Are Rangers really powerful?

[Lynsy]

Now, here I will admit that the damage gap likely would be somewhat closed if I had had a less insanely good tank. I would debate that a MNK is the second best tank in the game, depending on mob type/con level, but that's a whole different discussion--just follow me on it.
MNKs have a lot of advantages in the hate keeping department. With WAR subs, their hate generating tactics are nearly identical to WAR/MNK tanks at this level with the additional fact that hitting twice for 40 will generate more hate than hitting once for 80. All in all, I only pulled hate off the MNK, even when being tricked on, a handful of times and I tend to be a arrow-spam fiend. If I had a WAR tank, I don't think I could have done quite as much damage--but not 1/3 less. If I had had a PLD tank, it probably would have been a toss up with the MNK granted they were both 37.
But, if the tank didn't need SATA to do their job to begin with, then the tank can put up with an insane amount of hate generation on my part.

[imac2much]

Originally posted by Spider-Dan
How the f*ck can you accuse me of "selective reading" when you are quoting me IN THE MIDDLE OF A SENTENCE? Try quoting the ACTUAL ENTIRE SENTENCE I SAID!

Good job, genius. I quoted your entire paragraph about 2 or 3 other times in the past few pages. Too bad you weren't able to see them. My posts are long enough, so I didn't want to keep quoting the ENTIRE THING MULTIPLE TIMES just so you can finally lay your eyes on it.

Originally posted by Spider-Dan
Based on different parsing I have done with my THF and my RNG, I honestly think that from 15-~45ish THF is the most damaging DD in the game, but doesn't get much credit for it. (note: From 30-32 a gun RNG would probably outdamage THF.)

This assumes a party where THF is allowed to do max damage. Specifically, I mean a party with a good tank (one that doesn't need SATA to do their job). In these parties, THF can drop two SA(+TA) in the first 30 seconds or so (one on tank, one on other DD), and it's really hard for any other DD to overcome that huge lead.

Nice job going on a tangent again. To mimic your own eloquent words, why the f*ck does this matter? That's your post right there (without the 3rd paragraph addressing whether its what THF true purpose is or not). This is STILL NOT THE SAME AS YOUR NEW CLAIM:

Originally posted by Spider-Dan
In a PT with THF and [other DD], THF should outdamage [other DD] if he tricks onto [other DD].

You don't realize this is different? You are intentionally putting a limit on the other RNG. This isn't the same thing to say "THF tricking on both tank and DD is the most damaging DD in the game at 15-45." You are comparing your THF to two different things: 1) any other DD from 15-45 (including RNG/WAR getting a higher hate ceiling from having a THF in PT) and 2) a DD getting tricked on. How can you say that RNG/WAR isn't fair? Just because he's allowed to do more damage with the THF tricking on the tank multiple times?

SO WHAT?
Your claim is that thf is most damaging DD period if your conditions are allowed (THF trick on DD and tank, 3/3 pt). This puts NO conditions on the other DDs you are comparing THF to, unless you are now adding even MORE conditions. Thus, I see no reason why you cannot compare your THF (working at full potential) to a RNG/WAR (working at full potential with a THF in the PT). Yes, he is benefitted by the THF in the PT, whereas the THF is not actually benefitted as much by the RNG. So what? When did you ever place conditions on the other DD's? RNG/WAR + THF is not rare in a RNG+THF PT. It is much more reasonable for the RNG/WAR to turn the mob at will whenever the THF wants to trick onto the tank, than having the THF trick onto the RNG. So I am not bringing up some strange rare situation.

The problem is, of course, that the RNG/WAR will then outdamage your THF. I guess that's why you added new conditions to THE OTHER DD's you are comparing THF to.

I thought your only conditions were on your THF? Make up your mind.

Originally posted by ClydeArrowny
PT setup RNG+THF+TANK+DD+mage+mage
Thf pulls with a low D boomerang. Tank vokes. Thf fuido(SATA) on the second DD(will not give tank more hate and tank should be able to pull hate back soon enough.) When time comes around thf does second fuido on other DD; tank should have no trouble keeping hate by now if hes good enough.
This allows thf to do all his fuido dmg and not give the tank a higher hate ceiling. Note this is for test purposes only and is not most efficient in EXP PT.

This is a good idea. What are your complaints to this, Dan? It neither gives the tank a higher hate ceiling, nor does it intentionally limit my damage. It also allows you to fulfill your SATA potential.

