What's better %INT, %Damage or %Mattk?

Printable View

2012-03-23, 04:03 AM
FallenMemory

What's better %INT, %Damage or %Mattk?

I'm a level 160 Bishop with 816 base Int and 333 added Int. My current clean range is 10348~11498.

I was wondering if I was planning on using a nebulite on a staff, which of the bonuses would be better between 2% Int, 2% Mattk, 4% Damage, Mattk+4 and Ignore 18%def? How are the Mattk and damage one calculated? And whats the current formula to find out how much Int =1 matk?

Sorry if this has been asked before, but I can't see to find solid information on it. Thanks.
2012-03-23, 04:10 AM
Green4Ever

Re: What's better %INT, %Damage or %Mattk?

Total Int / Total M.Att = your ratio.
Depends what you do really. If you boss, 18% Ignore, although it's kind of worthless on a Bishop. :f3:
% M.Att would be my next choice followed by % Int.
I really don't like % Total Damage since it doesn't show in your range and at low percentages it's almost unnoticeable.
2012-03-23, 04:33 AM
FallenMemory

Re: What's better %INT, %Damage or %Mattk?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Green4Ever

Total Int / Total M.Att = your ratio.
Depends what you do really. If you boss, 18% Ignore, although it's kind of worthless on a Bishop. :f3:
% M.Att would be my next choice followed by % Int.
I really don't like % Total Damage since it doesn't show in your range and at low percentages it's almost unnoticeable.

While %damage doesn't show on your range, is it worse than %mattk? The b rank nebulite options are 2% Mattk and 4% damage. With the damage being a higher % I thought it would be better though I don't know the relation between the two.
2012-03-23, 04:37 AM
Shidoshi

Re: What's better %INT, %Damage or %Mattk?

You should post the amounts of %Int, %matk and %dmg from other potential you already have so we can give reasonable advice.

The Int = Matk ratio is calculated with your int from: Base + Mw + Equips (without %int) and your matk before %matk.
2012-03-23, 05:17 AM
modular

Re: What's better %INT, %Damage or %Mattk?

4% total or 18% ignore will most likely be the best.
2012-03-23, 10:49 AM
Kaasoljoyyx

Re: What's better %INT, %Damage or %Mattk?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Green4Ever

Total Int / Total M.Att = your ratio.
Depends what you do really. If you boss, 18% Ignore, although it's kind of worthless on a Bishop. :f3:
% M.Att would be my next choice followed by % Int.
I really don't like % Total Damage since it doesn't show in your range and at low percentages it's almost unnoticeable.

If mattk is anything similar to w.atk, then %dmg should = %matk
2012-03-23, 02:21 PM
Exidous

Re: What's better %INT, %Damage or %Mattk?

From the all known formulas thread:

MAX DAMAGE = MULTIPLIER * (4 * PRIMARY STAT + SECONDARY STAT) * (ATTACK / 100)

(Mage multiplier is 1)

The three % factors are multiplicative in the damage equation. In simple terms, think of it as (Int) * (Matk) * (Total Damage). So what proportion they raise your overall damage does depend on what you already have. You essentially start with 100% of each, and then add +% bonuses to them. If you already have +100% int from equips, going from 200% to 201% int is like a .5% overall range increase. Whereas if you don't have any % damage already, going from 100% damage to 101% damage is like a 1% overall range increase.

Your least improved factor is where you can make the most improvement. Being as %damage is "rarer" and there are fewer sources of it, so frequently it will do more for your damage than an equivalent amount of %attack.
2012-03-23, 02:39 PM
ShinkuDragon

Re: What's better %INT, %Damage or %Mattk?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Exidous

From the all known formulas thread:

MAX DAMAGE = MULTIPLIER * (4 * PRIMARY STAT + SECONDARY STAT) * (ATTACK / 100)

(Mage multiplier is 1)

The three % factors are multiplicative in the damage equation. In simple terms, think of it as (Int) * (Matk) * (Total Damage). So what proportion they raise your overall damage does depend on what you already have. You essentially start with 100% of each, and then add +% bonuses to them. If you already have +100% int from equips, going from 200% to 201% int is like a .5% overall range increase. Whereas if you don't have any % damage already, going from 100% damage to 101% damage is like a 1% overall range increase.

