Test Server Findings

[arus2001]

lore-wise i get where you're coming from.. but i guess its kinda unlikely since alraune is already a mandragora.
it does bear a slight resemblance to the FFXIV sylphs.. and well, it came to mind first because Sylph was traditionally an FF summon..

Keep in mind there are/were Malboros out there named Ochu prior to the release of the Raffelesia family. SE can be weird about grandfathering mob names to new designs. Not much of an issue, though, since it's most likely gonna be a VW or WoE boss.

[grevenilvec75]

Kaustra and Embrava display 1MP don't they?

Yes.

[Gwynplaine]

Is it possible for someone to upload the files from the latest update somewhere? I would appreciate it if possible.

[Motenten]

From here:

http://userdisk.webry.biglobe.ne.jp/...2313114533.png

Apparently they snuck it in with the last test server update, and it should be showing up in the March update for the live game.

No translation for the English forum, of course.

[Slycer]

Hopefully the fools who still argue about 999 being attack/defense cap will go lock themselves back in a closet once that gets updated on the live servers.

[Dotsudoku]

People like that exist? Isn't the lack of a cap extremely easy to demonstrate? >.>

[Neisan]

Going by gimp/fail threads, they are out there somewhere. Had a sam (known idiot h/o) in Qilin run claim his attack was capped because it was 999 on equip screen.

[GeneyusTitan]

From here:

http://userdisk.webry.biglobe.ne.jp/...2313114533.png

Apparently they snuck it in with the last test server update, and it should be showing up in the March update for the live game.

No translation for the English forum, of course.

I don't know some of the kanji so someone better than me can feel free to fix this but what you said is basically what the GM post said as well. Pretty sure this is what it said, but there may have been something in there about testing for bugs, I just didn't know all of the kanji.

Hello,

When the servers came up on Friday 2/24 we tried to secretly put this in to observe it.

It is being confirmed that this is included, but the big problem is because [the game is in] various languages you can’t see it. However, when the March Version Update is introduced we expect that you will be able to.

[diasetsu]

Just checked it out on test server and interesting fact, brew multiplies att and def by 10.

Naked RDM99/MNK49 I had 222att, 166 def with 96str, 89vit
Factoring out str and vit = 174attack, 122 defense
With brew had 6730attack, 6210def, 174att+499(att from str)=673, 122def+499=621
Boost added 84 attack, so boosts attack by base attack and not multiplicative with brew multiplier.

[Raelia]

Durp, that was three posts ago in this very thread that I read the 999 display cap was removed XD Captain Obvious...

[Foldypaws]

Just checked it out on test server and interesting fact, brew multiplies att and def by 10.

Naked RDM99/MNK49 I had 222att, 166 def with 96str, 89vit
Factoring out str and vit = 174attack, 122 defense
With brew had 6730attack, 6210def, 174att+499(att from str)=673, 122def+499=621
Boost added 84 attack, so boosts attack by base attack and not multiplicative with brew multiplier.

That's actually just consistent with boost adding +900% attack. All the other attack boosts stack linearly like that as well.

(Sort of makes sense that it would add 900% attack given that it adds 900 MAB)

[Khamsin]

That's actually just consistent with boost adding +900% attack. All the other attack boosts stack linearly like that as well.

(Sort of makes sense that it would add 900% attack given that it adds 900 MAB)

Brew adds MAB? I never knew, guess that means I should pick something other than Ultimate next time.

[Helel]

Just a quick note: someone changed the description of scout's beret +2 to adds +10 stp whenever recycle procs, which is wrong. It adds +1 tp/merit whenever recycle procs like the original description said.

(This is on BG wiki).

[Counterfeit]

Hopefully the fools who still argue about 999 being attack/defense cap will go lock themselves back in a closet once that gets updated on the live servers.

No, they will just say that they raised the attack cap.

[Slycer]

Just a quick note: someone changed the description of scout's beret +2 to adds +10 stp whenever recycle procs, which is wrong. It adds +1 tp/merit whenever recycle procs like the original description said.

(This is on BG wiki).

This was from a JP magazine which theoretically had their source straight from SE:

リサイクル：リサイクル発動時、ストアTP+10

=
Recycle: On recycle activation, Store TP+10

Can anyone else confirm that it's just 1 TP per merit per recycle shot? Depending on your base setup and normal amount of Store TP, 10 Store TP could effectively be 1 TP on a shot.

[grevenilvec75]

This was from a JP magazine which theoretically had their source straight from SE:

リサイクル：リサイクル発動時、ストアTP+10

=
Recycle: On recycle activation, Store TP+10

Can anyone else confirm that it's just 1 TP per merit per recycle shot? Depending on your base setup and normal amount of Store TP, 10 Store TP could effectively be 1 TP on a shot.

Is that 10 store tp per merit?

[Slycer]

Per merit yes, everything on the JP list was per merit, except for the stuff for 2 hr abilities of course.

[Seeum]

First post, been lurking a while.

Can confirm that it's 1 TP per merit. Tested with Loxley Bow, gives me 11 TP normally, 16 TP with recycle. With Annihilator and my usual gear, I get 22 TP normally and 27 TP with recycle.

Seems fairly certain to be a static value rather than calculated as Store TP.

[Ophannus]

Did anyone buy that JP book that was a sequel to that guide from like 4 years ago that listed all the hidden/latent effects of gear 1-75? It came out a few months ago does anyone have a copy?! Supposedly has modifiers for new JA/abilities and trait information up to 99.

[Slycer]

Can confirm that it's 1 TP per merit. Tested with Loxley Bow, gives me 11 TP normally, 16 TP with recycle. With Annihilator and my usual gear, I get 22 TP normally and 27 TP with recycle.

Seems fairly certain to be a static value rather than calculated as Store TP.

Definitely a static 1 per merit then if you otherwise had the same setup in both of those cases. That's why I asked for confirmation, though, as the Loxley Bow result could be interpreted either way. Similarly, if you had enough Store TP outside of the head, 50 store TP might only yield an additional 5 TP regardless of the weapon's base return. Can you confirm that you were using the same amount of Store TP (gear and sub) in both cases (Loxley and Annihilator)?