I have a PLD in mind to tank, I will ask him later. I will ask some friends to be mages too, and I could probably find someone to be your trick buddy (4th DD). We can especially instruct him to either 1) use crappy weapons or fish mithka or something or 2) not even attack, just be there to be your trick buddy. This guarantees the TANK will still be the main aggro holder, and I don't get to do more damage than usual. What are your complaints now?

[Cat]

just take him to emptiness but I doubt he's found the time to get to the level 40 restrict areas with all the time he spends defending THF here. (by the way anyone notice he never addressed my point about THF tricking on a DD to the point the DD has to hold back is actually detrimental to the Total damage output of the party?) I did bring it up about 5 times.

If were talking about damage potential, there is no hate ceiling... The ranger should fire continuously until the mob dies, and rely on utsusemi and the WHM to keep you alive long enough to kill the mob also assume that we have good enough MP regen to keep that pace up indefinatly. You could also say that your assuming the tank wont loose hate no matter what. at least not long enough for it to affect the party negativly. Seems we are making the assumtion that we have a horrible tank horrible MP regen and a horrible WHM. If this is the case you're practically having the RNG solo the mob. We dont assume the THF gets bad party members that mess up Trick Attack... why do we assume the RNG gets them?

[Spider-Dan]

Originally posted by imac2much
Good job, genius. I quoted your entire paragraph about 2 or 3 other times in the past few pages. Too bad you weren't able to see them. My posts are long enough, so I didn't want to keep quoting the ENTIRE THING MULTIPLE TIMES just so you can finally lay your eyes on it.

Removing the first part of that sentence, where I refer to my source for why I made that statement, changes its meaning. By quoting me in the middle of a sentence, you're making it look like I'm making a blanket statement, when I'm not.

I specifically said that based on specific logs I had, THF did the most relative damage. I then detailed the situation under which I obtained those logs (THF being able to trick on tank and other DD), and almost immediately clarified that I was only talking about 3/3 parties. Nowhere did I claim that THF outdamages everyone in every scenario from 15-45, yet you have repeatedly quoted bits and pieces out of my original post to try to make it look like I did.

I don't want to hear your crowing any more about selective reading and putting words in others' mouths when you do it too. Lots of people on this forum do it; you're just the only one who goes on a crusade about it.

This is STILL NOT THE SAME AS YOUR NEW CLAIM:

For the 3rd? 4th? time, RNG and THF don't have to be in the same party. If you don't want the RNG to be tricked on, parse the RNG in a party without a THF.

How can you say that RNG/WAR isn't fair? Just because he's allowed to do more damage with the THF tricking on the tank multiple times?

SO WHAT?
Your claim is that thf is most damaging DD period if your conditions are allowed (THF trick on DD and tank, 3/3 pt). This puts NO conditions on the other DDs you are comparing THF to, unless you are now adding even MORE conditions. Thus, I see no reason why you cannot compare your THF (working at full potential) to a RNG/WAR (working at full potential with a THF in the PT).

That's fine with me, but it opens up the possibility that RNG needs a helper THF to outdamage another THF. I think that if the situation were reversed, and THF needed a helper RNG to outdamage another RNG, you would immediately use that to disqualify THF, wouldn't you?

This is a good idea. What are your complaints to this, Dan? It neither gives the tank a higher hate ceiling, nor does it intentionally limit my damage. It also allows you to fulfill your SATA potential.

Well, it's still obviously not a 3/3 party, but I have another solution if you insist on parsing the RNG and THF in one party. We can do two separate parses; one where I do not use TA at all (only SA), so THF hate control is completely eliminated as a factor. The tank will just control hate as normal. After we do that for a while, reset parsers, and fight some more where I get to secondary trick on you whenever SATA comes up. Then we compare your damage in setup A to my damage in setup B. (This would actually also be a good way to show the difference between the amount of damage the party gives and takes when a RNG/NIN is tricked on, and when they are not, since apparently many people in this thread think tricking on RNG/NIN is a bad idea.)

[imac2much]

Originally posted by Spider-Dan
Removing the first part of that sentence, where I refer to my source for why I made that statement, changes its meaning. By quoting me in the middle of a sentence, you're making it look like I'm making a blanket statement, when I'm not.

