pod88kk wrote: »

I feel that Xynode builds are more for the 'I'll play the way I want to play' players....the 'Woohoo we finished vet hel ra in just under 3 hours, GG everyone' kinda players.

Well, you'd be wrong. The only time I've seen a vet trial with Xy take more than an hour was when half the team was completely new to vet trials. In general, when he's running with his own guilds, his trial runs go very smoothly.

I have nothing but respect for Xynode he has some great builds and gives a lot of good information in his videos.

That said, I can't help but laugh at the hypocrisy of the meta haters, they call meta followers sheep for following the meta because its the meta while they hate the meta simply because its the meta. Pot meet kettle.

ZOS_RogerJ wrote: »

Remember, per the community rules, it’s okay and very normal to disagree with others, and even to debate, but provoking conflict, baiting, inciting, mocking, etc. is never acceptable in the official The Elder Scrolls Online community. If you do not have something constructive or meaningful to add to a discussion, we strongly recommend you refrain from posting in that thread.

Only Liko matters...

Cloudless wrote: »

ZOS_RogerJ wrote: »

Remember, per the community rules, it’s okay and very normal to disagree with others, and even to debate, but provoking conflict, baiting, inciting, mocking, etc. is never acceptable in the official The Elder Scrolls Online community. If you do not have something constructive or meaningful to add to a discussion, we strongly recommend you refrain from posting in that thread.

starkerealm wrote: »

therift wrote: »

It's interesting to run basic statistical analyses on some of these 'dummy parses', because doing so often demonstrates the data sets are too small to draw reliable conclusions or that the variance in the data sets exceeds the difference between the alleged 'best in slot' versus the runners up... or both.

*shrugs*

Even within the range of parses, you can already start to see the issue here. Certain sets like Reli and Siroria will parse very well, because the set mechanics are trivial to maintain in a contained environment. When you try to take those into the wild, some content will allow you to just stand and deliver, without undermining the sets, while other content will completely eviscerate them. IE: The twins in vMoL.

I don't get the point of this comment. Nobody who understands this game would use Rele on Twins anyways so using that as an argument against Rele doesn't make sense. Sure it's bad in situations it wasn't designed for, but it's still best in the situations where you can make it work (a lot honestly).

People swap gear for fights in endgame and pick whats best for each situation. It's totally normal to have a different setup for almost every fight in a score run on PC and even on consoles they have fixed points in raids where they swap gear around.

Doing DPS tests on the best possible setup in the best possible situation simply shows you what CAN be achieved. The goal in raids is to get as close to these optimal situations as possible. By simple logic someone who can hit maximum possible DPS in such situations is also more likely to hit higher numbers under mechanics than someone who can not.


If you want to talk viability sure you can run a lot of the sets in the game in many weird and quirky setups and also beat all the trials (even HMs) with it. However if you want to talk about what's BiS there are hard numbers and math out there clearly indicating what is best and what is not.

NupidStoob wrote: »

I don't get the point of this comment.

It's an example, though not a singluar one. A surprising number of players do not, in fact, adjust their build when they're moving through content.

NupidStoob wrote: »

However if you want to talk about what's BiS there are hard numbers and math out there clearly indicating what is best and what is not.

I point of fact, there really isn't best in slot in ESO. Individual player performance is the determinative factor, not gear. At that point you can say, "oh, hey, I cleared with this setup," and that's valid for that objective, but saying, "this is BiS," is undermined by your own comment that players will adjust their loadout as they progress through content.

So, is Reli "Best in Slot," or is it utter garbage in 80% of endgame content? Because, if Best in Slot was a thing in ESO, and was supported by math, you wouldn't have this, "oh, hey, it's best, except when it's not." Furthermore, the people who have been arguing for crunching the numbers, don't really have the tools need to crunch the numbers in any meaningful sense. They can report what they see on a dummy. They can report what they see in a live situation with a ton of uncontrolled variables and a margin of error that makes the collected data meaningless. But, they can't provide anything useful to the discussion based solely on, "the math," especially given their math is reliably faulty.

starkerealm wrote: »

NupidStoob wrote: »

I don't get the point of this comment.

It's an example, though not a singluar one. A surprising number of players do not, in fact, adjust their build when they're moving through content.

