Item Search
     
BG-Wiki Search
+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 14 of 14

Thread: INT/MND and Magic Evasion     submit to reddit submit to twitter submit to tumblr

  1. #1
    Chram
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    2,982
    BG Level
    7
    FFXI Server
    Sylph

    INT/MND and Magic Evasion

    Does INT and MND (for their respective spells) have a direct influence on magic evasion?

    If not, and assuming the same dStat > MACC formula (as listed on the Magic Accuracy page on BG Wiki) applies to monsters, wouldn't increasing your INT actually sometimes reduce your magic evasion? For example, assuming that the 0.5 MACC point is at 10 dINT:

    Mob has 300 INT, player has 250 INT: Monster gets 250 + 0.5 * 40 = 290 MACC from INT.

    Mob has 300 INT, player has 300 INT: Monster gets 300 MACC from INT.


    I'm making an Ambuscade Cape for MEVA, and trying to figure out if adding INT would increase or lower my magic evasion towards INT-based spells and magical WSs.

  2. #2
    Radsourceful

    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    1,938
    BG Level
    6
    FFXI Server
    Bismarck

    Quote Originally Posted by Fwahm View Post
    Does INT and MND (for their respective spells) have a direct influence on magic evasion?

    If not, and assuming the same dStat > MACC formula (as listed on the Magic Accuracy page on BG Wiki) applies to monsters, wouldn't increasing your INT actually sometimes reduce your magic evasion? For example, assuming that the 0.5 MACC point is at 10 dINT:

    Mob has 300 INT, player has 250 INT: Monster gets 250 + 0.5 * 40 = 290 MACC from INT.

    Mob has 300 INT, player has 300 INT: Monster gets 300 MACC from INT.


    I'm making an Ambuscade Cape for MEVA, and trying to figure out if adding INT would increase or lower my magic evasion towards INT-based spells and magical WSs.
    Assuming the formula is correct, you're missing that it's 1MAcc per dStat, not per Stat - 300int vs 300int is 0 dStat, 300 vs 250 is 50dStat, which would be 10~15 + 0.5*(50-(10~15)) for 30~32.5 MAcc.

    Adding INT will not decrease magic evasion

  3. #3
    Chram
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    2,982
    BG Level
    7
    FFXI Server
    Sylph

    Quote Originally Posted by Radec View Post
    Assuming the formula is correct, you're missing that it's 1MAcc per dStat, not per Stat - 300int vs 300int is 0 dStat, 300 vs 250 is 50dStat, which would be 10~15 + 0.5*(50-(10~15)) for 30~32.5 MAcc.

    Adding INT will not decrease magic evasion
    You're misreading the page. The page says that all INT and MND is equal to 1 INT until your dSTAT reaches a certain value. Negative dSTAT is still a dSTAT.

  4. #4
    Salvage Bans
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Posts
    753
    BG Level
    5
    FFXI Server
    Asura
    WoW Realm
    Cho'gall

    Quote Originally Posted by Fwahm View Post
    You're misreading the page. The page says that all INT and MND is equal to 1 INT until your dSTAT reaches a certain value. Negative dSTAT is still a dSTAT.
    You need to reverse the formula if you are reversing the targets to calculate meva instead. If you have 250INT and mob has 300INT, then mob gains 50INT worth of macc. If you have 300INT and mob has 300INT, then mob gains 0INT worth of macc. Increasing the player's INT will decrease mob macc (or indirectly increasing player meva if you prefer to think of it that way.)

  5. #5
    Ridill
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    19,798
    BG Level
    9
    FFXI Server
    Bahamut

    It's all based on dstat not pure stat and as Nyarlko says remember to when who is who in each part of the equation. Also more recent jp testing shows caps both on negative and positive dstat and that it tiers in both directions

  6. #6
    Chram
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    2,982
    BG Level
    7
    FFXI Server
    Sylph

    Quote Originally Posted by Nyarlko View Post
    You need to reverse the formula if you are reversing the targets to calculate meva instead. If you have 250INT and mob has 300INT, then mob gains 50INT worth of macc. If you have 300INT and mob has 300INT, then mob gains 0INT worth of macc. Increasing the player's INT will decrease mob macc (or indirectly increasing player meva if you prefer to think of it that way.)
    Nothing on the page says or implies that you only get MACC from INT if you have more INT than your enemy (IE, a positive dINT). As the page is posted, 1 INT = 1 MACC for all values below dSTAT = ~10-15, including when your INT is lower than your foe's.