Wait, if you aren't saying THF is the most damaging DD in the game 15-45, why have you even been arguing for the past 20 pages or so? You could have just said "oh well maybe my parses were an exception" and left it at that. Yet you have been vehemently arguing that THF *IS* the most damaging DD in the game 15-45 and you keep bringing up reasons (valid or not) why this is the case. You are NOT just saying "this is what happened in my parses." The way you have been arguing, which is evident from the next 30+ posts you made, is that THF IS the most damaging DD overall 15-45, and you have some parses to prove it.

If you take your first post and clear face value, perhaps it may seem like you are just saying "well, this is what my parses say." But then why have you been arguing so much? You have to take the entire thread into account, and the majority of people posting have read the entire thread, god bless their souls. If you want to take your first post at face value, it's not like you said anything about tricking onto RNG or having 3/3 party in that post either, yet you keep bringing it up.

I don't want to hear your crowing any more about selective reading and putting words in others' mouths when you do it too. Lots of people on this forum do it; you're just the only one who goes on a crusade about it.

Oh, that's funny. Because in both this thread and the other one where you were proven wrong repeatedly, SEVERAL people pointed out your selective reading. But I guess we're all a conspiracy, you're totally innocent, and we're blaming you for no reason, right? Maybe you'll start suggesting that we're all the same entity or something?

Well, it's still obviously not a 3/3 party, but I have another solution if you insist on parsing the RNG and THF in one party. We can do two separate parses; one where I do not use TA at all (only SA), so THF hate control is completely eliminated as a factor. The tank will just control hate as normal. After we do that for a while, reset parsers, and fight some more where I get to secondary trick on you whenever SATA comes up. Then we compare your damage in setup A to my damage in setup B. (This would actually also be a good way to show the difference between the amount of damage the party gives and takes when a RNG/NIN is tricked on, and when they are not, since apparently many people in this thread think tricking on RNG/NIN is a bad idea.)

Wait wait wait. I'm confused here. At this point, are you just arguing for the sake of arguing? I mean, even you haven't done that yet, I think. Antagonistic or not, at least everyone so far has been arguing for some point or another, valid or not.

But here, you oddly refute the solution Clyde came up with.. for what reason? I have no freaking clue. And instead, you suggest an even more complicated scenario... why? Clyde's idea works perfectly fine. Who cares if it is not specifically 3/3, it still follows the reason behind your guidelines. If you so desire, we'll get a random WHM to be your trick partner, geez. He won't heal or do anything at all, he's just there to be your trick partner, and so that the tank will not have a higher "hate ceiling." It's a 3/3 party. Really, what are you arguing this for?

[Cat]

Guys Dan is obviously wrong in this situation no one really supports his claim its rediculous to think he will admit his mistake. I am proposing we drop it we really have nothing more to prove he wont even address the more important points even the ones I've brought up 5 or 6 times like how tricking on RNG actually lowers party damage by forcing the RNG to utsusemi instead of fire a couple shots and get TP.

[imac2much]

Hm I hate to admit it and let a debate die but this is true. No one has even been supporting dan's claim except dan himself in like the last 10 pages or more. Everyone has been citing otherwise and offering proof and evidence, and he still won't even admit to anything. Lynsy even followed all of his conditions and it negated his results and he still won't shut up. I bet if we parse and I outdamage him he'll make some damn sorry excuse or blame the moon phase.

Who are we all arguing with? Just Dan? I guess it's obvious he'll never admit he's wrong.

Wait, Dan, what was your argument against Lynsy's parsings again? The one where the RNG outdamaged the THF by nearly 50%? Oh wait, none. Yet you continue your arguments and claims like no evidence has been provided otherwise.

I guess everyone here already knows whether RNG or THF is more damaging (yes even at 15-45) if THF doesn't use ranged attacks. The only person who has the wool over his eyes is Dan himself, surprise surprise. And don't bring up some 'onus of proof' bs either, since Lynsy already supplied the parses. This isn't a damn conspiracy either, though you are probably willing to believe it.. Lynsy and I aren't exactly the best of friends but she brings good opinions and reasoning, especially in this thread. I don't see how you can just turn the other way from her evidence either.

I offered to PT with you for testing more than a week ago for lack of any better hard data. Now that we have Lynsy's, I see no need to be forced to deal with a stubborn hypocrite such as yourself, Dan, and none of my friends who read this thread were exactly jumping for joy at the chance of being in your presence. Since Lynsy's parsings provides the only reason I was willing to PT with you (solid data and evidence), I see no need to have to deal with you.

So... what was wrong with Lynsy's data again?

