an instance of seeing 8k DPS, I assumed he was looking for a number... "What is the maximum theoretical DPS given you could go all out without worrying about defending yourself."

I expected a spreadsheet answer of like:
WAR 12,134, DRK over9000, etc etc. Then people got all picky about buffs and fight duration and not dying... which doesnt change the answer output. Should still be a spreadsheet DPS answer.

OP, is that what you wanted? I didnt think it was a which job is better, I read it as which Job could theoretically bang out the highest DPS given perfect scenario that couldnt exist in game.

which by the way, if you want maximum buffs, dont forget transcendence. =P

For the second time, you are spouting inane BS. If I was "wanting it to be a certain job," show me literally ANY PROOF of that. The conditions are unrealistic to try to keep everything fair for everyone so that they can reach their max damage potential and then compare that to the others. This must be hard for you to understand.

45 minutes then, whatever. The point of the fight length was that it was long enough to allow jobs that don't have ridiculous 1 hours to catch up to those who do, evening the playing field.

You don't need to map out BIS gear for *every situation*, just the optimal one. Having a stationary target that doesn't hit back and allowing 45minutes to keep buffs up, etc, seems pretty optimal to me. Find a TP set, WS set, see what comes out - like the reference made earlier to spreadsheets (which aren't available to all jobs and have their own set of 'problems' but are likely the best we can get). The point, stated from the beginning, is to "determine what each job's actual maximum theoretical output is" and see who ends up the highest.

Exactly. How is that possibly this hard to understand?

Monk

Bst first talking off 10% of the mobs hp instantly then spamming 99999 cloudsplitters into 99999 darknesses!

You misunderstood his point, people weren't picky about buffs because you picked a target that doesn't hit back. People mostly questioned about the conditions because certain jobs will not reach their max damage potential if attack is not capped. And certain job suffers from Uncapped attack more than another.




Buffs and fight duration are like one of the most important aspect in a theoretical dps discussion though.

I love theoretical dps discussions, personally. But I would create different conditions that allows every job to reach their max dps potential instead of only allowing certain job to.

So something like DRK with full AM3/scarlet/absorb/souleater bonus V.S RUN/SAM with embolden temper and capped attack.

But not conditions that allows DRK to keep full dmg bonus without penalty but leave RUN in attack Uncapped condition. That's just unfair. RUN probably can't even beat 1h if attack isn't capped.

It's also a hell lot easier to discuss every jobs peak dps instead of avg dps in 1hr of hitting a wall.

Facts

The point Nyarlko was making was that the scenario you stated was not realistic and a realistic "max dps" tier cannot be quantified no matter how you slice it, because the scenario does not exist and its a purposeless discussion. I guess for argument's and number's sake, you were looking to create a "vacuum setting" where the monster would not encumber one or several jobs due to status effects, a player would not have to worry about not being optimal without the proper buffs, being at an advantage/disadvantage due to their sp relevance, dying, etc... But the honest to god truth is, in FFXI, that theoretical scenario can only be answered by "It Depends". That's not the answer you wanted, I'm sorry.

How can you ask for max theoretical dps (something a spreadsheet would determine) if you cannot simulate this optimal theoretical scenario by any means? Its literally buff, monster, and fight-length dependent. Of COURSE people would be picky.

If the fight is albumen, for instance, and you have ballstowalls buffs, RUN would certainly be the best DD for that, because it can literally moonwalk through most (if not all) of the stuff it throws out. WAR and DRK would fare amazingly, up until they get hit with amnesia or something that stops them from being able to perform. In this case, "it depends".

If the fight is something where you have zero worries of taking hate and dying for 1 hour straight, WAR, DRK, SAM would be at the top no doubt. It still "depends".

You DO have to be specific. There isn't a "one-size fits all" scenario where one DD would shine.

I generally agree with OP that we should leave out stuns/Amnesia/survivability out of theoretical dps discussions. it's not unrealistic to leave that out in game anyways(Bolster vex+attunement+bar spell+SV Carol anyone?), and it is theoretical after all.

I do think in proper theoretical dps discussion, all job should have capped attack/acc and they should be allowed to use their offensive JA at max potency.

I agree with Warrior, but I feel like this magical scenario would still be biased in a way, for example, against DRK. DRK can deal an unbelievably stupid amount of damage with Dacnomania+Souleater with a 9999HP lead from Drain 3. They can also pile on Dread Spikes for survival, but it wouldn't be useful in this setting since the monster cannot attack back (so you lose damage from DS essentially). Furthermore, outside of Blood weapon, there isn't a way to cure yourself to repeat the process after SE vampires you, so this could "theoretically" only be used once. This puts DRK at a disadvantage heavily. You need to be specific in this setting because each job will have its advantages and disadvantages just due to innate job design. DRK can land probably 5-10k dmg swings a pop if properly buffed (for the entire duration of Souleater), allowed to have full HP at all times, maximized drain 3 HP pool. For 30 seconds, DRK can double its damage with Blood Weapon. But it loses out on competing with WAR, for example, because Soul Eater is not designed to be used in a vacuum without healing power. DRK even benefits greatly from things like Scarlet Delirium, and then has to spend time casting to get stat boosts.

I'm just arguing for discussion, but it's not always about "who can put out the most damage vs a target who cannot attack you". That scenario may only favor jobs who are geared to ONLY swing and attack. It's a tough discussion.

Doesn't favor DRK, for reasons I stated above.