Has it already been tested?
Has it already been tested?
Alkalurops is pretty much only good for Paralyze/Slow in situations where you shouldn't use Mythic Wand +1/Mistilteinn and Muse Tariqah.
But Acc-wise its not better ? :O
The difference is negligible, but I think HQ Staves are slightly better.
ok thanks
Are there tests showing this? Not just number crunching?
Are Elemental Debuffs damage effected by INT? Could be good for them too if you're OCD.
Depends on the target and the rest of your set.
You can't simply drop a Alkalurops into a HQ staff set (you won't be making the most of it).
I just posted a long ramble about enfeebling sets, it might be worth a look.
Staff maths (testing can is linked on kaeko's blog)
HQ stave = ~30 m.acc
In high acc, high dINT it changes
HQ stave = ~30 magic hit rate
Alkalurops = 20 + 5 magic hit rate
HQ stave win
In high acc, low dINT it changes
HQ stave = ~30 magic hit rate
Alkalurops = 20 + 10 magic hit rate
Tie
In low acc High dINT:
HQ stave = ~15 magic hit rate
Alkalurops = 10 + 5 magic hit rate
Tie
In low acc low dINT:
HQ stave = ~15 magic hit rate
Alkalurops = 10 + 10 magic hit rate
Alkalurops win
As a wise man once said: "Shit situational"
Yes they are
formal magic accuracy testing? Is this what you're looking for?
seems like you have the dInt part backwards (if dint > 10; 2int = 1 macc, if dint<10; 1 int = 1 macc).
basically it's pretty much always best for slow/para, because the only time alkalurops will give less macc than hq staves is when you have a high land rate anyway (not to mention low mnd), so the 10 mnd would definitely be worth 5 macc.
it may be useful for ele enfeebs, but only if you can break the 150 int tier with it.
it practically never wins for any other spell, and it's hardly worth making a seperate macro/spellcast rules for those few situations, when ele staves will win 95% of the time. i suppose it may potentially be nice for enfeebles if you don't have the hq staff for them for some reason (poison for example probably isn't worth having the hq staff for most people, and lolwaternukes), but other than that, it's pretty much slow/para/eleenfeebs onry.
Yes it's better when dint/dmnd/dchr is low regarless on the base hit rate. As far as I remember the numbers on Kaeko's blog are speculation and you are not sure 1 int/1 mac gives exactly 1% or lower or higher numbers. Anyway if they are correct it makes alkalurops better on stuff that resist (since you'd have lower stats) and useless, as well as HQ staffs on stuff that don't resist (use clubs).
Well redoing my mistakes (nice catch btw) Alk wins in situations when land rate is low and dINT (dMND) is low.
So it could be used for a potent slow/para and for very low hit rate situations (silencing kirin etc), but the gain is very marginal (personally I would have no problem make rules for spellcast to cover this, but I can see why others wouldn't want to or aren't able to)
The problem is as RDM you will want to have the following with you 90% of the time:
Jupiter -> Nukes and probably stun as if you are stunning, it will have a high hit rate and landing it is key, so HQ is winnar here!
Aquillo -> Nukes
Terra -> Aftercast
Light -> healing
Dark -> Resting (or other main/sub resting option)
So the only staves that Alk would allow you to leave behind is Auster's and Neptune's staff.
Which to a RDM, it buts Alk's value @ 2 x HQ staff price (1m on my server).
There are very few end game situations in parties where a RDM would find themselves nuking or resting, and if it were the case they delve into their satchel before start of said event. 99.9% of the time you are not going to need jupiter's to stun at incredible success rate.
Since I got alkalurops, I use it for any enfeebles pretty much. Using Ice/thunder only for nukes (i rarely have to go /drk) and light for cures. I've done Odin'chamber 20 times and used both Aquilo/Terra and alkalurops and never seen any difference. It would resist a lot with any of them ; at least whenever slow lands it's 2% better with Alka. There are not many situation where Terra is needed. The only time I fought Tiamat I used a club and it worked fine ... I don't even have earth magic accuracy merit which would add the same acc as a NQ staff or almost.
True to a point, on HNMs RDM isn't going to nuke, or rest as convert is likely to see them through the fight.
I personally would be uneasy about putting my aquillo's or pluto's staff in my satchel. Many time I have thrown out a few nukes to help finish the floor of nyzul, or CS nuked in the last minute on a T1-T2 einherjar boss (not for much dmg, but it has made a difference).
that's still not bad if you're carrying alk around anyway, for slow/para.So the only staves that Alk would allow you to leave behind is Auster's and Neptune's staff.
Which to a RDM, it buts Alk's value @ 2 x HQ staff price (1m on my server).
also, as far as slow/para goes, there's practically no real reason to ever use hq staves over alka. hq staves only beat alk macc wise when you already have a high land rate. pretty much anything under hnm type difficulty is going to get you a capped land rate anyway, so you may as well use club+shield. Although the hq staves are more accurate with land rate >50%, and dmnd>10, it doesn't really matter. a 50% land rate gives you a 50% unresist, 25% 1/2 resist, and 25% full resisted, and even that is more than enough. 75% chance of landing unresisted is plenty to ensure you don't have to cast it more than twice, maybe 3 times before it lands, and unless you're soloing, or solo tanking (with no one else around capable of landing slow/elegy at all), in which case a resisted slow can really start to hurt very quickly, due to not being able to recast it right away, since you'd need to cast utsu first, and losing 3-4 shadows before you can recast it. other than that, there's really aren't many reasons you couldn't just recast slow1, and then overwrite with slow2 when the recast is up. and then of course, if land rate is <50%, then it doesn't matter anyway, since alka gives the same (or more) macc on top of the potency.
This might be a good place to ask.
Let me preface this by saying I am in no way a mage...
If you're a RDM laying on enfeebs, wouldn't it be best to Pack on for potency rather than accuracy? My thought is this, what's the point of laying on a weak enfeeb with 80% accuracy that won't do much, when you could try to land a much more potent enfeeb with 50% accuracy? Particularly on things like Paralyze. Would it be better to pile on the mind and just eat it if you get resisted? If you lay on a weak Para, now you got a stable weak para that can't be overwritten. At least with a potent Para that misses, if it misses you get another chance to make right.
No, at least not strictly in terms of accuracy. Alk never gives more accuracy than HQ staves. You've got your land rate calc screwed up still. Under 50% hit rate, the +INT(MND) still gives 5-10 equivalent m.acc, but that is cut in half again along with the rest of the m.acc.
But considering potency benefits, you might just want to use it anyhow in certain cases.
And @Gergall: it takes as much if not more number crunching to analyze the data when directly testing a random event. If you accept the validity of existing tests, then they can (hopefully) be applied to other situations where redoing a test with specific targeted conditions would be undesirable.