Goliard Clogs Vs Advocat Pigaches

[Suiram]

Could you perhaps explain what he meant? I am a bit confused o.o

Well like, look at melee accuracy. Sushi gives +15%, and eating sushi is going to be better accuracy than eating a food that gives, say, DEX+10, Accuracy+20. So people look at Alka and see "Stat+10, Macc+20" and they think "that's not going to be as much of a bonus as HQ staff, which gives +15% accuracy."

But they are really making two flawed assumptions. One is that HQ staves take some large "base magic accuracy" and add 15% more on, and the other is that even if it did that, that it would necessarily be high enough to be better than "Stat+10, Macc+20". Both of these are flawed assumptions, and while they may in the end turn out to be true, they could just as easily turn out to be false--so the whole question requires verification in the absence of a comprehensive understanding of Macc and how elemental staves affect it.

[Kirschy]

I know this is a huge derail, but since the topic is at hand, I didn't feel it was worth making another thread.

A lot of people have been bringing up 1 skill = .9 acc, and relating it to melee attacks. The tests in the blog that Kaeko linked showed very convincing evidence that this isn't the case. I'd like to provide additional reasoning why this would be a poor assumption to make, since it hasn't been brought up.

In the Dec, 2003 Patch: Dec. 16, 2003 Update Details

-The level cap has been raised to 75.

[Battle Updates]

-With the raising of the level cap, the skill cap for each combat skill has been increased.

-The accuracy of physical attacks for high-level characters has been increased.


While it's up to some interpretation, I feel like it's good reasoning to assume that for melee accuracy, 1skill=.9acc wasn't always the formula and was increased.

[Ultimagi]

Goliard Clogs > Avocat Pigaches

Please correct the spelling in the thread title.

[nekura]

I know this is a huge derail, but since the topic is at hand, I didn't feel it was worth making another thread.

A lot of people have been bringing up 1 skill = .9 acc, and relating it to melee attacks. The tests in the blog that Kaeko linked showed very convincing evidence that this isn't the case. I'd like to provide additional reasoning why this would be a poor assumption to make, since it hasn't been brought up.

In the Dec, 2003 Patch: Dec. 16, 2003 Update Details

-The level cap has been raised to 75.

[Battle Updates]

-With the raising of the level cap, the skill cap for each combat skill has been increased.

-The accuracy of physical attacks for high-level characters has been increased.


While it's up to some interpretation, I feel like it's good reasoning to assume that for melee accuracy, 1skill=.9acc wasn't always the formula and was increased.

I was actually thinking about that too when I was reading through old entries. Someone can correct me on this later, but wasn't it actually quite a bit lower than 0.9 accuracy per skill point past 200?

[pchan]

Idk about the relation skill/mac/int, but I did extensive tests on mac/stats lately to test alkalurops mainly. I'll bother posting the whole things when I feel error intervall are small. Basically in most case there is no difference with Alka/HQ staff. Hq staff doesn't seems to be either a % of accuracy, it's not a fixed % of "land rate" either. It seems that alka=HQ staff when the INT <= target, but HQ staff is better when your int is higher. This brings evidence that when int is < target+10, 1 int has a great effect. So far it seems :

when dint <10, 1 int=1mac, so alka would give 30 mac, same for HQ staff.
1 mac has not the same effect if dint <10 or > 10. Past dint>10, it has a great effect (~1%). Int seems to be weak when stacked. When dint<0, 1 int seems to be 1% land rate also. It also seems INT is checked before mac..

[Silenka]

Blah blah goliard is better etc carry on.

[Drunkenmonk]

what about goliard vs oracles for brd debuffs

[Belgaer]

INT has less of an impact on the potency of black magic enfeebles than MND does on the potency of white magic enfeebles, so I would use Advocate for black magic and Goliard for white magic.

[Jones]

what about goliard vs oracles for brd debuffs

Other gear dependent imo. Depends on your total CHR, skill gear, merits etc.

[Drunkenmonk]

119 chr, +15 singing, +20 wind (with oracles),+5 macc, HQ staves, no skill merits, just wondering if i should bother trying for goliard since i have oracles already and no other mage jobs atm

[Alistaire]

INT has less of an impact on the potency of black magic enfeebles than MND does on the potency of white magic enfeebles, so I would use Advocate for black magic and Goliard for white magic.

No, because INT affects the accuracy as well.

[Ultimagi]

Stick with Oracle's Pigaches. There's other slots where you can trade off much more Charisma for Skill.

[Seraph]

INT has less of an impact on the potency of black magic enfeebles than MND does on the potency of white magic enfeebles, so I would use Advocate for black magic and Goliard for white magic.

The only white magic enfeebles with variable potency from MND are Slow and Paralyze. What black magic enfeebles potency is affected by INT exactly? >_>

[Phla]

The only white magic enfeebles with variable potency from MND are Slow and Paralyze. What black magic enfeebles potency is affected by INT exactly? >_>

the only one would be blind and bind, but i think there was a test that showed that blind 1 / 2 were static -acc potency =|. i don't know how int affects bind (just acc or also duration?) most rdms i saw used macc/enfeeb to just get bind to land on big mobs so i am unsure about the effect.

[Seraph]

the only one would be blind and bind, but i think there was a test that showed that blind 1 / 2 were static -acc potency =|. i don't know how int affects bind (just acc or also duration?) most rdms i saw used macc/enfeeb to just get bind to land on big mobs so i am unsure about the effect.

I would just classify that as 'accuracy' for blind and bind instead of 'potency'. My understanding was that more INT on your cast will not cause a mobs attack accuracy to go down further, or cause it to get more stuck. >_>

I thought INT just helped land the spell, and prevent it from wearing off early.

[Belgaer]

and prevent it from wearing off early.

INT and MND (depending on the spell) seem to help this more than skill or magic accuracy, so yeah, you answered your own question. Good job.

And, yeah, Alistaire, I'm aware. >_>

[pchan]

i don't know how int affects bind (just acc or also duration?)

Just like gravity/silence/bind etc, adding int or mnd doesn't affect the duration of the spell. It is purely random. Note that it is the case for paralyze2 (and 1 I assume) too, the duration is random, unlike slow2 which is almost always 3 min and blind2 (5 minutes). I can't remember another duration for slow2.

[Belgaer]

It's not completely random. The higher your level, skill, MND/INT, magic accuracy, etc. in comparison to the mob; the more livelihood there is of the duration ending up on the more lengthy end.

[pchan]

It's not completely random. The higher your level, skill, MND/INT, magic accuracy, etc. in comparison to the mob; the more livelihood there is of the duration ending up on the more lengthy end.

No. try elemental seal bind or gravity sometimes

[TheBlazed]

Goliard imo