Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
The Ultimate Magician Damage Comparison
#12
Just now, I found AAA batteries for my graphing calculator and noticed that my RAM cleared. So the first thing I thought of doing was checking my damage.

I reprogrammed the MATK damage back into my calculator (by hand) and then compared the values with the ones in your table. ALL of your values are incorrect because you forgot to give all of the mages (nonbishops) AMP.

AMP is a 1.35x raw bonus, given the same way as the bonus from the Elemental boost is.

>_>


~~~~~


A few things I think you need to clean up your thread.

You said "This way you can compare how your damage ranks with your peers."

The way you set up that last table wouldn't help you compare with your peers. It's just taking out factors to make a comparison between matk scores and int.

1) For the last spoiler, include amp and elementals. Your table should look something like this:
IGN - Level Damage - INT - MATK - Job - AMP - Elemental

2) Include the above, but locked at level 150.

3) Use 570 for Arch mages and 670 for Bishops.

I think that it would only be fair to include these "other factors". The truth is that Bishops are a "different" class from Mages (even grendel the very old said so if you read his quests), they should be considered that way when calculating damage.
  • The only real attack that Mages share are their ultimates. Otherwise, you could use the base damage for Big Bang, which wouldn't work because then the Elemental Staves wouldn't be factored in. The multiplier should represent something meaningful, not just some random number pulled out of the blue.
  • AMP should never be taken out. AMP is a permanent change in a magician, and it should be factored in comparisons because it's purely from your character. It's what separates magicians from bishops.
  • Elemental staves were designed for Mages. Consider that a lot of bishops have elemental wands, but they can't utilize it's bonus. Why should a mage holding an elemental wand be considered the same as a Bishop holding the same wand?
  • Bishops' genesis are just different altogether. They're faster, they're not AMPed. But nonetheless, they should be 100 higher just as in game. If not, then almost ALL of the mages, regardless of lukless or luk would completely trump the Bishop's projected damage.
  • Include elemental type. A FP mage holding a Poison Staff isn't going to be dealing as much damage using a Fire Staff for Meteo. In addition, the primary staves are always more expensive than the secondaries. Ice staves are obviously more expensive than thunder staves. If this truly is a damage comparison based on the equips we have, buying a thunder staff isn't going to cut it. People spend money upgrading each and every equip. Buying a thunder staff and saying you have as much power as someone with a ice staff is almost cheating your score. >_>

These factors play an important role in the game, hence, should be added in.


~~~~~


Fiel Wrote:I'd likely include the LUK for Maple Warrior since you use it to equip the staff, but I would not include the Maple Warrior stats from INT, so subtract out the 73 from INT & MATK and leave the LUK in since LUK won't affect the table at all.
Yes, but you'd be "subtracting levels". The staff I intend to wear is level 163. By subtracting down to 150, I believe we will run into some kind of loophole. I won't have enough LUK at 150. I plan to add luk in when I near 163. I also will be wearing my crappy staves which wouldn't work either because that'd give me a significantly lower score.


~~~~~

Fiel Wrote:
 Source Code
Man, that's so confusing. Why not just put in eight formulas:

Step 1: prompt variables
Step 2: insert into each of the eight equations
  1. AMP + Element (1.25 boost) MAX
  2. AMP + Element (1.25 boost) MIN
  3. AMP + Element (1.1 boost) MAX
  4. AMP + Element (1.1 boost) MIN
  5. AMP MAX
  6. AMP MIN
  7. MAX
  8. MIN

:f6:
Reply


Messages In This Thread
The Ultimate Magician Damage Comparison - by Fiel - 2009-04-11, 10:23 PM
The Ultimate Magician Damage Comparison - by Harrisonized - 2009-04-12, 07:24 AM
The Ultimate Magician Damage Comparison - by Fiel - 2009-04-12, 10:13 AM
The Ultimate Magician Damage Comparison - by Harrisonized - 2009-04-14, 06:51 AM

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)