The Black Sacrament -- A Guide To Black Mage

I find it hilarious that you just learned about MACC and resist in 2022.

There are definitely more than two options for rings.
metamorph ring +1
Freke ring
zodiac ring -- 3% bonus on same day
mujin band -- Magic Burst II
Shiva ring +1 Only if you don't have the others
archon ring Niche, Comet casting

I didn't just learn...and this is a forum about blm which should be constructive. Just because we talk about something doesn't mean we don't understand it.

Just for confirmation, is when dINT > 600 is M just 0? The chart doesn't show anything but I assume it's the case

Each nuke tier has it's own dINT "cap", after 600 Tier V's are capped but I think Tier VI's go up by 1 MDMG for each dINT.

Sure... but what you posted definitely reads as if you just learned about it

According to the tables in the link, T5s cap at 500 dINT, T6s get 1 mdmg per INT up to 600, where they have a cap, and yeah, there is not M value 600+ because you've reached the hard cap for T6s

I can't really be bothered punching in 100 numbers every time I want to determine the value of something, so I rough drafted a spreadsheet to try and make it easier, there will be mistakes. Am looking to try and improve it.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1ira64zqthDLSwQnz2aQ96kxAP5nxK8nfidlLTS8a1YM/edit?usp=sharing

I'm curious for your project, but I will say that truly evaluating dINT (really the key starting point in the math since so many other "numbers" rely on that first computation) is infinitely more difficult than say building different tiers of melee accuracy sets. 95% of the time you won't even be wanted in content that would require such computations. Of the remaining 5%, the odds you'd be free-nuking (non burst) are almost non-existent. And figuring the dINT for the various situations where it really matters (in a sense of winning vs losing a fight), a lot more is dependent on the buffs you'll be getting than the gear you'll be wearing.

I've toyed with the idea lately of building different nuke sets more based on tier of nuke than macc needs, as most gear we use these days comes with a hefty amount of macc/skill (In my mind, Amalric+1 is dated and too risky to use compared to our other options)...kind of like how I stopped creating tiers of WS sets on my DD jobs based on accuracy needs, and more based on +PDL variances due to what buffs I have. The gear has grown so much that what we used to vary sets on isn't really a viable source of variance any more. Its kind of like how frontline DDs used to build "hybrid" TP sets, but nowadays almost every set for a heavy DD is "hybrid", even when using BiS dps-related gear.

if you know any python 3, you can use some of the code from my optimizer to generate the ideal damage set under any m.acc condition you need, free nuke or MB

I'm on the path of making some Cata, Earth Crusher, Flash Nova, and uhh AE sets for the blue moon I use AE. I'm wondering what pieces that BLM gets would be superior to Nyame if any?

I am the one who updated the dINT tiers for the higher dInt.

Currently it is very unlikely we will reach those tiers in end game content as mobs like Ongo have ~400 int.

Tests I ran were on bunnies in ronfaure...currently there is not assumed to be a tier for t6 nukes beyond the dInt 600 tier.

My reasoning for this is because each previous tier of nuke caps out in a progressively previous tier of dInt (tier 5 caps at dInt 500, tier 4 at dInt 400).

Interestingly enough though the tier 2 ancient magic never caps out - it is consistently 2 damage per dInt across all tiers including the dInt 600. I have yet to be able to test for the dInt 700 tier and still need to do geo and helix spells.

are
Are you suggesting that that AMII spells could hit higher numbers based on exclusively gearing for those spells/bursts alone?

They have lower casting time than T6 spells but if they could push out similar numbers via burst windows....would be interesting to see the numbers.

He is talking about dINT 600+ (and assuming it never caps you would need like dINT 1000 probably to match T6). It's mostly for science. There is no real end game scenario when you can achieve dINT 700. You would need like 900INT in nuke set against target that's hit by Burn and max buffed absorb INT from DRK.

Yeah - aside from possibly brewing something you would probably never actually see the dInt 600+ tier on current mobs - I had to use bard and geo to get that high when I was running my tests on bunnies which have around 7 int.

As far as spell growth over dInt tiers AM2 is worthwhile to keep macro'd. For low tier (dInt 0-49) -aja spells are much stronger than t4/t5's....but they quicky get outpaced in the d100 and d200 tiers....it is also worthwhile to notice that -aga3 spells catch up and surpass AM2 in these tiers but drop off in the d400 tier.

So priority of spell casts if you are bursting in dInt0-49 vs d100 vs d200 vs d300/400 are slightly different. (You'll still prioritize T6 > -aja3 > T5 (assuming -aja debuff is active already) but if you have CD's then after that in general it is between -aga3, AM2, and T4.)

Having an issue with my BLM lua... trying to set it up to use "Wicce Chausses +2" for -aja spells and not get overridden by MagicBurst set when its on. Using Selindriles. Any advice?

