Forum Settings
       
« Previous 1 2 3
Reply To Thread

Seriously, Heavy Strike...Follow

#1 Sep 21 2011 at 4:53 AM Rating: Decent
***
2,180 posts
I hate you and your mom. But I kinda love you...
____________________________
Louverance: You should spend your next life as a friar, my friend!
Later...
Meransarget: Oh, herro there.
#2 Sep 21 2011 at 11:55 PM Rating: Good
Scholar
***
2,998 posts
Pretty awesome when this hits.
Not so much with all the misses...
Kind of expected Benthic like accuracy, nothing like it is.
Though the set I'm using has pretty much no acc in it so that's not helping.

Yet to try it on anything meaningful outside of abyssea, so not looking forward to that at all.
____________________________
This used to be pretty fun.
#3 Sep 22 2011 at 4:51 AM Rating: Good
***
2,890 posts
Has any actual testing been done to confirm its actual -acc penalty? BLU spells innately usually have +30~35 accuracy.
____________________________
RoTZ: Complete DM: O
CoP: Complete AN: O
99 SAM, RDM, BLU, WAR, PLD, DRK

lolgaxe wrote:
Nothing in this game is impossible if you set yourself to the task of actually doing it. Even dumb people can only hold you back for so long.


Lucinus wrote:
when you're hefting something that deadly, you don't miss - mobs get the **** out of the way instead...
#4 Sep 22 2011 at 9:10 AM Rating: Default
***
1,755 posts
It is less accurate than Benthic Typhoon imho I been farming ep/dc golems in sky and haven't missed a single BT and Heavy Strike on the other hand misses like crazy with full str gear. My very first cast missed >.>. This started to make me feel like a sad panda so I changed my gear setup to str + a ton of accuracy and it hits very hard. Still I can't see using it on anything heavy duty in it's present condition.

I will have to parse and keep track of heavy strike acc just nothing like wasting CA ugh.....

Edited, Sep 22nd 2011 10:11am by kenshynOnShiva
____________________________
....::: All Jobs 99 but GEO and RUN :::....
Genbu [O] Suzaku [O] Seiryu [O] Byakko [O] Kirin [O] In Loving Memory of Kirin RIP 3/6/05
xXIEOSIXx Forums on Shiva


[ffxivsig]340581[/ffxivsig]
#5 Sep 22 2011 at 8:11 PM Rating: Good
Scholar
****
9,209 posts
I only did a few casts on these 2 days. Overall, it's not as bad I thought it'd be. But again, my full STR gear isn't that as accuracy-less as some people think. The worst equip I had probably Heafoc Mitts Warwolf Belt, and Aerion's Gamashes.
____________________________
Princess ThePsychoticOne wrote:
int stands for int.

#6 Sep 22 2011 at 8:58 PM Rating: Excellent
I'd say a good comparison to Heavy Strike's accuracy would be Sidewinder at 100% TP, to where it has an innate accuracy penalty to it.
____________________________
Lady Jinte wrote:

Vlorsutes' Negotiation Skill rises 0.2 points
Vlorsutes' Observant Parent Skill rises 0.3 points
Vlorsutes' Argument Diffusing Skill rises 0.1 points

#7 Sep 23 2011 at 2:38 AM Rating: Good
***
2,180 posts
I've never played rng or cor high enough to use slugwinder, but I have really felt like a ranger lately, yeah.

I threw on my thunder shamshir just for that spell when I was leveling up.
____________________________
Louverance: You should spend your next life as a friar, my friend!
Later...
Meransarget: Oh, herro there.
#8 Sep 23 2011 at 5:08 AM Rating: Decent
***
2,890 posts
Vlorsutes, Lord of Stuff wrote:
I'd say a good comparison to Heavy Strike's accuracy would be Sidewinder at 100% TP, to where it has an innate accuracy penalty to it.



See this is what I first though when I read what they were doing to it. Having done SAM/RNG I have a pretty good idea what it's -acc is.

A long time ago I went RDM/RNG and fought steel shells to figure out what the acc penalty was of SW @100, and it was approx -40. This was back @75 when I was trying to figure out of Martials Bow was any good for SAM/RNG SW spammage (turns out to be pretty awesome but that was then).