Your least improved factor is where you can make the most improvement. Being as %damage is "rarer" and there are fewer sources of it, so frequently it will do more for your damage than an equivalent amount of %attack.

except in %boss, because it stacks additively with it*
2012-03-23, 07:14 PM
modular

Re: What's better %INT, %Damage or %Mattk?

and on a related note, if 18% ignore doesnt put you over 100% (which it shouldnt on anything except a ds or hero or 3-ignore-lined-legendary weapon), 18% ignore is better than 4% overall range (the max any of the other stats could do for you) at any mob with at least 22.2% pdr. hard to find a mob with under 25 at high levels. ...finally wasnt falling asleep lol

id go with ignore, especially if you have some boss%. and i cant remember if bishops get the 135% or 150% or whatever m att skill like every other mage.
2012-03-23, 07:16 PM
Shidoshi

Re: What's better %INT, %Damage or %Mattk?

Quote:

Originally Posted by modular

id go with ignore, especially if you have some boss%. and i cant remember if bishops get the 135% or 150% or whatever m att skill like every other mage.

Elemental Amplification doesn't add magic attack. It's more like %dmg, no idea if they stack additively though.
2012-03-25, 09:46 AM
Thorr

Re: What's better %INT, %Damage or %Mattk?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shidoshi

Elemental Amplification doesn't add magic attack. It's more like %dmg, no idea if they stack additively though.

AMP is a total damage multiplier and it is always calculated separately. (In other words, it doesn't add to a %Damage potential line. %Damage gets applied after AMP is already calculated.)

Bishops do not get Amp. This is why they get hosed. Bish skills have similar damage range as a mage, but mages get Amp which makes them far better. Bishies get Holy Focus, but it's a pathetic equivalent.
2012-03-25, 07:56 PM
FallenMemory

Re: What's better %INT, %Damage or %Mattk?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shidoshi

You should post the amounts of %Int, %matk and %dmg from other potential you already have so we can give reasonable advice.

The Int = Matk ratio is calculated with your int from: Base + Mw + Equips (without %int) and your matk before %matk.

I have 191 int added from equips and skills before % int. 16% int from equips and 230 Magic Atk with 6% Matk totaling all my items and skills. This is all without Buffs and my MW is lvl 19.
2012-03-25, 08:26 PM
MrTouchnGo

Re: What's better %INT, %Damage or %Mattk?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shidoshi

You should post the amounts of %Int, %matk and %dmg from other potential you already have so we can give reasonable advice.

The Int = Matk ratio is calculated with your int from: Base + Mw + Equips (without %int) and your matk before %matk.

% matk I can understand, but can you explain why you don't include the % int in the ratio (assuming this is the ratio used to determine how much int = 1 atk)?
2012-03-26, 01:55 AM
Shidoshi

Re: What's better %INT, %Damage or %Mattk?

Quote:

Originally Posted by FallenMemory

I have 191 int added from equips and skills before % int. 16% int from equips and 230 Magic Atk with 6% Matk totaling all my items and skills. This is all without Buffs and my MW is lvl 19.

Why give numbers without buffs? When you are playing you will be using buffs.
Using the numbers you provided, supposing a monster with 25% defense, no other sources of defense ignore and that you'd have a 20 matk buff from something:

2% int translates to a 1.017 multiplier to your damage
2% matk translates to a 1.019 multiplier to your damage
4% dmg translates to a 1.040 multiplier to your damage
4 matk translates to a 1.016 multiplier to your damage
18% ignore def translates to a 1.060 multiplier to your damage