[1.2.378] Magicians in Jump

You can keep changing your argument but w/e I'll prove you wrong again....
IN 4th job is when you get CL, you only train on bosses so stuns don't matter.
AND even in EARLY 4th job where you don't boss 24/7, you got seal and freeze

They have a point. And this is what goes on.

Imagine you miss the first 2 hits you land, then land the rest, on a monster that takes 1.5 hits to defeat.

On a 4 hit move, You'd miss 2/4, deal half your normal damage, then kill him on your next move.

On a 1 hit move, you'd miss your first two attacks, then kill him in the next two successful ones.

First case, 2 hits. Second case, 4 attacks.

Wanna go the probability way? Alright, multiple hits, you end up doing first some of the damage, then some, etc, or none, if unlucky. Single hit, you sometimes miss, dealing 0 damage, wasting a whole attack, happening way more frecuently than if you had a chance to deal some.

And even at bosses, if those attacks somehow give a second effect like healing, darkness, etc, you need as many hits as possible to recover/have more chances.

However you see it, multiple hits beats or equals single hits ANYWHERE. So yes, just tell me a single situation where single hits is better over multiple hits. Just one.

Knockback. But that's a very old playing style... less relevant to the current playing style esp. with LHC.

*Edit* ^That's the point that I wanted to bring up actually. Anything that smooths out the damage curve is still going to be better, because any excess damage dealt is simply wasted.

Hadriel

Knockback. But that's a very old playing style... less relevant to the current playing style esp. with LHC.

Hadriel

Not really. KB is important at castle golems, because rushing right = best training in GMS right now.

Hahaha what? No one only trains on bosses.

Also, @Viaje: My point wasn't supposed to be A REVOLUTIONARY IDEA, it was just that this is a better system for training than the previous one. And it's not disagreeing with me that makes anyone an idiot, it's the inability to read and grasp a point.

Again, maybe you should consider that your point was neither well made nor well presented.
Though I guess the majority are clearly all below your genius level of articulation.
Always someone else to blame.

Uh. Everywhere.

See my last post about the new consecutive damage skill. Hitting is better than not, especially when doing so possibly increases damage on next attack and when other party members are wailing on the same mob as you.

I saw it. Do you not recall?
->

But we don't know how that skill works yet.

Less theorizing, please.

I use (used to, and now too) KB alot too actually, and in one of the videos I saw an I/L pinned a whole group of Werewolves using CL... no damage taken. Now that there's monster park... hmm... KB is important too afterall.

Hadriel

Oh lord, an argument on single hit vs multi hits.

I have to side with Sarah. Multi-hits is better not because more damage, but because it really is rather rage inducing to see giant single hits miss in comparison with many little hits miss and hit. Take FPS guns for instance. Sure that shotgun will kill anyone it touches, but if you miss you can be sure you'll be very ticked off. Now if you give me a machine gun, sure I'll be missing a lot of times, but it doesn't seem as bad. There's just more stability in multiple-hits in comparison with single strong hits.

Not sure if this was posted yet. It's a shame that you can't see much, though.
[video=youtube;IdX7MSDixYA]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IdX7MSDixYA[/video]

Hence the ol' "Arrow Blow vs Double Shot" arguments all over again...

Everyone here should go take a cold shower and chill. I know I need one... running a fever now... (no that'd only make me feel even worse)

Hadriel

And even at bosses, if those attacks somehow give a second effect like healing, darkness, etc, you need as many hits as possible to recover/have more chances.

I didn't know u didn't carry pots to bosses now-a-days. And I'm pretty sure darkness doesn't work on bosses.

They have a point. And this is what goes on.

Imagine you miss the first 2 hits you land, then land the rest, on a monster that takes 1.5 hits to defeat.

On a 4 hit move, You'd miss 2/4, deal half your normal damage, then kill him on your next move.

On a 1 hit move, you'd miss your first two attacks, then kill him in the next two successful ones.

First case, 2 hits. Second case, 4 attacks.

However you see it, multiple hits beats or equals single hits ANYWHERE. So yes, just tell me a single situation where single hits is better over multiple hits. Just one.

1st scenario Bossing. you do 1+1+1+MISS=3 Vrs (.25+.25+.25+MISS)+(.25+.25+.25+MISS)+(.25+.25+.25+MISS)+(.25+.25+.25+MISS)=3
2nd scenario Training it takes 1 to kill a monster you kill every monster in 1hit except 25% of the time in 2 Vrs
every monster needs 2hits except for 1/3 of them get killed in 1hit

Less theorizing, please.

Are you serious? If that's the case why the f'uck are we arguing over the effectiveness of missing or not when missing is half the issue it was after chaos? How many times are you going to be missing post-jump compared to right now? The entire argument is retarded and sarah was only making a THEORETICAL POINT that you're all jumping on her for. Chill the f'uck out. This entire thread is theorizing because, unless you forgot, NONE OF US PLAY KMST.

Again, maybe you should consider that your point was neither well made nor well presented.
Though I guess the majority are clearly all below your genius level of articulation.
Always someone else to blame.

Ironic that you'd say this, given that you and Yo are the only ones who didn't seem to get it. I believe even Joe understood, he just seemed to think I meant in terms of numbers.

Yes, I could have presented my thoughts better but this isn't a meeting of great minds, it's a forum. And given yours and Yo's history of arguing for the sake of arguing, I doubt that would've prevented anything.

Oh lord, an argument on single hit vs multi hits.

I have to side with Sarah. Multi-hits is better not because more damage, but because it really is rather rage inducing to see giant single hits miss in comparison with many little hits miss and hit. Take FPS guns for instance. Sure that shotgun will kill anyone it touches, but if you miss you can be sure you'll be very ticked off. Now if you give me a machine gun, sure I'll be missing a lot of times, but it doesn't seem as bad. There's just more stability in multiple-hits in comparison with single strong hits.