[Spider-Dan]

Originally posted by imac2much
If you take your first post and clear face value, perhaps it may seem like you are just saying "well, this is what my parses say." But then why have you been arguing so much?

Because (assuming everyone else can read) people are saying that even under the conditions I outlined (tricking on other DD, 3/3 party) there is absolutely no chance THF can outdamage RNG without /ra.

If you want to take your first post at face value, it's not like you said anything about tricking onto RNG or having 3/3 party in that post either, yet you keep bringing it up.

How many times do I have have to say the same thing?

1) In my first post I clearly stated that THF would be tricking on the other DD.
2) Within my first five posts I specifically clarified that I was only talking about 3/3 parties. This was MANY, MANY pages before anyone objected to tricking on the other DD.
3) At no point did I require that RNG and THF be in the same party.

Oh, that's funny. Because in both this thread and the other one where you were proven wrong repeatedly, SEVERAL people pointed out your selective reading.

And most of those people have axes to grind, just like you claim Beastlord did when he made his post in this thread.

In any case, if we both do it, then that makes us both guilty. "You do it too!" is not a defense.

But here, you oddly refute the solution Clyde came up with.. for what reason? I have no freaking clue. And instead, you suggest an even more complicated scenario... why? Clyde's idea works perfectly fine. Who cares if it is not specifically 3/3, it still follows the reason behind your guidelines.

Are you going to completely stop shooting if my trick dummy happens to get hate, until the tank gets hate back? This will almost definitely happen at the start of every battle, especially if we open with SC.

It's not that his solution is bad, it's that mine is better. If the party setup is 4/2, then we have to replace a mage with a statue that doesn't do anything, which would potentially change the dynamics. Which mage do we replace? With my suggestion, there's no possible way for you to get any benefit from my TA. What's your objection to my suggestion?

[Spider-Dan]

Originally posted by imac2much
I offered to PT with you for testing more than a week ago for lack of any better hard data. Now that we have Lynsy's, I see no need to be forced to deal with a stubborn hypocrite such as yourself, Dan, and none of my friends who read this thread were exactly jumping for joy at the chance of being in your presence. Since Lynsy's parsings provides the only reason I was willing to PT with you (solid data and evidence), I see no need to have to deal with you.

So... what was wrong with Lynsy's data again?

Nothing's "wrong" with it; it's data. I think my THF can do better than her THF did.

Are you officially retracting your offer to go parse?

[imac2much]

Originally posted by Spider-Dan
And most of those people have axes to grind, just like you claim Beastlord did when he made his post in this thread.

Uh are you trying to compare the people who post against you with your pal Beastlord? Are you freaking kidding me? Other than John Doe, who we ignore anyway, has anyone else in this thread stooped to the immaturity of threatening people in real life or spouting idiotic BS like "get a life"?
So you're saying that everyone is posting against you because they have "axes to grind"? You have got to be kidding me. Yes, I guess 10+ people post against you just because. You are so innocent! Why are we so mean to you, it's not fair!! Geez, how obtuse can you be?

Are you going to completely stop shooting if my trick dummy happens to get hate, until the tank gets hate back? This will almost definitely happen at the start of every battle, especially if we open with SC.

Why the hell would that matter?? The tank will get hate back almost immediately, he is still the MAIN TANK. The fact your trick buddy has aggro for like 5 seconds doesn't change ANYTHING. My supposed "hate ceiling" is still the same.

Like I thought, you are arguing now just for the sake of arguing.

If the party setup is 4/2, then we have to replace a mage with a statue that doesn't do anything, which would potentially change the dynamics.

You and your stubborn 3/3 condition. I already said just let some random WHM be your trick buddy. We'd have PLD, RNG, THF, WHM, BLM, WHM trick buddy. I already said this.

Your solution wasn't necessarily bad. I am just amazed you even brought it up when Clyde's is just as good and simpler. No need to reset parsers with his. Yours will require more battles to eliminate the "random" factor as much as possible, since we would be parsing two different and separate occasions. The less time I spend with you, the better.

But the point is moot. Obviously you'll think "my THF is the best in the game!!!" So the conditions change again... you add a new condition:
The THF must be Spider-Dan.

Oh, that's a convenient way to ignore all the evidence and facts that other people present to you. Your claim has now gone from "THF being most damaging DD 15-45 but not getting enough credit for it" to "Dan's THF being most damaging DD 15-45 but not getting enough credit for it."

It's not that his solution is bad, it's that mine is better.

