Talk:Saber Wars Event Re-run/@comment-29027964-20180316020519/@comment-28209103-20180318202612

@Islandking, If I get to bad mood there's no reason for me not to express that, and nothing put me in worse mood than 2 things, people who said "You're wrong! I don't know why you're wrong, but you are!", and people who when I said X completely ignored it, keep going on with whatever I said and worse even putting word to my mouth.

However I have to apologize for making you read that wall of text, yes your conclusion is correct at least it is indeed what I said However one thing I might add in the discussion of MHX 1st skill is that there is the thing about delay and cooldown that need to be took notice if you want to classify it to the 2nd type, which in your word is that the type that are used to buy time for enemy NP.

I might have touched this delay and cooldown problem before in nutshell but to illustrate I'll draw some example to elaborate some point to make my position clearer. This will be a bonafide wall of text but to make sure some rockhead around here understand my logic I really need to spell everything from A to Z for this case.

Suppose to say we're going to stun enemy with any skill stun, let's for this case use my general segmentation of 1st type (henceforth will be called AoE stun) and 2nd type (henceforth shall be called ST stun)

Here I draw a simple illustration, to make reading easier MHX, AoE, and ST are reffering to the skill. The other three are enemy type. Since I'm sure you understand bout general stun policy  I'll skip the hypothetical 1st move usage for ST. Also this is assuming that enemy doesn't have NP charge, if they do use your own judgement since there's no such thing as rigid rule in using a skill.

When you use ST skill as delay tactic, it'll be ready exactly when Rider/Caster NP are ready, it'll be one turn late for Saber/Lancer and 2 turns late for Archer/Assassin. In practice it means you'll always in time to stop Rider/Caster NP, It is possible to stop Saber/Lancer NP in a row if you have one more stall tool, and it is hard to stop Archer NP in a row because it is rare to have 3 delay tool in a team at once, but it's not impossible if you're fully geared stall team.

The gap between AoE vs ST stun in stalling as you can see is wide in term of timing, if we add the inconsistency of 60% proc rate then it is better to capitalize the buff and the number of skill used in battle. It is not that I wanted to use the so called "debuff logic" in stun, rather IT IS THE MOST OPTIMAL WAY seeing it from practical perspective. ​​​​​I won't touch why you should use AoE stun early again but I'll just highlight that MHX are 2 turns slower than usual AoE stun so it'll be pretty late when it's ready again even if we use it early. considering it's skill without any debuff/buff effect then let's assume it's a bad idea to use it this way generally.

Therefore MHX skill might be used for 2nd scenario as stall tactic to buy time. However still on the topic of cooldown MHX, this is where Delay become fatal.. 1st of all average AoE Np cooldown are 1 tick slower than Rider, 2 ticks slower for Saber/Lancer and just in time to stop Archer/Assassin IF AoE is even intended to be used that way as Danakane suggested. In practice this means it's possible to stop Rider Np twice in a row, it's hard to stop Saber/Lancer NP twice in a row and it's only possible to stop Archer NP once every 2 NP bar. THIS IS FOR STANDARD AoE case.

However MHX skill have fatal weakness in Delay, as you've seen above I even compensate the delay by using it early like what Danakane suggested, it might looks not tad different from average AoE skill but REMEMBER if you use the skill you still need to wait 1 turns before it proc, therefore it's even 1 turn slower than AVERAGE AoE which is already 1 turn slower than average ST stun. If we put it into word then it means it's 2 turns late for Rider enemy, 3 turns late for Saber/Lancer, and 1 turns late for Archer Assassin 2nd NP. If I need to make it clearer it means it's hard to stop Rider enemy NP twice in a row, it is impossible to stop Saber/Lancer enemy stun in a row and it's possible to stop Archer/Assassin NP once every 2 Np.

This is why I said Danakane doesn't understand the implication of Delay on timing and are half-assed in the comparison. '''As  illustrated MHX skill are slow, If I expand the curve then by the time normal ST Stun could stall NP twice, MHX skill can only barely do it once WITH one delay support. Even if we think of it as pure "Stun logic" as Danakane put it then it's only half as efficient as proper ST Stun.'''

Even if you insist of putting MHX and Shuten toe to toe in "Stun" logic then in exchange for 20% more procentage of stun chance MHX skill are 1 tempo slower than standard AoE. This is demerit because in exchange for more proc chance this skill are too slow to stop anything properly. '''By the time the cooldown are over you need 2 additional stall kit to stop Rider, you're better off stalling Saber/Lancer 3rd NP because there's rarely team with 3 stall kit, and even to stop Archer 3rd NP you need 1 additional stall kit. It doesn't matter if your proc rate are higher IF you cannot use that proc rate efficiently.'''

That alone is already a huge demerit for mere 20% stun bonus, however it still carried further demerit of having nothing on it when it missed. '''Basically as I already said, it carried the worst out of ST of having no 2nd skill  and the worst of AoE of long cooldown. '''

Finally once again I said that to compare something you need a clear measurement standard. Contary to what Danakane believe or rather the straw man he build, I never once said nor wrote anything that imply I prefer Shuten to MHX skill because of the debuff existence. As I already made it clear in this long ass explanation and as I already repeated over and over, the reason why that skill is bad is due to the DELAY, and COOLDOWN demerit  on top of her cost which is why I said don't be half assed when comparing it'''. '''

and FYI This is still a watered down version of what is in my head limited only to what Danakane asked; Only about 1st skill and 1st skill only. When I said I try to keep it short before it literally means I am trying to keep it short, ain't this kind of explanation too long? However I just need to make it straight that contary to what someone actually believe I am not labelling the skill bad because of the missing debuff rate, incidentally I already said this long ass paragraph in really simple manner as my very first description of this skill which is :

'''[1st skill is DELAYED stun with 80% RNG chance at level 10 with 8 turns COOLDOWN.. it's practically useless stall kit with chance for RNG to screw you.. highly undependable skill.]'''

which is why I repeatedly said that stop focusing on the RNG chance, it's just one keyword among three! Danakane doesn't even try to address other keyword which incidentally is the defintion of using red herring to divert the discussion to a lesser point that he feels confident at. He's still keeping the plead to subjectivism, even tho I already put my measuring tool on the table not once he looked at it till I urge him to. He tried to plead to authority as if truth or even objectivism have positive relation with being in authority, and finally he assumed that I said a lesser version of what I said as explained above even tho I already tried to be clear about it more than once, on top of that he called me "Dishonest" based on his own straw man belief.

I am trying to be tolerant but there's limit to how much I can try civil when the other party doesn't even try to. I am man of my word, when I accuse someone of something it means I know where and what exactly I am referring to, When I say I am sure of X then I'm sure of it, when I'm not sure I say I'm not sure, if I don't know I'll say I don't know. When I say it's shit then I have clear reason and measurement/comparison on it that are acceptable by logic, and not by preferences or whatever.