Do you have Burst toggle on?

Yes. I want the rest of the gear to change to MB gear when it's on, just need the legs to stay locked on empy+2.

ItemSet 386920ItemSet 386921
I guess you are right w/ AF+3 legs giving an additional 15 macc
Thinking Skill trumps Macc tho w/ Boots for Resist. AF+3 boots not BiS.
The Skill on Laev drastically decreases Resist rate vs Bunzi combo as is

Struggled to land Burn vs Kei using Bunzi but Laev fixed everything
I am also convinced that is also Wrong. We used to assume that Skill was 1.5x that of Macc yet now we assuming less & in game Macc =/= Skill. Not from what I have experienced using Bunzi combo compared to Laevateinn.

Controlled testing has both shown that 1 MACC = 1 magic accuracy skill, and that dINT (for black magic) affects magic accuracy. I've literally done a test where my land rate literally more than doubled just from adding large amounts of INT. It's an absolutely established fact, and your gut feelings don't matter.

Also, we've never assumed anything like 1 skill = 1.5 macc. Before it was tested, the we assumed that either 1 skill = 1 macc, or that it follows melee skill rules where 1 skill = 0.8 to 1 macc depending on how much you have. Testing then showed it was 1 = 1 after all.

dINT is also established. The cutoff points are:

<-70 dINT = 1 INT = 0 MACC
-70 to -31 dINT: 1 INT = 0.25 MACC
-30 to -11 dINT: 1 INT = 0.5 MACC
-10 to 10 dINT: 1 INT = 1 MACC
11 to 30 dINT: 1 INT = 0.5 MACC
31 to 70 dINT: 1 INT = 0.25 MACC
>70 dINT: 1 INT = 0 MACC

Where exactly is the Question. I checked Bgwiki links and the only dINT testing I saw was using Drain.


Drain doesn’t equate to Paralyze or Slow it equates w/ Thunder & Blizzard where dINT makes perfect sense for Potency. dINT ain’t doing anything for Impact Macc outside of M.Dmg which is not what we are looking to achieve.

There's lots of mechanics testing that don't make it onto BG wiki for one reason or another.

I did dINT testing that I posted in the Mathy subforum on Bluegartr, and this JP player did very in-depth dINT testing on their blog years ago (though I deleted the exact link I used to have so some digging to find the precise page would be required these days): https://luteff11.livedoor.blog/

Still not seeing dINT = Macc
I need to see the Tests done cuz there’s obvious discrepancies showing in game.

I pointed you to two sources showing dINT = MACC and the BG wiki page shows a 3rd. If you're not seeing it, you're not looking.

Your "obvious discrepancies" of casting Burn a couple times on Kei are the result of tiny sample sizes, and don't exist.

You showed a chart. That’s not Testing. Is this where you got such info from? http://robonosto.blogspot.com/2008/12/give-me-data-or-give-me.html?m=1

He is blatantly confusing Macc w/ M.Dmg thinking they are both the same thing.
He is also the same person linked to BGwiki for Magic Accuracy testing.

I get nobody including myself have the time to Test countless targets & it’s easier just to go w/ what others have alrdy Tested long ago in the past yet the Tests I am finding do not Test Macc whatsoever & formulated my opinions reading such when I say dINT =/= Macc but rather M.Dmg Potency only.

That's literally a chart showing Lodeguy's testing results (taken from http://lodeguy.blog69.fc2.com/blog-entry-410.html). He cast water spells thousands of times on a specific enemy and recorded how many times he got resisted at each amount of skill, then Robonosto analyzed the results using statistics to prove that it's very unlikely 1 skill is noticeably different than 1 magic accuracy. That's how you test something like this. At no point does he mix up magic accuracy and magic damage in his analysis.

Also your original claim using Burn and Kei is pointless, because Kei greatly changes his fire resistance whenever he swaps between wind mode and fire mode, so it naturally varies greatly in how hard it is to land Burn on him even without considering other factors.

I pointed you towards multiple tests showing dINT affecting MACC on black magic skills, including mine where the fully unresisted land rate of my spell went from ~33% rate to ~75% rate solely from adding more INT.

Don't worry folks- this happens about every 2-3 years in the BLM world. Someone is convinced that we've all just been doing it wrong for years and that SE doesn't need to fix BLM, because our savior has finally stopped playing MNK to learn us all good on how to BLM!

The truth is what Geriond is trying to bash into your frontal lobe- elemental magic damage formulas are some of the most established in-game we have, there really isn't much new under the sun, and as soon as these newer BLMs just calm the *** down and accept what the rest of us have for half a decade, the sooner we can get back to real BLM forum issues- like bitching we don't get natively get Cataclysm.