Relic Weapons just aren't that great...

[Reko]

The problem is, there is really nothing worthwhile about Spharai that warrants the resources it requires.

Been trying to say that this goes for all the relics, but people want to beleive.
Sure, you can get some use out of a few. But none will change the game anymore.

 

[Blancho]

Been trying to say that this goes for all the relics, but people want to beleive.
Sure, you can get some use out of a few. But none will change the game anymore.

Nothing has ever been game breaking. You see what RMT do with small numbers and shit for gear. It's all about strategy. You seen the Video of that RDM soloing what was it seiryu? One of the gods. Point is people like obtaining the best items in the game rather it be a Osode or a Mandau. No one gives a shit if it's game breaking or not they want it solely for their entertainment. DO YOU UNDERSTAND THAT YET? NO ONE SAID THEY WERE GAME BREAKING SO WHAT'S YOUR BEEF?

They cost more then they are worth ok? Big deal no one cares we want them because they are the best that's all that matters to us. Now leave us alone.

 

[Marajade]

Been trying to say that this goes for all the relics, but people want to beleive.
Sure, you can get some use out of a few. But none will change the game anymore.

Aegis changes strategys, its that good. Horn changes strategys, it's that good. Every other weapon (for meeles, not mages) performs better in a merit party or any melee event than any other obtainable weapon by a fair margin, the GKT even has HNM use. H2H are the only ones that do not improve over another obtainable weapon.

 

[Uzor]

Aegis changes strategys, its that good. Horn changes strategys, it's that good. Every other weapon (for meeles, not mages) performs better in a merit party or any melee event than any other obtainable weapon by a fair margin, the GKT even has HNM use. H2H are the only ones that do not improve over another obtainable weapon.

Neither Aegis nor Gjallhorn changes the strategy in any way. All it do is just allow one to do certain events with less people. Having a Gjallhorn won't simply mean you can change your entire strategy to melee burn Kirin in under 1 min.

Guess what? People can do that without Gjallhorn. You know why? Because Gjallhorn doesn't do anything for any buffs except for Ballad. And guess what? You can beat things without Gjallhorn. As I said before, it will only allow you to win things with less people then you normally have.

And H2H still is an improvement over other obtainable weapons of the same class. The bolded part is thus bullshit.

If you rely on relic weapons as part of the strategy, your shell sucks beyond anything measurable.

 

[Vilurum]

Aegis changes strategys, its that good. Horn changes strategys, it's that good. Every other weapon (for meeles, not mages) performs better in a merit party or any melee event than any other obtainable weapon by a fair margin, the GKT even has HNM use. H2H are the only ones that do not improve over another obtainable weapon.

I wouldn't say H2H do not improve *at all*, but I *would* say that you wouldn't be able to use your "by a fair margin" clause for H2H. In its case it's really only by a relatively narrow margin.

Neither Aegis nor Gjallhorn changes the strategy in any way. All it do is just allow one to do certain events with less people. Having a Gjallhorn won't simply mean you can change your entire strategy to melee burn Kirin in under 1 min.

Guess what? People can do that without Gjallhorn. You know why? Because Gjallhorn doesn't do anything for any buffs except for Ballad. And guess what? You can beat things without Gjallhorn. As I said before, it will only allow you to win things with less people then you normally have.

Is that bolded part *not* a change to strategy? At least insofar as FFXI *has* changes to strategy? (Because practically every fight in this game boils down to "tank and spank with some optional crowd control".)

Perhaps "change strategy" isn't quite the right term... but Aegis/Gjallarhorn do make fights significantly safer and easier with bigger margin for error (or unexpected problems that aren't anyone's error). A tank who's that much harder to kill? MP users with that much more MP to burn?

So yeah, I wouldn't say it changes the original strategy, but it certainly makes it much easier to execute, or makes it possible to execute it with fewer numbers. In a different way from simply having a little bit more damage output (which makes for the same *difficulty* of the fight while it's going on, but a slightly shorter fight).

And Kirin's not exactly a good example, seeing as he can just be TP-burned to death without relics or indeed without anything resembling a strategy other than "kill fast".

 

[Skaw]

I wouldn't say H2H do not improve *at all*, but I *would* say that you wouldn't be able to use your "by a fair margin" clause for H2H. In its case it's really only by a relatively narrow margin.

Bingo. They're better. They aren't 150 million gil + time spent getting attestation and shard better, though. They aren't even worth the very minor effort spent upgrading to Militant Knuckles better.

Every other weapon has a significant boost in power over others. Spharai don't.