  7. #7
    Ridill
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    19,798
    BG Level
    9
    FFXI Server
    Bahamut

    Quote Originally Posted by Fwahm View Post
    Nothing on the page says or implies that you only get MACC from INT if you have more INT than your enemy (IE, a positive dINT). As the page is posted, 1 INT = 1 MACC for all values below dSTAT = ~10-15, including when your INT is lower than your foe's.
    You're missing the point. Yes 1 more int will still increase your macc by 1 (or decrease the targets meva depending on point of view) at that point. By the same token less int means LESS macc (or more meva) so if you are negative you are already starting lower. And in terms of macc you are talking about the caster. So when caster has higher stat it gives them a bonus to macc when lower it gives them a penalty. So in your example above you are supposed to be using 310 not 250 for the top example. Also the bg wiki information is just sort of copied from old wiki so some is lost so it's not really a macc/meva from absolute amount of stat but of difference of stats only

  8. #8
    Chram
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    2,982
    BG Level
    7
    FFXI Server
    Sylph

    Quote Originally Posted by dasva View Post
    You're missing the point. Yes 1 more int will still increase your macc by 1 (or decrease the targets meva depending on point of view) at that point. By the same token less int means LESS macc (or more meva) so if you are negative you are already starting lower. And in terms of macc you are talking about the caster. So when caster has higher stat it gives them a bonus to macc when lower it gives them a penalty. So in your example above you are supposed to be using 310 not 250 for the top example. Also the bg wiki information is just sort of copied from old wiki so some is lost so it's not really a macc/meva from absolute amount of stat but of difference of stats only
    Yes, of course I'm talking about the caster; I'm talking about calculating the monster's magic accuracy stat from dINT, which is equivalent to talking about the player's magic evasion stat from dINT in the opposite direction. That's my whole point.

    Also, whether dINT gives a bonus or a penalty over base magic accuracy and over which ranges is irrelevant, as long as the slope of it is as is implied by the notes on that page (which is what I made the topic to ask about). Currently, that page says that 1 INT = 1 MACC at -Infinity < dStat < ~10-15, and that 1 INT = 0.5 MACC at ~10-15 < dstat < Infinity. That would mean that unless INT/MND/etc by itself (and not as a dSTAT) gives magic evasion directly, raising INT could, in certain ranges, effectively lower your magic evasion by letting a monster get more MACC out of the INT they currently have.

  9. #9
    Salvage Bans
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Posts
    753
    BG Level
    5
    FFXI Server
    Asura
    WoW Realm
    Cho'gall

    Quote Originally Posted by Fwahm View Post
    Nothing on the page says or implies that you only get MACC from INT if you have more INT than your enemy (IE, a positive dINT). As the page is posted, 1 INT = 1 MACC for all values below dSTAT = ~10-15, including when your INT is lower than your foe's.
    Regardless of the specific INT values, if the actor's dINT ratio goes down (including when their target's INT goes up) then the actor will not gain macc, and most likely lose macc. As far as we are able to determine, there isn't a difference in how player/mob stats and formulas function, so you need to reverse the positions of player/mob in the formula on the page since it's worded to describe player > mob macc.

  10. #10
    Hydra
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    123
    BG Level
    3
    FFXI Server
    Odin

    I think I understand the confusion. Fwahm is, I believe, interpreting the 1 INT = 0.5 MACC thing as meaning, that, say, if the breakpoint is dINT = +10 and you have +15, then you get +7.5 MACC, whereas actually you would (I assume) get +12.5 because it's incremental. Further INT only gets 0.5 MACC per point, but everything up to the breakpoint should still be getting 1 MACC per INT.

    Think of it like tax brackets. There are diminishing returns, but hitting a higher tax bracket doesn't mean you're suddenly taxed higher for all your prior income.

  11. #11
    Ridill
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    19,798
    BG Level
    9
    FFXI Server
    Bahamut

    Quote Originally Posted by Fwahm View Post
    Yes, of course I'm talking about the caster; I'm talking about calculating the monster's magic accuracy stat from dINT, which is equivalent to talking about the player's magic evasion stat from dINT in the opposite direction. That's my whole point.