So, with BLU spells having a native +30~35 acc naturally, and this spell not getting that and actually having a -40 penalty, would put it at around -70~75. This is just my guess though, need evidence to back it up. Being a one-shot-wonder and all, meaning if the first hit miss's then the whole thing miss's, your going to notice that missing vs something like BT which is a two hit WS or the myriad of multi-hitters.

Interesting, will need some +acc gear, Pizza+1 or sushi to make it reliable, situation use at best for high defense monsters.
____________________________
RoTZ: Complete DM: O
CoP: Complete AN: O
99 SAM, RDM, BLU, WAR, PLD, DRK

lolgaxe wrote:
Nothing in this game is impossible if you set yourself to the task of actually doing it. Even dumb people can only hold you back for so long.


Lucinus wrote:
when you're hefting something that deadly, you don't miss - mobs get the **** out of the way instead...
#9 Sep 23 2011 at 4:46 PM Rating: Good
Scholar
***
1,054 posts
I tested benethic typhoon as basically 20 less acc than a standard blue spell, but this was only with 200 casts so a fair margin of error (could be as low as -30 acc I would guess). So still above normal melee acc.

Once I cap blue skill, I plan on do a fair amount of testing on Heavy Strike and more BT acc testing as well. Hopefully its not too much lower than BT, but even swaping out Potentcia -> Cuch. mantle, Heafoc -> Alky, Beir+1 -> Piplika belt and maybe ire +1 -> new neck piece (+6str,+6vit....the name escapes me atm). You would be getting 23.5 acc while only giving up 8 STR. Every other slot is more of a 1 to 1 ratio, unless you plan on making acc swords. Perhaps the new +10 acc ammo slot would be a solid choice also.


If someone who knows how to determine statisical significance and ranges on +/-, please show or link to a site so I can figure out how better to do that.

Edited, Sep 23rd 2011 5:48pm by doctorugh
____________________________
Quote:
You can't transform numbers into other numbers like that. It'd just go on forever. That's like witchcraft.


There's one guy I know who
Quote:
is a big deal now.
#10 Sep 24 2011 at 1:22 PM Rating: Decent
**
275 posts
When you say you tested B. Typhoons accuracy against a 'standard blue mage spell', which other spell exactly did you use? Did you only use one? Was it also a single hit?

This is the closest I've been to anyone who's actually confirmed testing the claim that benthic typhoon has less accuracy than most spells, most people just vaguely mention it and I'd wondered where it started.
#11 Sep 24 2011 at 1:41 PM Rating: Good
Scholar
***
1,054 posts
VonCrown wrote:
When you say you tested B. Typhoons accuracy against a 'standard blue mage spell', which other spell exactly did you use? Did you only use one? Was it also a single hit?

This is the closest I've been to anyone who's actually confirmed testing the claim that benthic typhoon has less accuracy than most spells, most people just vaguely mention it and I'd wondered where it started.


I ran against several other one hits, which I know (from previous testing at lvl 75) have +30 acc over melee. (headbutt, vertical cleave). Also vanity dive came up with same acc and HB and VC.



Edited, Sep 24th 2011 2:43pm by doctorugh
____________________________
Quote:
You can't transform numbers into other numbers like that. It'd just go on forever. That's like witchcraft.


There's one guy I know who
Quote:
is a big deal now.
#12 Sep 25 2011 at 4:15 AM Rating: Excellent
***
2,890 posts
Looking over I think I know where SE screwed up badly. Assuming they just reused the SW/SS model of acc, then -40 @100 would of been chosen. Except we cast spells @0 TP, so it would have to go even lower then -40.
____________________________
RoTZ: Complete DM: O
CoP: Complete AN: O
99 SAM, RDM, BLU, WAR, PLD, DRK

lolgaxe wrote:
Nothing in this game is impossible if you set yourself to the task of actually doing it. Even dumb people can only hold you back for so long.


Lucinus wrote:
when you're hefting something that deadly, you don't miss - mobs get the **** out of the way instead...
#13 Sep 25 2011 at 2:22 PM Rating: Excellent
Scholar
***
1,054 posts
So after a bit of testing, some results. The sample size isnt huge but can certainly get some idea. I would like to know better how to determine margin or error, so if someone could clue me on on that....

