Dear HSR Sheetmakers

Overview

The speaker attacks “spreadsheet makers” (character theory-crafters using calculators/sheets) as largely unreliable and misleading. They argue these creators prioritize appearances and clout over true accuracy and thorough testing.

Main Targets and Claims

• A specific spreadsheet/battle-sim developer is singled out after the speaker encounters a repository described as “backed up by a battle sim.”
• The speaker claims that within minutes they found multiple issues and stopped checking further because the results felt inherently untrustworthy.
• The developer is accused of agenda posting, including:
  • promoting/valuing leaked or beta characters,
  • using math to influence players’ investment decisions, such as:
    • “what Eidolons are worth”
    • what teammates are best.

Core Technical Argument: Sim/Calcs Don’t Match the Game

The speaker argues the spreadsheet maker does not properly align its damage outputs with actual in-game behavior—specifically for Herta-style calculations around an “Eva” character’s ultimate (referred to as Eva’s ultimate / Evanesce calcs).

• When asked whether the damage numbers match the game, the creator allegedly replies that they couldn’t fully verify due to sim bugs and limited access/time.
• The speaker claims the creator treats “accuracy” as secondary to producing calcs quickly.

Why the Speaker Says the Ultimate Calcs Are “Glaringly Wrong”

The speaker provides two major alleged mistakes:

1) Failure to account for “hit splits” affecting energy (and thus Eva’s bonus damage proc)

• Many attacks apply damage in multiple hit portions (“hit splits”).
• These hit splits can distribute not only damage but also:
  • toughness breaking
  • energy gains
• The speaker’s claim is that Eva’s kit gains a key resource (“certified banger”) from energy gain, and that energy gained from an initial AoE hit should increase later Elation/bounce damage in the ultimate.
• They allege the spreadsheet applies the energy-derived bonus too late—after the Elation damage—so:
  • the Elation and bounce portions are miscalculated.

2) Improper aggregation of bounce/toughness break instances

• The speaker claims the spreadsheet:
  • combines bounce damage into a single damage instance, and
  • mishandles toughness break handling.
• They argue this breaks interactions with:
  • weakness broken / break / super-break mechanics,
  • invalidating the results.

Broader Critique: “Close Enough” Isn’t Acceptable

• The speaker argues that even if minor discrepancies could be excused, the number of inaccuracies is too large.
• They contrast these spreadsheets unfavorably with their own approach:
  • building/using an optimizer
  • building a comprehensive battle simulator
• They emphasize they are not trying to dictate what players should pull or what Eidolons to invest in.

Accusations About Incentives and Accountability

• The speaker claims spreadsheet creators include warnings such as:
  • “may not be accurate”
  • “don’t compare across sheets”
• They argue these disclaimers help creators avoid accountability.
• They further claim many spreadsheets remain unverified, and may be updated using leaks rather than rigorous testing.

Final Conceptual Argument: Local vs. Global Optimization

• The speaker says spreadsheets typically do local comparisons, such as:
  • choosing the best light cone within one fixed team.
• They contrast this with global optimization, where an optimizer searches across:
  • all combinations of items and team setups.
• The speaker argues spreadsheets therefore miss important synergies and better options that only emerge when evaluating full team/item interactions—unlike an optimizer that tests many possibilities.

Conclusion / Call to Action

• The speaker’s “moral” is to treat spreadsheet makers as frauds (their wording).
• They urge viewers to:
  • demand real testing,
  • stop treating these sheets as “word of law.”
• The speaker also criticizes other creators (including one named “Globa”) for allegedly:
  • providing vague context,
  • maintaining comparison-avoidance warnings.

Presenters / Contributors

• Vaush (primary speaker)
• An additional participant whose name isn’t given in the subtitles
  • They DM/correspond and later join the discussion (“someone else pitched in”)
• “Globa” (mentioned as another spreadsheet/video creator; not shown speaking in the subtitles)