Southperry.net
Typo or Lukless Mages ftw? - Printable Version

+- Southperry.net (https://www.southperry.net)
+-- Forum: Maplestory (https://www.southperry.net/forumdisplay.php?fid=15)
+--- Forum: Training Center (https://www.southperry.net/forumdisplay.php?fid=32)
+---- Forum: Magician (https://www.southperry.net/forumdisplay.php?fid=39)
+---- Thread: Typo or Lukless Mages ftw? (/showthread.php?tid=1074)

Typo or Lukless Mages ftw? - Felicitates - 2008-07-13

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:

[Image: 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%

[Image: 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%

[COLOR="Red"]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!
[/COLOR]
Credits: All informations and images belong to - http://strategywiki.org

Typo or Lukless Mages ftw? - Cardboardsnail - 2008-07-13

That's no joke. Those lukless weapons really are that powerful.

Typo or Lukless Mages ftw? - ahoboandahal - 2008-07-13

thats a typo. the luk ones have 178 clean.

Typo or Lukless Mages ftw? - Germ - 2008-07-13

There's 130 weapons? They're beast.

Typo or Lukless Mages ftw? - Darklai - 2008-07-13

If that wasn't a typo, maple would be finally 100% unbalanced. Yup yup.

Typo or Lukless Mages ftw? - Yoorah - 2008-07-13

I'm no expert on Mages, but I believe the LUKless kind wins regardless of this being a typo or not. Tongue

Typo or Lukless Mages ftw? - Kigaz - 2008-07-13

Yoorah Wrote:I'm no expert on Mages, but I believe the LUKless kind wins regardless of this being a typo or not. Tongue

Thats true Tongue
161 LUK would be better off in INT Rolleyes
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

Typo or Lukless Mages ftw? - Takebacker - 2008-07-13

Huh. Luckless wands have slow speed. Never noticed that.

Typo or Lukless Mages ftw? - Milelke - 2008-07-13

I suspect it was edited actually.
Its Wiki, you can edit at will.

Typo or Lukless Mages ftw? - Felicitates - 2008-07-13

Yoorah Wrote:I'm no expert on Mages, but I believe the LUKless kind wins regardless of this being a typo or not. Tongue

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...

Milelke Wrote:I suspect it was edited actually.
Its Wiki, you can edit at will.

Ah, that's true. I hadn't thought of that.

Typo or Lukless Mages ftw? - butterfλi - 2008-07-13

Takebacker Wrote: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.

Typo or Lukless Mages ftw? - DumbApples - 2008-07-13

I believe only the wand is lukless while the other require luk.

Typo or Lukless Mages ftw? - Lunare - 2008-07-13

Despite the typo let me keep it simple for you.

Lukless Mage FTW

Typo or Lukless Mages ftw? - ★tastie - 2008-07-14

Yoorah Wrote:I'm no expert on Mages, but I believe the LUKless kind wins regardless of this being a typo or not. Tongue

unfortunately this is true. theres almost no way for a regular build or low luk to come close to the potential of lukless.

Typo or Lukless Mages ftw? - doctorx - 2008-07-14

★tastie Wrote: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.

Typo or Lukless Mages ftw? - ★tastie - 2008-07-14

doctorx Wrote: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?

Typo or Lukless Mages ftw? - Kabanaw - 2008-07-14

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.

Typo or Lukless Mages ftw? - Sushii - 2008-07-15

Regardless of those weapons or not, lukless will end up being better anyways.

Without the luk at that level that's like 130+ Magic.

Typo or Lukless Mages ftw? - Hana - 2008-07-15

Too bad bishops cant benefit from these elemental wands/staffs.

Typo or Lukless Mages ftw? - Kabanaw - 2008-07-15

Hana Wrote: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.