 

[Uzor]

I wouldn't say H2H do not improve *at all*, but I *would* say that you wouldn't be able to use your "by a fair margin" clause for H2H. In its case it's really only by a relatively narrow margin.



Is that bolded part *not* a change to strategy? At least insofar as FFXI *has* changes to strategy? (Because practically every fight in this game boils down to "tank and spank with some optional crowd control".)

Perhaps "change strategy" isn't quite the right term... but Aegis/Gjallarhorn do make fights significantly safer and easier with bigger margin for error (or unexpected problems that aren't anyone's error). A tank who's that much harder to kill? MP users with that much more MP to burn?

So yeah, I wouldn't say it changes the original strategy, but it certainly makes it much easier to execute, or makes it possible to execute it with fewer numbers. In a different way from simply having a little bit more damage output (which makes for the same *difficulty* of the fight while it's going on, but a slightly shorter fight).

And Kirin's not exactly a good example, seeing as he can just be TP-burned to death without relics or indeed without anything resembling a strategy other than "kill fast".

A change is strategy is something larger, such as MNK tank instead of PLD. Jormungand is handled pretty much the exact same way in a 18-man alliance a 12-man alliance. Only the latter is much harder to do unless you have Gjallhorn. It doesn't really actually change the strategy.

If we're going pure damage difference etc. then Axe is probably one of the best relics. Great WS, which also causes a high intimidation rate, and increases damage over the other weapons by a lot for BST. Thus, by your definition, its one of the best relics.

 

[Bajaratt]

And H2H still is an improvement over other obtainable weapons of the same class. The bolded part is thus bullshit.

It's rather sad just how little you actually know about monk, and yet you're acting like you wrote the book on the job. The "improvement" is almost non-existant, therefore they are the worst relic weapons, because you get the least out of them compared to other weapons. You think they're great weapons, when their improvement over destroyers is negligable; but you're ignoring that because it's monk that can wear them. You're rating the job highly, not the weapon.

 

[Dowzer]

And how often do you actually have other melees meleeing in end-game anyway? Jailer of Love you mainy use SAM's to SC, hence why I said Amano is a good relic. THF's do a whole lot less damage then SAM's on Jailer of Love, and they also need to build TP.

Those were from stealing Boost. I don't know how they did it because I assume most people would dispel it right away? Anyway, I'm sure SAM are more efficient at building TP to swap in for a skillchain but I wouldn't say THF do a whole lot less damage.

 

[Blancho]

LOL pawned.

 

[Uzor]

It's rather sad just how little you actually know about monk, and yet you're acting like you wrote the book on the job. The "improvement" is almost non-existant, therefore they are the worst relic weapons, because you get the least out of them compared to other weapons. You think they're great weapons, when their improvement over destroyers is negligable; but you're ignoring that because it's monk that can wear them. You're rating the job highly, not the weapon.

You can try to think I know little about MNK if you want. But you're still narrowminded.

Last I checked, and improvement is still an improvement, which I've been saying for a long time. They're good because of how strong MNK is. A MNK will put the Spharai to use during things that other melees won't to the same extent. And hence why they are good.

A relic weapon isn't more good because it is very strong. Its better if it can be useful in different situations.

Those were from stealing Boost. I don't know how they did it because I assume most people would dispel it right away? Anyway, I'm sure SAM are more efficient at building TP to swap in for a skillchain but I wouldn't say THF do a whole lot less damage.

Yeah. You know how strong his boost is? Naturally THF is useful for Jailer of Love because you can steal the boost to WS :wacko: Because its completely beneficial to keep the boost on for the THF to steal it 1/5 of the time every 5 min, right?

 

[Skaw]

No ones saying they aren't good.

Everyones saying they're the worst relic, performance-upgrade wise. Which is completely true.

 

[Marajade]

Neither Aegis nor Gjallhorn changes the strategy in any way. All it do is just allow one to do certain events with less people. Having a Gjallhorn won't simply mean you can change your entire strategy to melee burn Kirin in under 1 min.

Guess what? People can do that without Gjallhorn. You know why? Because Gjallhorn doesn't do anything for any buffs except for Ballad. And guess what? You can beat things without Gjallhorn. As I said before, it will only allow you to win things with less people then you normally have.

And H2H still is an improvement over other obtainable weapons of the same class. The bolded part is thus bullshit.

If you rely on relic weapons as part of the strategy, your shell sucks beyond anything measurable.

"Strategy changing" means that they change the way in which you do things. You now don't need 3 tanks for Tiamat, you just need the Aegis plus the backup in case things go terribly wrong. With the Gjallhorn, you can have that much more MP, thus be able to cast that many more spells, thus kill it that much faster.