NupidStoob wrote: »

However if you want to talk about what's BiS there are hard numbers and math out there clearly indicating what is best and what is not.

I point of fact, there really isn't best in slot in ESO. Individual player performance is the determinative factor, not gear. At that point you can say, "oh, hey, I cleared with this setup," and that's valid for that objective, but saying, "this is BiS," is undermined by your own comment that players will adjust their loadout as they progress through content.

So, is Reli "Best in Slot," or is it utter garbage in 80% of endgame content? Because, if Best in Slot was a thing in ESO, and was supported by math, you wouldn't have this, "oh, hey, it's best, except when it's not." Furthermore, the people who have been arguing for crunching the numbers, don't really have the tools need to crunch the numbers in any meaningful sense. They can report what they see on a dummy. They can report what they see in a live situation with a ton of uncontrolled variables and a margin of error that makes the collected data meaningless. But, they can't provide anything useful to the discussion based solely on, "the math," especially given their math is reliably faulty.

There are no universally BiS sets for all content, but for specific scenarios there are definitely significant differences between sets that can be proven mathematically and with evidence (CMX). For example, sets like Auroran's Thunder, Undaunted Infiltrator, and Unfathomable Darkness (all advocated for on the website), are all very bad sets for raiding (and most/all content in general). There are a whole host of objectively superior sets for virtually any scenario. Other build aspects like robust jewels, WD enchant on an uninfused front bar, 5/1/1 on stam, IA on DPS, sword (??), infused large pieces of armor with shadow mundus, double lightning on a templar build, race against time, etc etc are HIGHLY questionable. Even for casual builds there are just tons of things that could be optimized better and perform objectively better. There absolutely ARE sets and setups that are objectively BiS for specific fights, and endgame PvE players are going to collect most of them and swap between them depending on the fight, group comp, etc.

lassitershawn wrote: »

There are no universally BiS sets for all content, but for specific scenarios there are definitely significant differences between sets that can be proven mathematically and with evidence (CMX). For example, sets like Auroran's Thunder, Undaunted Infiltrator, and Unfathomable Darkness (all advocated for on the website), are all very bad sets for raiding (and most/all content in general)...

I'm going to stop you right there, because you just told me everything I needed to hear. You haven't tested any of this. You saw Undaunted Infiltrator and went, "that's a trash set," and moved on with your day. Or, you trusted in someone's math who also didn't test the set, they looked at the set, examined it as a stam set, and went, "well, this is trash."

I'm not going to bother defending each of Xy's builds. He presents how they work on his site, and if you really want to understnd how they work, you can watch the videos or read the articles.

Difference is, he actually tests his builds. He tests a lot of variations, before signing off on a build. It results in some oddball set picks, but the builds actually deliver.

But, I mean, since you know what's BiS, just go ask him if he's thought about using Elegant instead of UI 20 or 30 times.

lassitershawn wrote: »

Ok if you or him or anyone else using his magsorc build (heck ANY of his builds) can beat my magsorc raid parses I'll concede they are good builds Seems fair enough.

Well, if you want, he's on stream right now. You can go and ask him on Twitch.

starkerealm wrote: »

NupidStoob wrote: »

I don't get the point of this comment.

It's an example, though not a singluar one. A surprising number of players do not, in fact, adjust their build when they're moving through content.

NupidStoob wrote: »

However if you want to talk about what's BiS there are hard numbers and math out there clearly indicating what is best and what is not.

I point of fact, there really isn't best in slot in ESO. Individual player performance is the determinative factor, not gear. At that point you can say, "oh, hey, I cleared with this setup," and that's valid for that objective, but saying, "this is BiS," is undermined by your own comment that players will adjust their loadout as they progress through content.

So, is Reli "Best in Slot," or is it utter garbage in 80% of endgame content? Because, if Best in Slot was a thing in ESO, and was supported by math, you wouldn't have this, "oh, hey, it's best, except when it's not." Furthermore, the people who have been arguing for crunching the numbers, don't really have the tools need to crunch the numbers in any meaningful sense. They can report what they see on a dummy. They can report what they see in a live situation with a ton of uncontrolled variables and a margin of error that makes the collected data meaningless. But, they can't provide anything useful to the discussion based solely on, "the math," especially given their math is reliably faulty.