Target: Ladybugs (THF), that are either DC or EM and read High evasion when checked. The equipment for melee and tested spells remained the same.

Melee: 1102/2187 (50.39%)

Sudden Lunge: 204/308 (66.23%) +31 acc (expected for most blue spells)

Benethic Typhoon 85/174 (48.85%) -3 acc (likely 0 acc and doesnt recieve +acc that other spells get)

Vanity Dive 160/172 (93.02%) +85acc (I was suprised by this, initally I assumed all spells simply got the +30 bonus but never dropped my melee % low enough on previous tests to determine this. It might actually be more than this.

Heavy Strike: 49/243 (20.16%) -60 (So.....thats 90 acc off a typical blue spell and 145 acc or more from vanity dive. Since I hit the absolute lowest % possible on acc, IT COULD BE WORSE!!!)



Conclusion: Heavy Strike is just a fun spell to smash things you could have otherwise smashed with our previous spells and......SE has a wierd sense of humor.
____________________________
Quote:
You can't transform numbers into other numbers like that. It'd just go on forever. That's like witchcraft.


There's one guy I know who
Quote:
is a big deal now.
#14 Sep 25 2011 at 3:41 PM Rating: Good
**
275 posts
So, uh... I guess we could maybe use Heavy Strike in an HNM situation if there's a thief landing feint on the mob?

Cool news about vanity dive though, I guess. Plus it makes accuracy bonus, lol.
#15 Sep 25 2011 at 9:11 PM Rating: Default
Scholar
****
9,209 posts
doctorugh wrote:
So after a bit of testing, some results. The sample size isnt huge but can certainly get some idea. I would like to know better how to determine margin or error, so if someone could clue me on on that....

Target: Ladybugs (THF), that are either DC or EM and read High evasion when checked. The equipment for melee and tested spells remained the same.

Melee: 1102/2187 (50.39%)

Sudden Lunge: 204/308 (66.23%) +31 acc (expected for most blue spells)

Benethic Typhoon 85/174 (48.85%) -3 acc (likely 0 acc and doesnt recieve +acc that other spells get)

Vanity Dive 160/172 (93.02%) +85acc (I was suprised by this, initally I assumed all spells simply got the +30 bonus but never dropped my melee % low enough on previous tests to determine this. It might actually be more than this.

Heavy Strike: 49/243 (20.16%) -60 (So.....thats 90 acc off a typical blue spell and 145 acc or more from vanity dive. Since I hit the absolute lowest % possible on acc, IT COULD BE WORSE!!!)



Conclusion: Heavy Strike is just a fun spell to smash things you could have otherwise smashed with our previous spells and......SE has a wierd sense of humor.

Although it doesn't change the fact that heavy strike really have some accuracy problems, but testing on varying mob level probably doesn't provide an accurate measurement on how much -acc there is. So unless all your target were EM ladybugs, we probably can't infer something accurate.
____________________________
Princess ThePsychoticOne wrote:
int stands for int.

#16 Sep 26 2011 at 3:13 AM Rating: Decent
***
2,890 posts
doctorugh wrote:
So after a bit of testing, some results. The sample size isnt huge but can certainly get some idea. I would like to know better how to determine margin or error, so if someone could clue me on on that....

Target: Ladybugs (THF), that are either DC or EM and read High evasion when checked. The equipment for melee and tested spells remained the same.

Melee: 1102/2187 (50.39%)

Sudden Lunge: 204/308 (66.23%) +31 acc (expected for most blue spells)

Benethic Typhoon 85/174 (48.85%) -3 acc (likely 0 acc and doesnt recieve +acc that other spells get)

Vanity Dive 160/172 (93.02%) +85acc (I was suprised by this, initally I assumed all spells simply got the +30 bonus but never dropped my melee % low enough on previous tests to determine this. It might actually be more than this.

Heavy Strike: 49/243 (20.16%) -60 (So.....thats 90 acc off a typical blue spell and 145 acc or more from vanity dive. Since I hit the absolute lowest % possible on acc, IT COULD BE WORSE!!!)