    Also, whether dINT gives a bonus or a penalty over base magic accuracy and over which ranges is irrelevant, as long as the slope of it is as is implied by the notes on that page (which is what I made the topic to ask about). Currently, that page says that 1 INT = 1 MACC at -Infinity < dStat < ~10-15, and that 1 INT = 0.5 MACC at ~10-15 < dstat < Infinity. That would mean that unless INT/MND/etc by itself (and not as a dSTAT) gives magic evasion directly, raising INT could, in certain ranges, effectively lower your magic evasion by letting a monster get more MACC out of the INT they currently have.
    I pointed that out because you were still using target int in there for some reason in your original equation


    If actually very much matters if it's a bonus or penalty vs absolute especially when you read it weirdly like that. The page doesn't say 1 stat =1 macc. It says +1 stat = +1 macc. And after a break point +2 stat =+1 macc. It's a very key difference that shows the slope changes at those points not entire ratio of all the stat you have. And yes I see the they dropped the + on the second half but like I said this is a very poorly copied version of old wikis article on it.


    But here's an updated visual to make it easier. Axises are obviously dint and macc


  12. #12
    Chram
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    2,982
    BG Level
    7
    FFXI Server
    Sylph

    Quote Originally Posted by Djohn View Post
    I think I understand the confusion. Fwahm is, I believe, interpreting the 1 INT = 0.5 MACC thing as meaning, that, say, if the breakpoint is dINT = +10 and you have +15, then you get +7.5 MACC, whereas actually you would (I assume) get +12.5 because it's incremental. Further INT only gets 0.5 MACC per point, but everything up to the breakpoint should still be getting 1 MACC per INT.

    Think of it like tax brackets. There are diminishing returns, but hitting a higher tax bracket doesn't mean you're suddenly taxed higher for all your prior income.
    No, I'm saying that, based on that page's description of how MACC from INT works, under certain circumstances, monsters could get more total MACC from INT if the player adding INT increases the size of the monster's dINT tier where +1 INT = +1 MACC.

    For example, if the monster has 300 INT and the player has 250 INT, then the first 260 INT gives 1 MACC each (because dINT < 10), then the remaining 40 INT gives 0.5 MACC each (because dINT >=10), for a total of +280 MACC from INT.

    However, if the player then added 20 INT for 270, then the first 280 INT gives 1 MACC each, then the remaining 20 INT gives 0.5 MACC each, for a total of +290 MACC from INT, making him have 10 more ACC than before the player added 20 INT.

    Now, if the page is actually wrong (and not merely just worded confusingly), and Dasva's graph is the actual story, then okay, it doesn't work like that, and adding more INT would, at worst, not affect your resist rate at all.

  13. #13
    Ridill
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    19,798
    BG Level
    9
    FFXI Server
    Bahamut

    The thing you have to remember is if absolute caster int values are giving macc then the same is true with target and meva values. So then the player would have

    But of course it was never originally worded that way and really should go to old wiki for info from that era. It explains it a lot better and how it's really just a mathematically way of showing changes in macc to meva and they just chose to add to macc side presumably because that was the more important/changeable one at the time and was somewhat used to explain the old 320/120 maxim. And more importantly it flat out stats it's based on dstat not total stat and added to the rest of macc.

    The graph I posted was merely an update on tiers and caps but the concept of it being dstat not total stat has been around since the very original testing. Just bg wiki is kind of hit or miss on old info and also worded a little badly. They probably should've carried on the and said dstat a few more times but probably figured you'd continue reading as such instead of going to total. If you really want to learn more about macc/meva/magic hit rate really need to use old wiki and even if you truly hate lifes the CDFs blog (ok it's actually quite informative and nicely laid out I'd actually recommend it but there's a lot lol). I cannot stress enough how not just this but a ton of pre bg wiki stuff is more complete on sites that actually existed at the time for obvious reasons

  14. #14
    i should really shut up
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    1,923
    BG Level
    6
    FFXI Server
    Asura

    Quote Originally Posted by dasva View Post
    Also the bg wiki information is just sort of copied from old wiki so some is lost so it's not really a macc/meva from absolute amount of stat but of difference of stats only
    I would do some unspeakable things if someone updated the magic acc/magic evasion page/section of the wiki.

Quick Reply Quick Reply

  • Decrease Size
    Increase Size
  • Remove Text Formatting
  • Insert Link Insert Image Insert Video
  • Wrap [QUOTE] tags around selected text
  • Insert NSFW Tag
  • Insert Spoiler Tag