Teal vs. AF handsFollow

As far as i know, bard songs haven't been tested. I've always assumed that 2 skill = 1 macc, what with having twice as much skill and all, but it could very well be 1:1. We just don't know for sure.

Yeah, to be honest, i'd be a bit surprised if 1 skill=1 macc for songs, but again, we just don't know for sure.

You can't be that busy with alla, mr. 73 posts.

Well the usual "We don't know" disclaimer applies here but:

If you take the Occam's Razor approach, there's no reason for SE to re-invent magic accuracy / magic evasion / magic hit rate for songs. Currently it IS proven that 1 Skill in Elemental/Enfeebling = 1 MACC, and further evidence supports Dark/Ninjutsu and Blue Magic works the same. For the sake of simplicity, it would be the best answer to assume 1 Sing/String/Wind = 1 MACC. This doesn't mean it's true, but the chances of it being different, with a whole new formula just for songs....We'll it *is* SE we are talking about...

Anyways, your going to want to AF+1 hands anyways for the extra CHR and the fact that skill can be used for debuffs AND buffs.


Edited, Aug 6th 2010 9:51am by Asmoranomar

I understand that, and if it wasn't for that specific piece I'd call you crazy for using the "We don't know" caviet.

I really think this thing with requiem having bad accuracy is being falsely attributed to the fact that a lot of mobs are just immune to it. I can't remember ever having a noteworthy issue landing it on something like chariots or omega, although I was surprised to find they weren't immune.

A lot of notorious monsters that have been added since the release of ToAU are completely immune to Requiem. It's not an issue of the spell's accuracy or anything, just Square Enix deciding that they didn't want that particular DoT to work on the NMs. This is the same as how a lot of the newer NMs are immune to Bind, Gravity, and Sleep.

The ironic bit is, the whole Don't Want These Important Mobs Defeated Easily purpose would have been served a lot better if they made them Elegy-immune instead of Requiem-immune. That and many of them are still susceptible to Poison, which basically does the exact same thing.

It's kinda annoying how they give out all these Requiem spells (there are now 7 of them, more tiers than any other available spell in the game AFAIK) and make them all entirely ineffectual on even some of the more mundane NMs. It's not like a pimped out Requiem is going to be destroying these mobs any faster than any other caster job could.

Should I be ditching my Osode in favour of a Teal Saio for debuffs?

What nonsense is this? Can you please cite your references? As far as any tests that have been done, CHR offers the same amount of MACC that MND or INT does for their respective spells. In addition to that, your target (and its corresponding stats) is going to determine the exact amount of MACC you will receive via stats.

In terms of Magic Accuracy, you will receive:
Kirin's Osode: 5-10 Variable MACC
Teal Saio: 4 Fixed MACC and an additional 3-6 Variable MACC

Teal Saio will offer more MACC on average than Kirin's Osode, but will peak out the same. It only offer's 6 less MP than Osode, and /facepalm at looks.

If your going to pick some good features of the Osode, at least point out that it has a higher defense rating, and large gains in VIT and AGI (increases defense, decreases enemy critical hit rate, increases evasion). It isn't much, but at this point MP should be a non-issue for most. 6 MP wouldn't even buy you an extra cure - for example.

Advice? If all you care is MACC, then keep Saio. If you play other jobs or care about other stats, keep both.

Edited, Oct 26th 2010 5:35pm by Asmoranomar

Incorrect. There is no fCHR function. There *IS* a dStat function but it works completely differently than what you described. You can never cap out on CHR and adding more will always benefit you.



Incorrect. What you are describing is the the base stats of HNM's around that level. They are more important for estimating damage (in the case of INT) and estimating the maximum magic accuracy bonus received from stats. It *is* a good reference to go by, but your reasoning (via caps) is wrong. Furthermore, CHR and Skill can be directly tied to MACC - it is therefore impossible to tell someone to 'cap' one and wear gear for another.

Is it good to tell someone to reach 120 stat? Yes. Should you tell people to stop wearing CHR after 120 and focus on other stuff? No. CHR never gets to a point where it becomes worthless and you should still wear whatever piece of gear will give you the larger of the bonus. This is why things like Jester's Cape +1 (5 to 10 MACC) will generally be better than Astute Cape (5 MACC), even when your over the dStat tier.



Duh?



Incorrect. I'll save you the lecture on that one though because you already admitted you've been eyeballing it. There are some pretty impressive tests over the past few years on magic accuracy that stomp your 'eyeball' methods.



In regards to MACC, I disagree. There's still purpose for Kirin's Osode outside of that.



He's talking about debuffs! I know we got side-tracked on the additional stats, but I was trying to make a point that HAD he asked about that THOSE would be the ones to point out. He didn't, and you tried to say Kirin's Osode is better. Not only are you wrong, but anything other than MACC is irrelevant anyways (for all we know he could be gear swapping, etc.).