Conclusion: Heavy Strike is just a fun spell to smash things you could have otherwise smashed with our previous spells and......SE has a wierd sense of humor.


Yep that's what I was beginning to think. -40 would of been understandable, this -90 is complete BS. I understand the spell is only 32mp and 2 set points, but they should of left some utility in it. Now it's just a cheaper way to make Double Attack.

Edited, Sep 26th 2011 9:16am by saevellakshmi
____________________________
RoTZ: Complete DM: O
CoP: Complete AN: O
99 SAM, RDM, BLU, WAR, PLD, DRK

lolgaxe wrote:
Nothing in this game is impossible if you set yourself to the task of actually doing it. Even dumb people can only hold you back for so long.


Lucinus wrote:
when you're hefting something that deadly, you don't miss - mobs get the **** out of the way instead...
#17 Sep 26 2011 at 10:09 AM Rating: Good
Scholar
***
1,054 posts
VZX wrote:
doctorugh wrote:
So after a bit of testing, some results. The sample size isnt huge but can certainly get some idea. I would like to know better how to determine margin or error, so if someone could clue me on on that....

Target: Ladybugs (THF), that are either DC or EM and read High evasion when checked. The equipment for melee and tested spells remained the same.

Melee: 1102/2187 (50.39%)

Sudden Lunge: 204/308 (66.23%) +31 acc (expected for most blue spells)

Benethic Typhoon 85/174 (48.85%) -3 acc (likely 0 acc and doesnt recieve +acc that other spells get)

Vanity Dive 160/172 (93.02%) +85acc (I was suprised by this, initally I assumed all spells simply got the +30 bonus but never dropped my melee % low enough on previous tests to determine this. It might actually be more than this.

Heavy Strike: 49/243 (20.16%) -60 (So.....thats 90 acc off a typical blue spell and 145 acc or more from vanity dive. Since I hit the absolute lowest % possible on acc, IT COULD BE WORSE!!!)



Conclusion: Heavy Strike is just a fun spell to smash things you could have otherwise smashed with our previous spells and......SE has a wierd sense of humor.

Although it doesn't change the fact that heavy strike really have some accuracy problems, but testing on varying mob level probably doesn't provide an accurate measurement on how much -acc there is. So unless all your target were EM ladybugs, we probably can't infer something accurate.


While this test doesn't provide a bottom to the - acc, it does show it is likely at least -60. Meaning I was at 20% (the absolute minimum) on even the dc mobs. Also there are enough melee swings to determine an avg acc on the mobs. since there was no gear swap.

One note: anytime the mob did spiral spin (which was rare), I turned and did *** prior to any melee strikes or casting.
____________________________
Quote:
You can't transform numbers into other numbers like that. It'd just go on forever. That's like witchcraft.


There's one guy I know who
Quote:
is a big deal now.
#18 Sep 26 2011 at 11:08 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
**
312 posts
i tried it a couple times, im not impressed. its super strong but with that acc, im gonna have to go with this guy

Quote:
I understand the spell is only 32mp and 2 set points, but they should of left some utility in it. Now it's just a cheaper way to make Double Attack.


chain affinity is just too strong to have it miss.
____________________________
99war 99mnk 96whm 99blm 90rdm 99thf 85pld 99bst 99brd 99drg
99blu 99pup 60sch 99dnc 99nin 99sam
50/50 glavoid shells
50/50 itz scales
6/75 orthrus claws
#19 Sep 27 2011 at 2:07 PM Rating: Good
Scholar
***
1,054 posts
After do some number crunching on possible builds for heavy strike, it can still be very useful as a spamable spell, as it is has the ability to be our most MP efficient spell even with the -acc bonus (going to assume -60 below melee for demonstration purpose but intend to test most specifically in the future for exact amount)

VS L103 mob with 450 def:

Delta Thrust(MP 28)(my current build, w/ 2 STR shamshir+3)
STR 210
VIT 100
Blue attack: 560
cratio:0.8444
Acc: 466 (includes +30 bonus, pre-food)
Avg damage: 563
Efficeincy (damage/mp) : 20.1

Heavy Strike (high acc set,w/ 2 STR shamshir+3)
STR 167
Blue attack:539
cratio:1.798
Acc: 466 (includes -60 penalty, pre-food)
Avg damage: 934
Efficeincy (damage/mp): 29.2

This is contingent of course on the fTP (2.25) and mod (75% STR) being correct (was tested by others).

