You're the one that's going overboard with reducing the value -Enmity. I can pull like 5 quotes from this very thread showcasing this. It got to the point where it's almost insulting; even to people like me who runs with very little -Enmity.
Be my guest and pull 5 quotes that show how overboard I've gone. Call me out on that, not on these ridiculous things such as fast cast tiers. I think that as you try to search for those quotes, you'll find that in most cases you'd simply read words into my mouth, such as this:
"Ultimately I think each person should go through this process, and I know you all are probably sick of hearing me say this... but do not equip enmity down except as a last resort."
and replying with:
"Quite the contrary. Having a healthy "Enmity" buffer is a very smart thing to do; it helps you be ready for when sh*t hits the fan."
When the two points are not contrary at all. When I say "don't equip enmity down except as a last resort," I'm not referring to equipping the absolute bare minimum amount to avoid pulling hate. I'm actually referring to the process of evaluating your equipment and casting habits, which was the topic of that entire post. This should've been apparent if you'd actually read it. Said another way: You should first see if there are practical and safe ways to change your casting habits to reduce enmity, and only after exploring every possibility should you resort to Enmity Down. It should be your last ditch effort at keeping safe enmity levels, not your first as most WHM view it. Most WHM if they pull hate during a fight their automatic response is, "I need more Enmity Down!" This is not always the case. This is how it can become a crutch, when people take this point of view. *Note that I said "safe enmity levels," this is something I could see you skimming over and not really seeing for what it means. Safe enmity levels doesn't mean 5 VE away from pulling hate. It means safe. It means you should be able to react to situations and not be constrained by your enmity.
I reality, I think that our opinions are not very different, Drak. You just seem to think I'm saying some very outrageous things that I'm not saying at all, and do not comprehend the nature of the message I'm trying to convey. Everything you said could've been an addendum to my posts and I would've probably replied "I agree completely!" (well, except the fast cast tier stuff) but you instead decided to challenge me on your own false assumptions, leading to making us both look as fools.
Wrong. No matter the situation, that additional 15% Haste over the cap can't possibly help you, because of the game mechanics. Wearing -40 enmity as opposed to -30 can help you in some situations. You're right, it won't make a difference most of the time; it's more of a safety net.
This would be true in exceptional situations, such as low-manning a mob that hits really hard, or fighting a mob with hate reset moves, or really strange hate mechanics like Tanihwa. In those situations, your safety net often can't be too large. I use Enmity-35 on Long-Bowed Chariot and I love how after a Homing Missiles hits the MNKs, they can pull hate off me again with one weaponskill after 5+ minutes of me casting spells.
However, outside those situations, my analogy stands. If Enmity-30 would result in never pulling hate in a given battle, what good does Enmity-40 do? Now, I understand your conflict, as haste is a fixed target at 25%, while enmity levels required to avoid pulling hate in a battle is a constantly moving target. So in that respect, they are slightly different. Picking the right amount of enmity down is more of a trial-and-error thing. However, the point I was trying to make was that Enmity Down always has a point beyond which it will do nothing for you, except allow you to be more lazy and wasteful in your casting without drawing attention to yourself.
I work in the software development world and there's a metaphor we often refer to which is "lowering the water level." New software development methodologies will often do little to actually improve your ability to write good software. More often what it actually does is lower the "water level," such that any flaws in the process that existed before without being noticed may be visible with the new methodology, giving us the opportunity to correct them and improve our efficiency. In addition to allowing you to safely perform more actions, Enmity Down also increases the water level and conceals problems in your play style. That's why it's a good idea to lower the water level from time to time and see if anything gets exposed. There's nothing wrong with raising it right back up again if you find that the things which pull hate are things which really can't be safely avoided or done another way. However, it's important not to raise the water level as a reflex. It should be a very well-thought-over decision.
This is very simple mathematics. |A| + |B| > |A| when B ≠ 0.
You're arguing that because Curaga saved you some time (At the Expense of higher Enmity Peaks); you can now cast more stuff that will prevent further need of Enmity-intensive spells.
This is a bit harder to calculate, but the result AFAIK should still end the same.
Why? Because given an infinite time frame and same enmity consumption: the player that finishes his casting first will always have higher Enmity peak than the one that finished last; even if the final enmity results the same.
I'll borrow a page from Michelob on this one: Wrong.
Your assumption is based on a linear set of spells to cast. The whole point of what I was saying about Curaga can only be viewed if you look at the big picture. Let's say everyone gets hit for 250 damage, and you know more damage is coming in a minute or two. If you're doing individual Cure III's, then you'll be lucky to finish by the time the next wave of damage hits, and will be right back where you started spamming more Cures to keep your head above water, wasting MP and generating excessive enmity. If you instead use Curaga II, you will have a slight lull before the next wave of damage. You will be able to use this time to throw up some regens, Auspice, and other preventative spells. Thus, when the next wave of damage hits, your reaction won't need to be as severe as the person using single-target Cures as the regens and such will lower the severity of the situation for you. Thus, on the second wave of damage, you may cast a Curaga instead of Curaga II, while the single-target guy would still be spamming Cure III's and possibly IV's by this point if he gets too far behind.
So the correct version of your statement would be:
Given an infinite time frame, the same rate of enmity consumption, and the same rate of damage to the party
, the player that uses Curagas will be sacrificing higher peak enmity on the short term for lower overall enmity on the long term in addition to greater overall MP efficiency.