Finally, it looks better? Seriously? Functionality > Looks. You shouldn't be giving advice at all if the foundation for it has to be 'it must look good'. Looks doesn't make you land spells better.

Edited, Oct 27th 2010 3:29pm by Asmoranomar

I haven't updated my gear set in over a year+ and I only did it to show a friend how to build an SST setup, so don't rely on it. Also, Marduk Jubbah would give a MACC bonus of 6-12, against Teal Saio's 7-10. Since I gear for worst case scenario (and the bigger bonus), I still wear Marduk.


The problem is, it's Both (I'm also assuming you mean skill=MACC, otherwise your wrong). Tests show that the type of bonus you get is both 1:1 and 2:1 or VERY close. Your target's stats determine WHEN this changes from 1:1 to 2:1. The higher the mob's stats, the more MACC you receive from stats.


I have/use one.


You don't need high level mobs to test this. Much of the tests have been done against lower level mobs. As long as you know the enemy's base stats you can measure stat's effects of MACC.


Thank you.


First: MACC works nothing like PACC. They are calculated completely differently, so you cannot assume the same. You really need to read up on how MACC is calculated.

Second: You underestimate how much Etudes and their effect on MACC works on mobs you are under-geared for. If you have a high resist rate, your Etudes will give you a 24 MACC bonus without a proper instrument. This is a little less than what a HQ staff would give you under the same conditions.

Third: Your understanding of how MACC is used to determine Magic Hit Rate (and by extension, how PACC determines Hit Rate) is flawed. Infact, what you said makes no sense. When we talk about percentages, we are talking about Magic/Physical Hit Rates. 1 MACC could increase Magic Hit Rate by 5%, or it could increase it by 50% - This all depends on the target's natural Magic Evasion stat. MACC and Magic Hit Rate are NOT the same thing.


There is, I told you that. But the tier isn't 120 CHR, it's dStat.


It depends on your definition of comparable. Due to your misunderstanding, I can see why you'd do MACC. However, The real answer is "Whatever is better". As I said before, there is never a point where CHR is useless. For example, if you have a piece of gear that grants +10 MACC and one that grants +12 CHR, there will be times when the MACC piece wins and times when the CHR piece will win (depends on your target). At this point it becomes a matter of preference between what is more reliable (MACC), and what will give you the stronger edge against tougher mobs (CHR).

My personal preference is to pick the piece of gear that has the stronger edge. There are a lot of reasons why I do this, but the biggest reason is because if it does come down to the CHR dStat, then it already means I'm over-geared for my target and I'm going to have an adequate Magic Hit Rate. In no way am I suggesting everyone has to play this way, there are strategic uses for a reliance build too - especially if you don't do HNMs.



In regards to DEX and Critical Hit Rate - There is no such tier. DEX operates on an exponential curve, which means you have to have lots of it in order to see the larger gains - but every point of DEX increases your Critical Hit Rate (unless your capped at 20%). This has been extensively tested, and the math for it has been released by Studio Gobli (which many assume the data is generated from SE insiders).

Back to CHR - There is no part of the MACC formula that works like DEX does for Critical Hit Rate. Low/High stat builds have been tested and exhibit predictable MACC rates.



Why can you not understand that the community was incorrect in its assumptions? The system you are describing was theoretical (not proven), and was found to be wrong. Your sitting in the middle of 4+ year-old knowledge. I'm not debating that people used to think this was true, I'm telling you it is incorrect.

I don't see why your stuck on something that was never tested and proven - when you have one person doing 8,000 tests with 95% confidence, and hundreds of other smaller tests that support it. Not to mention that there are NO tests that show the system works differently for CHR or supports any type of method you describe. All of these tests began back in 2008, so none of this information is exactly new now. Most people stopped believing in the 120 Cap even before then.

If your unwilling to provide accurate data that proves your system works, or do the work yourself, then please stop providing advice regarding a system that has been debunked years ago.

If you need links, let me know and I'll provide what I can. I'm not the go-to person for every available resource/test, but I can most certainly point you to references that can get you started. Having a JPN Translator might help too.

Edited, Oct 28th 2010 7:00am by Asmoranomar

Not exactly. You get either 1 macc per mnd/int/chr, or 1 macc per 2 stat. If you're stat minus the mob's appropriate stat is > 10, then you get macc in a 1:2 ratio. If it's lower than 10, then you get 1:1. You'll basically always have >10 Δstat, so you can just simplify it to 2 chr = 1 macc, as that's the case 99.99% of the time

You are wrong. There are no ranges. 10 chr gives either 5, or 10. Nothing in between.

Edited, Oct 31st 2010 7:01am by ThePsychoticOne

That's what i said

That's not a variable bonus. You get 1 macc per stat up until Δstat=10, and then 1 per 2 stat after that.