CA/Efflux QC will still outperform the CA/Efflux HS Acc version. Bumping the acc much higher on this spell would come at significant cost, but perhaps my affinity for seeing high numbers can take a back seat to make this a worthwhile spell.
And of course we can keep a backup macro for max damage in abyssea and older content and still get some good screenshots.



Edited, Sep 27th 2011 3:14pm by doctorugh
____________________________
Quote:
You can't transform numbers into other numbers like that. It'd just go on forever. That's like witchcraft.


There's one guy I know who
Quote:
is a big deal now.
#20 Sep 27 2011 at 7:12 PM Rating: Good
Scholar
****
9,209 posts
Outside abyssea, using acc instead of STR will change the efficiency number a lot though.

I spammed heavy strike again last night when helping my friend exp/finishing gkt trial on Monitor in A Grauberg. The miss number is decent, but not that bad. I'll just take it as another slugwinder for BLU.

in fact I found benthic typoon is less accurate this time


Edited, Sep 28th 2011 1:14am by VZX
____________________________
Princess ThePsychoticOne wrote:
int stands for int.

#21 Sep 28 2011 at 2:48 AM Rating: Decent
Scholar
***
1,054 posts
VZX wrote:
Outside abyssea, using acc instead of STR will change the efficiency number a lot though.

I spammed heavy strike again last night when helping my friend exp/finishing gkt trial on Monitor in A Grauberg. The miss number is decent, but not that bad. I'll just take it as another slugwinder for BLU.

in fact I found benthic typoon is less accurate this time


Edited, Sep 28th 2011 1:14am by VZX
]

The efficiency # posted above is outside abby as indicated with the low str. It would get much higher inside.
____________________________
Quote:
You can't transform numbers into other numbers like that. It'd just go on forever. That's like witchcraft.


There's one guy I know who
Quote:
is a big deal now.
#22 Sep 28 2011 at 5:04 AM Rating: Decent
Scholar
***
1,054 posts
More Heavy Strike testing (of my own).

Tested fTP(0%) = 2.0 (certainly not 2.25)

fTP(50%) = 2.25 (0tp w/ 5/5 enchainment)

With Efflux and AF3+2 pants (bonus unsure, seeing reports from +50%->100%) fTP(150->200) = 3.0

Testing efflux with 0/5 enchainment merits and 5/5 enchainment did not result in a damage increase (limited testing but I'm inclined to believe they do not stack). It does appear to stack with and not overwrite actual tp when used with CA, but limited testing on this also.


Tested 2 hour a few times and come up with fTP = 3.67 (going to guess btw 3.5 and 4)

Edited, Sep 28th 2011 6:05am by doctorugh
____________________________
Quote:
You can't transform numbers into other numbers like that. It'd just go on forever. That's like witchcraft.


There's one guy I know who
Quote:
is a big deal now.
#23kimjongil76, Posted: Sep 29 2011 at 6:17 AM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) KOTR Heavy Swing = Light. 100 tp and in not so good gear as just testing
#24 Sep 29 2011 at 6:45 AM Rating: Good
***
2,180 posts
Qutrubs are hilarious.

Edited, Sep 29th 2011 3:46pm by zellbaca
____________________________
Louverance: You should spend your next life as a friar, my friend!
Later...
Meransarget: Oh, herro there.
#25kimjongil76, Posted: Sep 29 2011 at 7:50 AM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) Was a worm....
#26 Sep 29 2011 at 8:03 AM Rating: Decent
Scholar
***
1,054 posts
kimjongil76 wrote:
KOTR Heavy Swing = Light. 100 tp and in not so good gear as just testing


3800 Heavy swing 3800 Light. Needles to say mob died.


You were subbing sam?.........
____________________________
Quote:
You can't transform numbers into other numbers like that. It'd just go on forever. That's like witchcraft.


There's one guy I know who
Quote:
is a big deal now.
« Previous 1 2 3
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 1 All times are in CDT
Anonymous Guests (1)