Completely subjective, but I'm inclined to believe, despite my disagreement with the metaphor.

Shotguns are actually more multi-hit than machine guns.

Anywaaaay....
I love what they've done with the mage jobs so far.
Haven't delved into Bishops yet, but love Shining Ray's new, symmetric look.

Ironic that you'd say this, given that you and Yo are the only ones who didn't seem to get it. I believe even Joe understood, he just seemed to think I meant in terms of numbers.

Yes, I could have presented my thoughts better but this isn't a meeting of great minds, it's a forum. And given yours and Yo's history of arguing for the sake of arguing, I doubt that would've prevented anything.

If Joe thought you meant something else, he didn't understand.
The entire definition of 'understanding' is to be in clear comprehension of an idea, statement, or thought.

And I can't speak for Yo, but I don't argue for the sake of argument.
You said something silly; I called it silly.
Then you got pissy at everyone who called you silly.

Still hoping for a undispelable magic gaurd.
Can't really see myself using big bang unless they get rid of the charge.
The new chains skill looks interesting and i'll reserve my opinion till I have tried it.
Wouldn't mind if they gave us at least some sort of party skill either. :/

+ I agree with sarah.

>comes to thread to see ooooh and aaaaah left and right
>find everyone bitchin' about wether one hit is better than two hits
>facepalms.

IT'S THE SAME DARNED THING >.< if defense was a substraction or something, then story would be different, but overall and extended, it's the same thing. i prefer multihits if i don't need my full force to kill it, which is what happens a lot with buster, but if i need full force, i'd use whichever, call me when you are hitting damage caps, and then i will tell you multihits are better, until then, it doesn't matter, and i don't care. i am pissed off at sacrifice damage cappin later on, and i'd love if it were multihit, but do i hit damage cap with it? nope? then i don't really care now.

>looks at dem shoulderpads
>looks at them NPC's
i want a mage now.

Single-hit vs Multi-hit:

Matter of preference, do you prefer your damage all over the place or more centered on the average?
Some people are more gamblers, some people are more on the "safe" side, but both give the same results.

Ironic that you'd say this, given that you and Yo are the only ones who didn't seem to get it. I believe even Joe understood, he just seemed to think I meant in terms of numbers.

Yes, I could have presented my thoughts better but this isn't a meeting of great minds, it's a forum. And given yours and Yo's history of arguing for the sake of arguing, I doubt that would've prevented anything.

I argue because, I'm right..and its funny how neither you or taker pointed out the only true flaw in CL's single hit. As an i/l I<3this change because CL only had 1 flaw.

Completely subjective, but I'm inclined to believe, despite my disagreement with the metaphor.

Shotguns are actually more multi-hit than machine guns.

You kind of missed the point there...

A shot gun is a single burst fire, where as a machine gun is a continuous stream of bullets. If you miss with your shotgun, you'd be a bit more ticked off than if you missed with a couple of bullets with your machine gun, because at least you hit with some, unlike your shotgun where you completely missed.

Ok, I'm not going to bother quoting all of the comments that I want to reply to as there are just too many of them at this point. Instead I'll just give a generalized post about why I agree with Sarah in this situation.

While it is indeed true that over time, the damage difference between multi-hit and single-hit skills will even out, it is also true that the % miss rate doesn't always work out exactly as a calculator would lead people to believe.

If, for example, I were to go on my Paladin and fight a monster I could kill in one hit using ACB, but I had a 50% miss rate for some odd reason, then theoretically I would be able to kill that monster in 2 hits if I miss on my first attack; however, that 50% miss rate is also present in the second attack, and then the third as well. I have missed using single-hit skills up to 5 times in a row on monsters that are only 2 levels above me, and have thus wasted a large amount of time, mp, and hp trying to kill a monster that could have been dead much earlier. If I had been using Blast at the time, which hits multiple times, then there's a good chance I could have killed that monster sooner (not to mention Blast's instant kill rate, but I'm ignoring that in this particular case).

Yes, when a monster has massive hp, multi-hit and single-hit even out after a while, but that % miss rate can be a pain in the ass sometimes and force single-hit skills to be utterly worthless at times. That is not to say that I think single-hit skills are worthless, but I do think that the current accuracy formula makes single-hit attacks far more annoying to use when a monster is above the player's level.


This will be the first and last time I will comment on this argument about multi-hit vs single-hit. Frankly I think both sides need to lay off, especially since each party is beginning to sink to petty insults and neither party has shown a desire to let up any time soon.

Ironic that you'd say this, given that you and Yo are the only ones who didn't seem to get it. I believe even Joe understood, he just seemed to think I meant in terms of numbers.

Yes, I could have presented my thoughts better but this isn't a meeting of great minds, it's a forum. And given yours and Yo's history of arguing for the sake of arguing, I doubt that would've prevented anything.

>Sees the frase below your username and above your avatar.
>LoLed.

Anyway lets wait and see what else they bring, but it would most likely be in terms of balacing skills.

You kind of missed the point there...

A shot gun is a single burst fire, where as a machine gun is a continuous stream of bullets. If you miss with your shotgun, you'd be a bit more ticked off than if you missed with a couple of bullets with your machine gun, because at least you hit with some, unlike your shotgun where you completely missed.

You missed what he said, a shotgun is a scatter shot. It's bullet breaks up into hundreds of little ones. Shotguns are only powerful up close due to all the little pieces going into you. Shot guns are crap at long range due to the scattered-ness of the spray. It's much like a machine gun at long distances and less powerful.
Notice it sounds like they are the same?