You view it as making the impossible possible, where it just takes the standard way of doing it, and then going beyond that to do it in a way that would have not worked without it.

 

[Uzor]

"Strategy changing" means that they change the way in which you do things. You now don't need 3 tanks for Tiamat, you just need the Aegis plus the backup in case things go terribly wrong. With the Gjallhorn, you can have that much more MP, thus be able to cast that many more spells, thus kill it that much faster.

You view it as making the impossible possible, where it just takes the standard way of doing it, and then going beyond that to do it in a way that would have not worked without it.

Three tanks? Who on earth uses three tanks on Tiamat anyway? We've always used 1-2 taks without Gjallhorn. Using 2 tanks instead of 3 isn't a change in strategy, its the norm. wtf have you been smoking?

Casting more spells, yes, its an increase, but its not a change in strategy.

 

[Legomyeggo]

Three tanks? Who on earth uses three tanks on Tiamat anyway? We've always used 1-2 taks without Gjallhorn. Using 2 tanks instead of 3 isn't a change in strategy, its the norm. wtf have you been smoking?

Casting more spells, yes, its an increase, but its not a change in strategy.

Now I know this might be hard to comprehend, but chances are that not everyone uses the same strategy for everything. I know, I know. It seems out-of-this-world, but it might just be possible.

 

[Uzor]

Now I know this might be hard to comprehend, but chances are that not everyone uses the same strategy for everything. I know, I know. It seems out-of-this-world, but it might just be possible.

I know this might be hard to comprehend, but I never said everyone uses the same strategy. I'm aware that people might not know that a question mark actually means something is a question and not a statement, so I'll repeat myself.

3 tanks? who on earth uses 3 tanks on Tiamat anyway?

edit: and before you metion it, the statement I made were "Using 2 tanks instead of 3 isn't a change in strategy, its the norm.", which can be seen as a statement, yes. But it was more of a beliteling insult if his shell actually need 3 tanks to stay alive. Hence the follow-up question "wtf have you been smoking?"

 

[Bajaratt]

You can try to think I know little about MNK if you want. But you're still narrowminded.

It's not hard, you keep showing how little you know throughout this thread. Hell, you're trying to tell career monks that you know more than they do. The fact that not one person has agreed with you, should have been a clue; but you hang with pchan, so things like logic just escape you.

Last I checked, and improvement is still an improvement, which I've been saying for a long time. They're good because of how strong MNK is. A MNK will put the Spharai to use during things that other melees won't to the same extent. And hence why they are good.

Skaw posted about the DPS, they're actually worse so there's not even an improvement.

They're good because of how strong the job that can use them is, that doesn't mean the weapons are good at all. By that same logic, every weapon a monk can use is good: staves, clubs, and the shitty hand-to-hand weapons that no one ever uses. You're completely ignoring the lack of merits on the weapons and focusing on the job that can use them.

A relic weapon isn't more good because it is very strong. Its better if it can be useful in different situations.

A monk would actually put Spharai to less use than other melee's relic weapons, since monk doesn't get to melee in big fights unless you're zerging.

The ONLY situation where Spharai would be better is counter-tanking, which monks don't do anymore since they all sub ninja nowadays. Plus, with Cross-counters/retaliators, Spharai lose most of their uniqueness in utility; although they would be an upgrade from retaliators, definitely.

 

[Vilurum]

Yeah. You know how strong his boost is? Naturally THF is useful for Jailer of Love because you can steal the boost to WS :wacko: Because its completely beneficial to keep the boost on for the THF to steal it 1/5 of the time every 5 min, right?

Last I checked, JAs fired off faster than Dispel, assuming equal reaction time on both the part of the THF and the presumed-RDM. A dispeller should still try to Dispel without waiting (can't wait too long anyway, it's used - or hopefully gets wasted on a shadow or possibly a whiff - on the next hit after all), but a THF should still *try* to ace them out and nab the effect for themselves.

 

[neophytal]

this thread... is very good humor.

 

[Zoolander]

3 tanks? who on earth uses 3 tanks on Tiamat anyway?

Pretty much the norm for the last year and a half I've been killing Tiamat. Pretty much the same goes for the only two other LS that kill her. Obviously all three groups have used one or two tanks for extended or all parts of the fight. If I had my choice, I'd take three tanks. Its pretty much failsafe and you can let your DDs go all out without ever really worrying about hate loss.

Not really sure how you qualify as a Tiamat expert either.

Anyways, carry on this awsome conversation about how good mnk relic is...