Nothing's "wrong" with it; it's data. I think my THF can do better than her THF did.

Why am I not surprised to see you say these things. Has there ever been such a cocky narcissistic poster in these forums? Someone who never admits their wrong and thinks he's the best in all the world for no reason?

Are you officially retracting your offer to go parse?

Cool, the offer I posted nearly TWO WEEKS ago, yet you never wanted to take part in? The only reason I made that offer was because I wanted hard data. WE HAVE HARD DATA NOW. Your new condition seems to be "THF named Dan can do more damage than RNG 15-45" or something, so I guess you are automatically refuting all other data. Whatever.

I'll decide later whether I really want to spend time with you. I mean, seriously, what is your argument toward all the other data out there... the only reason is that you think your THF is somehow the best player in the game? Are you nuts? I find it pointless to do these things when:
1) You are the only one arguing your case now even though everyone else has posted otherwise.
2) You will bring up some other reason or condition to explain why you lost if you lose.
3) If people argue with you, you'll claim it's only because they have an "axe to grind."

Ridiculous.

[Spider-Dan]

Originally posted by imac2much
You and your stubborn 3/3 condition. I already said just let some random WHM be your trick buddy. We'd have PLD, RNG, THF, WHM, BLM, WHM trick buddy. I already said this.

This is a party where the 6th person doesn't do anything. I have no idea how those results would turn out.

Your solution wasn't necessarily bad. I am just amazed you even brought it up when Clyde's is just as good and simpler. No need to reset parsers with his. Yours will require more battles to eliminate the "random" factor as much as possible, since we would be parsing two different and separate occasions.

With my scenario, hate control is totally eliminated, and we have 6 people actually fighting instead of only 5. How is the other scenario "just as good"?

Oh, that's a convenient way to ignore all the evidence and facts that other people present to you. Your claim has now gone from "THF being most damaging DD 15-45 but not getting enough credit for it" to "Dan's THF being most damaging DD 15-45 but not getting enough credit for it."

Obviously, the logs that I saw before don't agree with the logs Lynsy provided. What else do you expect me to say?

I find it pointless to do these things when:
1) You are the only one arguing your case now even though everyone else has posted otherwise.
2) You will bring up some other reason or condition to explain why you lost if you lose.
3) If people argue with you, you'll claim it's only because they have an "axe to grind."

I stated from the beginning that I think THF is most damaging, based on the logs I saw. When everyone else basically said, "THAT'S TOTALLY IMPOSSIBLE!" I tried to explain how it COULD happen. Not once did I claim that it is a fact that THF is most damaging, even though I'm sure you saw that through your warped perception of my posts.

If I go out and parse and I don't do more damage, then great, I have more evidence to change my belief. I don't particularly care whether or not you actually agree that THF can do more damage, as I know that no logs could convince you. After all, you've already stated all the reasons it's not possible, right? The only reason I want to parse is to show that it is possible under the conditions I described.

[imac2much]

This is so ridiculous. You are now after 20+ pages changing your entire stance?

Originally posted by Spider-Dan
I stated from the beginning that I think THF is most damaging, based on the logs I saw. When everyone else basically said, "THAT'S TOTALLY IMPOSSIBLE!" I tried to explain how it COULD happen. Not once did I claim that it is a fact that THF is most damaging, even though I'm sure you saw that through your warped perception of my posts.

Why does it matter in this case whether you said "I THINK postulate A is true" or "It is a fact that postulate is true."? Either way, you are still claiming that postulate A is true! The only difference is that in the first scenario you are supposedly admitting that you could be wrong... but wait! You've NEVER admitted that you could be wrong in these 20+ pages of thread!

Either way, you are still claiming that THF IS MOST DAMAGING DD 15-45. No situation is "impossible" in this game. It's possible for a WHM to outdamage a WAR. Does this mean I can say "I think WHM is most damaging DD from level 15-45 based on parses I saw"? Perhaps. But when people show several other parses and anecdotes and reasons that prove otherwise, would I argue so strongly for my case? No, I'm not a fool. I like to acknowledge what other people say, even if it isn't always the same thing I said. You should try that.

If you sole stance was "it is POSSIBLE for THF to outdamage RNG at 15-45", I wouldn't have argued. No one would have. It's possible for WHM to outdamage a WAR too. What's your point?

If you said "According to my parses, it is possible for THF to outdamage RNG from 15-45" no one would have argued. Of course it's possible! Yet the way you have been arguing so strongly for so long is because you keep claiming "THF IS MOST DAMAGING DD 15-45".

