Rdm Sets
Rdm Sets
Hmm, post disappeared. Anyway, if you start with a max potency build, and add skill as required (to land), shouldn't the very first thing you swap in be the HQ staff?
Odin.Blazza said:
Hmm, post disappeared. Anyway, if you start with a max potency build, and add skill as required (to land), shouldn't the very first thing you swap in be the HQ staff?
Yeah, should swap out in the order of:
HQ Staff(15% MACC bonus vs. 13 MND) >=
Relic Hat (15 Enf vs. 5 MND) >
AF Body (15 Enf vs. 10/11 MND)
Since 5 MND is kind of low vs. 15 enfeebling, you could also do hat first. You want to keep Errant/Mahatma body on as long as you can.
You can probably use full potency for most Limbus, Dynamis, most ZNM, and EXP events. But you'll want to push some MACC on high level mobs like the ones in Sky.
Personally I prefer to use staff/grip in my potency-set aswell.
Might not reach max potency, but atleast I wont get resisted on HELP I AM TRAPPED IN 2006 PLEASE SEND A TIME MACHINE things.
120+ MND with 5/5 Slow II seems to do very good for me, and I can land with the potency set on most stuff.
Used wand/club for awhile but I cba to make 3 sets just for slow II, and it sucks bigtime when it resists, as the recast timer is pretty high. (20 seconds-ish without fast cast?)
Might not reach max potency, but atleast I wont get resisted on HELP I AM TRAPPED IN 2006 PLEASE SEND A TIME MACHINE things.
120+ MND with 5/5 Slow II seems to do very good for me, and I can land with the potency set on most stuff.
Used wand/club for awhile but I cba to make 3 sets just for slow II, and it sucks bigtime when it resists, as the recast timer is pretty high. (20 seconds-ish without fast cast?)
HQ staffs are not 15%, this was disproved a long time ago.
They are ~30 m.acc (NQ is ~20). 30 m.acc = 30 skill, therefore in terms of land rate, AF + AFv2 = HQ staff.
You can get more MND from the main/sub slots so, if you are trying to maximise you MND at a without dropping m.acc then use AF/AFv2/Wand/Shield (30m.acc and 16 MND)
If you need more m.acc then sure switch to Staff/AFv2/Errant body, as this will give 45 m.acc and 10 MND)
They are ~30 m.acc (NQ is ~20). 30 m.acc = 30 skill, therefore in terms of land rate, AF + AFv2 = HQ staff.
You can get more MND from the main/sub slots so, if you are trying to maximise you MND at a without dropping m.acc then use AF/AFv2/Wand/Shield (30m.acc and 16 MND)
If you need more m.acc then sure switch to Staff/AFv2/Errant body, as this will give 45 m.acc and 10 MND)
Looking at just the main/sub/head/body slots the order would be:
Highest mnd to highest m.acc
Wand/Shield/Goliard/Errant (0macc and 31MND)
Wand/Shield/AFv2/Errant (15macc and 26MND)
Wand/Shield/AFv2/AF (30macc and 16 MND)
Staff/Grip/AFv2/Errant (45macc and 11-13MND)
Staff/Grip/AFv2/AF (60macc and 1-3MND)
Edit: GDI I meant to edit.
Highest mnd to highest m.acc
Wand/Shield/Goliard/Errant (0macc and 31MND)
Wand/Shield/AFv2/Errant (15macc and 26MND)
Wand/Shield/AFv2/AF (30macc and 16 MND)
Staff/Grip/AFv2/Errant (45macc and 11-13MND)
Staff/Grip/AFv2/AF (60macc and 1-3MND)
Edit: GDI I meant to edit.
Valefor.Argettio said:
HQ staffs are not 15%, this was disproved a long time ago.
They are ~30 m.acc (NQ is ~20). 30 m.acc = 30 skill, therefore in terms of land rate, AF + AFv2 = HQ staff.
You can get more MND from the main/sub slots so, if you are trying to maximise you MND at a without dropping m.acc then use AF/AFv2/Wand/Shield (30m.acc and 16 MND)
If you need more m.acc then sure switch to Staff/AFv2/Errant body, as this will give 45 m.acc and 10 MND)
They are ~30 m.acc (NQ is ~20). 30 m.acc = 30 skill, therefore in terms of land rate, AF + AFv2 = HQ staff.
You can get more MND from the main/sub slots so, if you are trying to maximise you MND at a without dropping m.acc then use AF/AFv2/Wand/Shield (30m.acc and 16 MND)
If you need more m.acc then sure switch to Staff/AFv2/Errant body, as this will give 45 m.acc and 10 MND)
Actually, even using your logic for this, using staff still wins out over swapping the other pieces.
30 MACC Staff + 3 MND Grip + 10/11 MND Body + 5 MND Hat
Total: 18/19 MND + 30 MACC
vs.
16 MND Wand and Shield + 15 MACC Body + 15 MACC Head
Total: 16 MND + 30 MACC
However, it's also proven that at high tiers, Skill < MACC. So say, once you're over 300 skill level in enfeebling, adding 15 enfeebling isn't near as potent as adding 15 magic accuracy.
1 skill = 1 macc, allways
Edit: It has been proven that one point of skill in the appropriate magic skill (e.g. Elemental Magic, Enfeebling Magic, ...) corresponds to one point of Magic Accuracy, and not .9.
Edit: It has been proven that one point of skill in the appropriate magic skill (e.g. Elemental Magic, Enfeebling Magic, ...) corresponds to one point of Magic Accuracy, and not .9.
