View Full Version : Typo or Lukless Mages ftw?
Delicae
2008-07-13, 01:47 PM
http://strategywiki.org/wiki/MapleStory/Magician_Guide/Equipment
Has anyone noticed that the 130 LUKLESS wands are stronger than the 165 luk Staves?
Here let me explain myself:
http://media.strategywiki.org/images/9/99/MS_Item_Freeze_Wand.png Freeze Wand -
Required stats:
Level 130
Slow
Weapon Attack: 92
Magic Attack: 145
LUK: +2
Elemental Default: 75%
Ice Attacks: +25%
Lightning Attacks: +10%
http://media.strategywiki.org/images/e/ec/MS_Item_Xuanwu_%28Ice%29.png Xuanwu -
Required stats:
Level 163
LUK 165
Fast
Weapon Attack : 72
Magic Attack : 118
INT +1
LUK +2
Elemental Default: 75%
Ice Attacks: +25%
Lightning Attacks: +10%
Notice: It's been already cleared up that the 163 staves base Magic attack is 178. I just wanted to point out this funny typo into making me think that Lukless mages still win!
Credits: All informations and images belong to - http://strategywiki.org
Cardboardsnail
2008-07-13, 01:48 PM
That's no joke. Those lukless weapons really are that powerful.
ahoboandahal
2008-07-13, 01:49 PM
thats a typo. the luk ones have 178 clean.
There's 130 weapons? They're beast.
Darklai
2008-07-13, 01:52 PM
If that wasn't a typo, maple would be finally 100% unbalanced. Yup yup.
Yoorah
2008-07-13, 02:13 PM
I'm no expert on Mages, but I believe the LUKless kind wins regardless of this being a typo or not. :P
Kigaz
2008-07-13, 02:21 PM
I'm no expert on Mages, but I believe the LUKless kind wins regardless of this being a typo or not. :P
Thats true :P
161 LUK would be better off in INT :f3:
The LUK staves only have 178 base while the lukless have 145??
C'mon -_-
Edit:Now that I think about it,LUKless wins every time T_T
Takebacker
2008-07-13, 02:21 PM
Huh. Luckless wands have slow speed. Never noticed that.
Milelke
2008-07-13, 02:25 PM
I suspect it was edited actually.
Its Wiki, you can edit at will.
Delicae
2008-07-13, 02:26 PM
I'm no expert on Mages, but I believe the LUKless kind wins regardless of this being a typo or not. :P
Haha Lukless do always win.
But I'm the shallow luk-type who likes to wear pretty equips and weapons instead of having major 1337tzzz@@ power lol...
I suspect it was edited actually.
Its Wiki, you can edit at will.
Ah, that's true. I hadn't thought of that.
butterfλi
2008-07-13, 05:41 PM
Huh. Luckless wands have slow speed. Never noticed that.
Yes, when you wack a snail with that wand, you'll wack it slower than a magician holding a fast weapon... lol.
When you cast speed, it's the same speed. The only spell effected by wand/staff speed if explosion and perhaps the ultimates but no one confirmed that yet.
DumbApples
2008-07-13, 09:33 PM
I believe only the wand is lukless while the other require luk.
Lunare
2008-07-13, 10:24 PM
Despite the typo let me keep it simple for you.
Lukless Mage FTW
★tastie
2008-07-14, 07:29 AM
I'm no expert on Mages, but I believe the LUKless kind wins regardless of this being a typo or not. :P
unfortunately this is true. theres almost no way for a regular build or low luk to come close to the potential of lukless.
doctorx
2008-07-14, 07:34 AM
unfortunately this is true. theres almost no way for a regular build or low luk to come close to the potential of lukless.
Um... re-check your facts. Low-LUK builds can actually match LUK-less mages performance, given that the Low-LUK mage has a Horntail Pendant (scrolled once) + Zakum Helmet (1) + LUK capped at a total 80 + Doomsday staff similarly scrolled as a Maple LV64 wand/staff. Not like 10~15 points of Magic stats will make the difference.
★tastie
2008-07-14, 10:22 AM
Um... re-check your facts. Low-LUK builds can actually match LUK-less mages performance, given that the Low-LUK mage has a Horntail Pendant (scrolled once) + Zakum Helmet (1) + LUK capped at a total 80 + Doomsday staff similarly scrolled as a Maple LV64 wand/staff. Not like 10~15 points of Magic stats will make the difference.
all that can compare to a lukless with such elemental staffs being discussed in this thread?
Kabanaw
2008-07-14, 12:17 PM
I have my luk capped at 103 for the lvl 100 items, and assuming by the time I was a high enough level to equip this you can scroll HT pendants more than once, then with a 15 luk zak helm and a 37 luk pendant I could equip the lvl 163 staff, which is probably a lot cheaper considering not many people would be able to equip it, unlike every other elemental item.
Sushii
2008-07-15, 12:24 AM
Regardless of those weapons or not, lukless will end up being better anyways.
Without the luk at that level that's like 130+ Magic.
Too bad bishops cant benefit from these elemental wands/staffs.
Kabanaw
2008-07-15, 08:53 AM
Too bad bishops cant benefit from these elemental wands/staffs.
They were made to help balance bishops and AMs, along with AMs and other classes.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.1.10 Copyright © 2012 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.