People have suggested that perhaps your RNG is not as skilled as your THF. This could explain your parses. Yet you counter by saying RNG is an easy job to play, and that it's easy to be a good RNG. But THF is easy to play too! Why are you claiming that your THF is better than Lynsy's friend's THF? What makes you honestly believe that it's more likely for other THF to suck than for your RNG to suck? Just your ego?

This is some classic backtracking here Dan. I wouldn't argue at all that it's possible for THF to be most damaging DD in a PT from 15-45. No argues whatsoever. However, this hasn't been what you've been claiming for the last 20+ pages.

If you want to backtrack and try to save face and make some excuses, go ahead. But it's obvious to anyone who's been posting what you've been claiming.

Oh wait, they all have an "axe to grind" right? We're all just posting against you because it's the new cool thing to do? We're all a conspiracy against you? Is that what's going on in your head?

[Tokitoki]

Ive played THF to 61 and now RNG and i honestly ahev to say that RNG is "harder" to play because you have to control your hate a lot more than you do on THF. All your damage on THF is from SA/TA and SA/TA/WS and that hate is always transfered to someone else. If the RNG really knows what they are doing they will have to limit themselves to keep from getting killed and couldnt go all out most times especially if subbing WAR instead of NIN.

[Spider-Dan]

Originally posted by imac2much
Why does it matter in this case whether you said "I THINK postulate A is true" or "It is a fact that postulate is true."?

Ahem...

Originally posted by imac2much
Stop stating everything as if every single thing you say is absolute fact.

Offhand, I'd say that's why it matters.

Either way, you are still claiming that THF IS MOST DAMAGING DD 15-45.

No, actually, I'm claiming that in the logs I had, THF had the biggest relative damage lead. Most of the rest of the 20+ pages consist of me trying to defend the POSSIBILITY of such a result against everyone who says it WILL NOT HAPPEN unless the RNG is somehow gimped; i.e. I am trying to explain HOW THF can outdamage RNG.

The last 3 pages or so consist basically of you accusing me of recently making up conditions that I had fully explained by page 5.

If you sole stance was "it is POSSIBLE for THF to outdamage RNG at 15-45", I wouldn't have argued. No one would have. It's possible for WHM to outdamage a WAR too. What's your point?

!!!

NINETEEN pages ago, I made it crystal... f*cking... clear... that I was talking about a 3/3 party where THF is tricking on the other DD. (I think this is a common scenario, you don't.) Do you, or do you not, think that THF can do the most damage in that scenario? Because for at least TEN PAGES, no one would even agree that THF COULD outdamage a RNG (without /ra).

People have suggested that perhaps your RNG is not as skilled as your THF. This could explain your parses. Yet you counter by saying RNG is an easy job to play, and that it's easy to be a good RNG. But THF is easy to play too! Why are you claiming that your THF is better than Lynsy's friend's THF? What makes you honestly believe that it's more likely for other THF to suck than for your RNG to suck? Just your ego?

Yeah, it's just my ego. Which is why Clyde also said:

Although personally I believe rng beats thf in total dmg by quite a bit, I also believe I could do better than the thfs Lynsy PTd with from how it seems the PT went.

Maybe I'll beat you in damage, maybe I won't; we'll find out if/when we do it. But I highly doubt I would lose by 50 percent.

Both Clyde and I think that Lynsy's THF was not exceptional. Clyde doesn't think that he will beat a RNG; I think that under the conditions I outlined, I can.

P.S. Check your PMs.

[Spider-Dan]

Originally posted by Tokitoki
Ive played THF to 61 and now RNG and i honestly ahev to say that RNG is "harder" to play because you have to control your hate a lot more than you do on THF. All your damage on THF is from SA/TA and SA/TA/WS and that hate is always transfered to someone else. If the RNG really knows what they are doing they will have to limit themselves to keep from getting killed and couldnt go all out most times especially if subbing WAR instead of NIN.

Well, while any job in this game could be mastered by a 14-year-old, THF is somewhat unique. For RNG, as long as you know what you're doing, you can do the best job that conditions allow. Your performance is much more under your own control.

For THF, your performance depends heavily on your party members and their positioning and timing. Not only do you have to know your own job (which, again, isn't that hard) but your party members need to know your job. Things like provoking during SC or tiny movements during SATA setup really hurt THF. THF relies on everyone in the party for their damage more than other melees do.