True I forgot to factor in the grip.
Where is the testing that shows the relationship between macc and skill varies?
My source:
http://kanican.livejournal.com/34049.html
Where is the testing that shows the relationship between macc and skill varies?
My source:
Quote:
1) +1 MACC ("Magic Accuracy" the stat) is equivalent to +1 Skill
There is some debate as to whether 1 skill really equates to 0.9 magic accuracy over 200 base skill (as is the case for melee skills). Statistically it is incredibly hard to tell the difference between 1.0 and 0.9 without a massive number of trials, so the current testing is unable to support or refute this idea. For the purposes of this post, I will consider them equivalent unless future testing suggests otherwise.
EDIT: See Edit info, 1 MACC is 1 Skill (proven after this post was first made by R
There is some debate as to whether 1 skill really equates to 0.9 magic accuracy over 200 base skill (as is the case for melee skills). Statistically it is incredibly hard to tell the difference between 1.0 and 0.9 without a massive number of trials, so the current testing is unable to support or refute this idea. For the purposes of this post, I will consider them equivalent unless future testing suggests otherwise.
EDIT: See Edit info, 1 MACC is 1 Skill (proven after this post was first made by R
http://kanican.livejournal.com/34049.html
Ahh, I was still under the assumption that the correlation was 0.9 MACC per skill at high tiers.
Don't melee stats work like that, and are less potent 200+ than they are at 0-200? Not saying melee and magic are the same, but if they programmed it in like that for melee, why not do a similar programming for magic?
Don't melee stats work like that, and are less potent 200+ than they are at 0-200? Not saying melee and magic are the same, but if they programmed it in like that for melee, why not do a similar programming for magic?
Caitsith.Mahayaya said:
Ahh, I was still under the assumption that the correlation was 0.9 MACC per skill at high tiers.
Don't melee stats work like that, and are less potent 200 than they are at 0-200? Not saying melee and magic are the same, but if they programmed it in like that for melee, why not do a similar programming for magic?
Don't melee stats work like that, and are less potent 200 than they are at 0-200? Not saying melee and magic are the same, but if they programmed it in like that for melee, why not do a similar programming for magic?
It is like that for melee, yes.
But it´s proven otherwise for magic:p
Idk why they made it that way, but it´s SE afterall lol
Caitsith.Mahayaya said:
Ahh, I was still under the assumption that the correlation was 0.9 MACC per skill at high tiers.
Don't melee stats work like that, and are less potent 200 than they are at 0-200? Not saying melee and magic are the same, but if they programmed it in like that for melee, why not do a similar programming for magic?
Don't melee stats work like that, and are less potent 200 than they are at 0-200? Not saying melee and magic are the same, but if they programmed it in like that for melee, why not do a similar programming for magic?
Yes melee skill become 0.9 accuracy after 200 skill and it used to be believe to work the same for mage, but that was proved wrong.
Cerberus.Kvazz said:
Caitsith.Mahayaya said:
Ahh, I was still under the assumption that the correlation was 0.9 MACC per skill at high tiers.
Don't melee stats work like that, and are less potent 200 than they are at 0-200? Not saying melee and magic are the same, but if they programmed it in like that for melee, why not do a similar programming for magic?
Don't melee stats work like that, and are less potent 200 than they are at 0-200? Not saying melee and magic are the same, but if they programmed it in like that for melee, why not do a similar programming for magic?
It is like that for melee, yes.
But it´s proven otherwise for magic:p
Idk why they made it that way, but it´s SE afterall lol
They did it when the level cap was upped from 60 and was supposed to be something to do with scaling at higher levels. I never really figured out the reasoning.
Oh well, not like it's an issue or anything, as long as we know about it and can calculate around it ^^,
But it would be nice if SE could confirm some of the macc tests and ***.
But it would be nice if SE could confirm some of the macc tests and ***.
Valefor.Argettio said:
Looking at just the main/sub/head/body slots the order would be:
Highest mnd to highest m.acc
Wand/Shield/Goliard/Errant (0macc and 31MND)
Wand/Shield/AFv2/Errant (15macc and 26MND)
Wand/Shield/AFv2/AF (30macc and 16 MND)
Staff/Grip/AFv2/Errant (45macc and 11-13MND)
Staff/Grip/AFv2/AF (60macc and 1-3MND)
Edit: GDI I meant to edit.
Highest mnd to highest m.acc
Wand/Shield/Goliard/Errant (0macc and 31MND)
Wand/Shield/AFv2/Errant (15macc and 26MND)
Wand/Shield/AFv2/AF (30macc and 16 MND)
Staff/Grip/AFv2/Errant (45macc and 11-13MND)
Staff/Grip/AFv2/AF (60macc and 1-3MND)
Edit: GDI I meant to edit.
those 2 combination also look nice:
Alkalurops/Grip(new)/Goliard/Errant(HQ) (20Macc and 27(29)MND)
Alkalurops/Grip(new)/AF2/Errant(HQ) (35Macc and 22(24)MND)
both for me seems very nice hybrid combinations.
Valefor.Argettio said:
You most likely don't have enough MND to cap cure IV ; you need around 70 MND to cap it with capped healing skill.
Leviathan.Pimpchan said:
Valefor.Argettio said:
You most likely don't have enough MND to cap cure IV ; you need around 70 MND to cap it with capped healing skill.
All FFXI content and images © 2002-2024 SQUARE ENIX CO., LTD. FINAL
FANTASY is a registered trademark of Square Enix Co., Ltd.