Skill vs. Magic Accuracy

[maddog]

Excuse the new thread, I'm not the best with the search function. I was wondering 1 enfeebling magic skill = ? magic accuracy.

In other words what is better reforged AF or Relic red mage heads.

Atro. Chapeau +1
https://www.bg-wiki.com/bg/Atrophy_Chapeau_%2B1
Viti. Chapeau +1
https://www.bg-wiki.com/bg/Vitivation_Chapeau_%2B1

edit: bleh hyper link things arn't working

[Darkmagi]

1skill=1macc, potentially .9 at some point, but still better even so.
edit: Just noticed int was higher on atro, I think that makes it better for int based enfeebles.

[Sechs]

Almost off topic but I have three similar questions which do not belong in a separate thread


1) Have tests been performed to see if the new Magic Accuracy stat we get on ilevel weapons corresponds 1:1 to the old "Magic accuracy +" stat or if it's something slightly different?

2) I remember reading a thread eons ago (during the lv75 era) somewhere, maybe here on BG, concerning skill/macc/CHR for BRD debuffs. I don't remember the full details of that test/discussion, but the sum of it was that there is not a 1:1:1 ratio for those 3 things. Basically +1 Macc was always +1 no matter what, but CHR had "dynamic" (almost) ratios. The further below your CHR was to your target's CHR, the more valuable 1 point of CHR would have been (1 CHR = more than 1 macc). The further ABOVE your CHR was to your target's CHR, the less valuable (1 CHR = less than 1 Macc)
Is this true? I always assumed this was the case even for INT/MND for the related black/white debuffs.
So far I've always simplified things considering 1 CHR circa 1 Macc, when I had to compare gear.

3) Similar thing to point 2, but for BRD skills. Since Macc for BRD is calculated in a different way from most other magic skills (it's the sum of Singing plus either Wind or String), +1 skill on BRD is slightly less valuable than the same value on another mage's skill. So silly example +10 Wind for BRD would have an overall smaller impact than +10 Enfeeble would have on a SCH.
In other terms, +1skill = +1Macc (roughly) as been said on the first post, but for BRD skills +1skill is a bit less than +1macc.
Is this true?

[Damane]

my rule is to go hardcore macc. alot of new delve gear give augmented 30-40 macc. obviously if somethin has like 3 less macc and 10 more int/mnd i would go with that. the weapon magic accuracy should reflect your natural skill gain you would have from going 99 to 119. we gained from lvl 75 to 99 156 skill (278-424) on an A skill. so 6 skills per lvl the new weapons give 240 magic accuracy skill which equals 120 skill gained fir 20 lvls...
so 1 skill = 2macc if it gives the same... i am confused now. it looks we gained alot less macc then melees got with their skill+ on weapon for accuracy someone help ._.

[Fwahm]

I don't get what you're saying. Mages get 228 skill on 119 staves, as compared to melees getting 228-242 weapon skill on 199 weapons. That's almost the same.

[kenshyn]

I think he is comparing the melee skill increase to the Macc increase of magic skill on mage weapons. Melee skill doesn't help the mages on macc so comparing the level of skill ie sword skill at 119 vs enhancement skill with + macc to equal magic skill at 119.

[Fwahm]

But as far as we know, they're equal. 228 melee skill gives the same accuracy as 228 magic accuracy skill gives magic accuracy.

[kenshyn]

But as far as we know, they're equal. 228 melee skill gives the same accuracy as 228 magic accuracy skill gives magic accuracy.

But the weapons have club/staff skill which I don't think give macc any longer once they added actual macc to the items. So club skill + club skill on weapon = 119 level skill and say enfeebles + macc skill on weapons = 119 level enfeebles skill the melee skill would be much higher.

[dasva]

But the weapons have club/staff skill which I don't think give macc any longer once they added actual macc to the items. So club skill + club skill on weapon = 119 level skill and say enfeebles + macc skill on weapons = 119 level enfeebles skill the melee skill would be much higher.

I don't think you get what Fwahm is saying or you are just hung up on the higher number things. When converted to acc/macc as far as we know they should be fairly equal. Actually think macc might be a bit higher. Who cares who has the bigger number for skill I mean look at brd and their 1k skill!!!!