Playerskill is the determining factor in DPS? Yes, but only until a certain level. Rotations pan out more or less the same with equally skilled players and then the determining factor is sets. Sets will provide a clear set of advantages in pretty hard numbers and it's easy to compare and conclude which is better.

Again: No endgame player will claim that a set is best in slot for all situations so I am not sure why you are making it a point. Everybody in endgame is aware that some sets perform better under different conditions. Your entire argument is basically that there is not a single set that is best for all situations which nobody claimed in the first place.

Since Rele is getting brought up a lot: Rele is the strongest set you can run on stamina single target fights where you can maintain the stacks. These are it's conditions and it's quite many fights where this is achievable:

All craglorn bossfights
MoL first and last boss
HoF first, second, last

That's more than half of the trial boss fights currently in the game. If you do AS+0 you can also use it on both sidebosses and in CR some groups dedicate one DPS to always stay on Z'maja which can also run this.

What I never understand about discussions like this is how easily people dismiss the testing and efforts of endgame players. Many groups spend tens to hundreds of hours in a trial for score running and during that time they will test different setups and compare their results over and over. It's not like some people suddenly pulled some random numbers out of their butts and acted as if that was the best. Meta doesn't just develop over night. There is way more testing involved than a single individual on a dummy could even hope to compare with.

@starkerealm , no intended offence. I'm genuinely intrigued at your frequent attempts to throw shade at people like Asian and Alcast. You have made numerous snide references to 'the math.'

I read these:

starkerealm wrote: »

... you know, unlike the guy you quoted and agreed with, who frequently advocates for BiS (with dubious choices) and says, "I did the math," as the only justifications for his opinions. (Frequently, with fundamental errors in methodology.)

starkerealm wrote: »

... Furthermore, the people who have been arguing for crunching the numbers, don't really have the tools need to crunch the numbers in any meaningful sense. They can report what they see on a dummy. They can report what they see in a live situation with a ton of uncontrolled variables and a margin of error that makes the collected data meaningless. But, they can't provide anything useful to the discussion based solely on, "the math," especially given their math is reliably faulty.

I'm genuinely confident to say ... Asian, Alcast (and even Xynode!) are THEORYcrafting, and/or buildCRAFTING. Emphasis on THEORY and CRAFT.

It should be clear to any reasonable person that these people do not have 'all the tools' needed to 'crunch' the numbers in any 'meaningful sense.' In every video by Asian I have ever watched, he makes it pretty clear that what he presents is pretty much nothing more than a snapshot that should not be taken as gospel, won't be perfect in all scenarios, and is a theoretical 'best' in answer to some question (e.g., 'what is the best build for a magDK for Vet HM trial?')

I'll note: ESOLogs just might give Asian, Alcast, et. al., a lot of those needed 'tools.'

Shouldn't it be accepted that 'theory' and 'craft' are not always perfect?

Since we KNOW none of us have all the meaningful data, shouldn't it be clearly obvious there will be statistical anomalies? Particularly to anyone who appears to (claim to) have an understanding of statistics?

Shouldn't your shade be reserved for the people who ignore the clear disclaimers and parrot stupid, instead of tossing it off on the forums on the content creators? (And, yeah, that barb goes to the people who cannot see the merit in others' work, like Xynode's as well).

Here is the genuine intrigue: what did Asian do to you personally, that you throw so much shade at every opportunity?

NupidStoob wrote: »

What I never understand about discussions like this is how easily people dismiss the testing and efforts of endgame players. Many groups spend tens to hundreds of hours in a trial for score running and during that time they will test different setups and compare their results over and over. It's not like some people suddenly pulled some random numbers out of their butts and acted as if that was the best. Meta doesn't just develop over night. There is way more testing involved than a single individual on a dummy could even hope to compare with.

This is something that needs repeating, meta isn't simply pulled out of some random person's posterior. Xynode tests all of his own builds? Thats great, there are entire guilds dedicated to testing and developing the meta.

jazsper77 wrote: »

Give it a rest , your not that good and nobody cares about your BAD ARSE builds. There only great in your mind .
Beta/ Console launch , 2 platform , 4 server player and I’ve never heard of you. Xynode I have , btw how many subs your channel got ?

8,699 more than your's?

TheInfernalRage wrote: »

Children. Behave.

No kidding. Sheesh.