Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

MAB vs INT Follow

#1 Jan 23 2011 at 1:36 PM Rating: Decent
*
84 posts
ok so i was having a debate w/ a blm in my lowman LS i know 1int<1mab<2int is there a point when this will become incorrect w/ T4 and T5 spells that mab would offer better results or is this always true
#2 Jan 23 2011 at 1:38 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
******
29,185 posts
Unless your naked or some ****, that is always true. Depending on spell/gear/mob/etc, 1 int usually = between 1.6~1.9 mab. The more mab you have, the less you get from adding more.
____________________________
BANNED

Creator and Leader of the Anti-Rog faction
#3 Jan 23 2011 at 2:10 PM Rating: Decent
5 posts
INT is the multiplier of your spells. MAB is the modifier of the multiplier. It depends on your gear on what you have
#4 Jan 23 2011 at 2:10 PM Rating: Decent
Avatar
******
29,185 posts
SajIsSEXY wrote:
INT is the multiplier of your spells. MAB is the modifier of the multiplier. It depends on your gear on what you have
wat
____________________________
BANNED

Creator and Leader of the Anti-Rog faction
#5 Jan 23 2011 at 2:15 PM Rating: Decent
5 posts
There is no +2 INT = +1 MAB in the magic damage formula. INT is a direct +damage on top of the spell's base damage, while MAB is a multiplier after the INT calculations are made. Sometimes it ends up working out to be 2 INT = 1 MAB, depending on your gear and your target, but that is purely coincidence.

An imaginary Hume BLM/RDM with 72+45 INT, 32+18 MAB, max ice/thunder merits and neutral day/weather wears a NQ weskit and does 1315/1372 vs Puddings. Switches to RR with +4 MAB/Macc and does 1320/1377. Puts on a HQ weskit and does 1322/1381. Upgrades to Morrigan's and does 1342/1400.

A lucky augment of +6 INT on the NQ Weskit brings them up to 1342/1400 (same as Morrigan's!). A lucky augment of +6 INT on the HQ brings them up to 1351/1408.

What's better changes depending on the target's INT and any magic damage modifier it might have (MDB, -MDT, etc.). Flans have 89 INT and take an extra 25% damage from magic.
#6 Jan 23 2011 at 2:19 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
******
29,185 posts
SajIsSEXY wrote:
There is no +2 INT = +1 MAB in the magic damage formula.
No one ever said there was.
____________________________
BANNED

Creator and Leader of the Anti-Rog faction
#7 Jan 23 2011 at 2:43 PM Rating: Decent
5 posts
Its what the poster is saying
#8 Jan 23 2011 at 2:44 PM Rating: Decent
Avatar
******
29,185 posts
No, he was comparing them. He said 1 int is worth less than 1 mab which is worth less than 2 int. All of that is true.
____________________________
BANNED

Creator and Leader of the Anti-Rog faction
#9 Jan 23 2011 at 8:11 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
40 posts
This really is not true all of the time. The tradeoff between INT and MAB is going to depend on a number of factors but the big deciders are Atma and tier of spell. If you don't have Ultimate, its going to offset the relative benefit towards the "2 int" end, and if you don't have MM somehow, its going to make INT a much more valuable tradeoff.

In all honesty, a better rule of thumb since the introduction of Tier V spells is (spell_M_value -1)INT < 1 MAB < (spell_M_value)INT, so for Vs, you're looking at somewhere between 1.299 and 2.299. If you are seriously MAB deficient (no beyond, baying, ultimate etc) you're even pushing the 2.8 mark.

This blog has a derived equation to determine the approximate value of an increase of 1 MAB, its useful for figuring out that kind of thing if you want to make separate macros / spellcast rules for different individual spells.

Edited, Jan 29th 2011 10:15pm by NotJim
____________________________
Jimothy
Bismark
BLM 61, WHM 50
#10 Jan 24 2011 at 5:13 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
******
29,185 posts
NotJim wrote:
In all honesty, a better rule of thumb since the introduction of Tier V spells is (spell_V_value -1)INT < 1 MAB < (spell_V_value)INT
That doesn't account for how much mab you have, or even the M value...
____________________________
BANNED

Creator and Leader of the Anti-Rog faction
#11 Jan 29 2011 at 9:18 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
40 posts
My bad, I meant to put M but was thinking V for some reason. It doesn't take MAB into account on purpose, so you can apply it to anyone. Its just meant to improve upon the old 2 = 1 heuristic that everyone gets comfortable with. Its safe to assume that as a BLM, your MAB is not going to go above 200 (excluding maybe ascetics, I don't know values for them), and it holds true for all MAB values under 200.
____________________________
Jimothy
Bismark
BLM 61, WHM 50
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 15 All times are in CST
Ashtehcat, Anonymous Guests (14)