That said the fact is we have no idea how much macc skill adds right now. Hell I don't think they ever tested magic skills at this high of a level to see if that's even still 1:1. So really this argument is moot without knowing what is what

[Fwahm]

But the weapons have club/staff skill which I don't think give macc any longer once they added actual macc to the items. So club skill + club skill on weapon = 119 level skill and say enfeebles + macc skill on weapons = 119 level enfeebles skill the melee skill would be much higher.

Great Axe Skill (A+): 424
Bravura: 242
424 + 242 = 666

Enfeebling Skill (A+): 424
Venabulum: 228
424 + 228 = 652

Elemental Skill (A+): 424
Laevatainn: 255
424 + 255 = 679

How is melee skill "much higher", again?

[kenshyn]

Great Axe Skill (A+): 424
Bravura: 242
424 + 242 = 666

Enfeebling Skill (A+): 424
Venabulum: 228
424 + 228 = 652

Elemental Skill (A+): 424
Laevatainn: 255
424 + 255 = 679

How is melee skill "much higher", again?

A part from the third item I believe the discussion was based on the first 2 actually just pointing out initial weapons that have 242 skill greater than macc of 228 skill which is what I was pointing out now a staff with 255 does beat 242 can a rdm or brd use it? My point was just trying to indicate what the author was trying to say I thought nothing more nothing less.

In truth we still don't know how SE does a lot of things I just know my bard needs macc out the blank to land anything vs any thing decent...

[dasva]

Macc skill is most likely just there way of saying macc from skill. And it should be pointed out that you only get 218 acc from 242 melee skill. Macc skill to axe skill is comparing skill to acc without using thr conversion factor.

Only real complaint I have is the melees get acc and att whilr mages only get macc and few of the other benefits of magic skills

[Fwahm]

All of the mage weapons give Magic Damage, so I don't think it's accurate to say that melees get both acc and atk, while mages only get macc.

Also, how much accuracy 242 skill gives you depends on how much skill you have before the weapon, since you only get 0.8 accuracy per skill between 400 and 600.

There is also likely to be a conversion for magic skills, too.

[CDF]

You may recall that Matsui said that real magic accuracy "will" be different from "magic accuracy skill" but as it turned out, the given magic accuracy values in his dev post were the same as the help text "magic accuracy skill" for 2 out of the 3 weapon examples (exception: Lehbrailg +1, with 153 skill in the actual help text vs 156 in the example).

One way to make sense of this is to assume that "magic accuracy skill" is some derivation of item level "combat skill" with some arbitrary penalties or bonuses based on mage vs non-mage weapon, 1h vs 2h, or R/M/E status, which would be a reasonable interpretation as they claimed spell interruption rate would be affected by item level weapons with "combat skill" (there are no item level weapons without combat skill). As spell interruption rate is putatively connected to combat skill, so too should magic accuracy.

Perhaps they then realized it would be utterly pointless and stupid to list "magic accuracy skill" values that are NOT 1:1 with the actual magic accuracy bonus but forgot to clarify this.

[dasva]

All of the mage weapons give Magic Damage, so I don't think it's accurate to say that melees get both acc and atk, while mages only get macc.

Also, how much accuracy 242 skill gives you depends on how much skill you have before the weapon, since you only get 0.8 accuracy per skill between 400 and 600.

There is also likely to be a conversion for magic skills, too.

While true they get magic dmg that basically just adds onto base dmg just like melees get much higher base dmg weapon. So ok melees get base dmg att and acc and mages just get base dmg and macc. This ends up making them do a little less dmg than old magian weapons on higher tier stuff. Besides I was just comparing skill to skill. Melee skills give acc/att or racc/ratt. While magic skills will give macc and for blue physical spells to att and for blue and meteor base dmg. And while they did add the blue stuff in it seems underpowered. And then their are the tiers for various dark magic spells and skills part in divine magic for pld dmg for ninjitsu and then all the non offensive stuff

There probably is a conversion of skill to macc at some point. The macc skill most likely factors that in

[Fwahm]

If you count magic damage as analogous to melee weapon damage, then consider that mage weapons get MAB on them as well.

[dasva]

If you count magic damage as analogous to melee weapon damage, then consider that mage weapons get MAB on them as well.

Also true. In a sense mab/mdb takes the place of pdif for magic dmg but not sure 12 mab is quite the same boost in dmg as 242 att... Regardless my point was about how melee skill gets fully translated over but magic doesn't not so much what each weapon gets. We could really us some more tiers and such for some spells to keep up with the increases in all the stats and stat vomit and dmg we are getting