2008-08-22, 10:21 PM
Blizzard and Meteo have harder hitting potential when on level playing field.
Genesis is much lower MP cost, and it is, by all accounts, faster as well. This means that on level playing field, Genesis has the highest DPS potential.
No endgame monsters to grind on are weak to fire or ice, yet there are holy weak. This gives Bishops heavy advantage in the goal to gain levels at endgame, although this could be changed at any time in the future.
With functional elemental weapons, the percentage based boost puts neutral Mages about on par with advantaged Bishops in attacking power (particularly if you consider a lukless Mage using the 130 wand and a Bishop using a Maple Wisdom Staff). With these weapons and a level playing field has Mages heavily in the lead (although it is worth noticing that because of the situation with monsters as mentioned above, this instance not that practical to consider).
That's all there is to it. No need for a thread really. Further discussion won't really take it any further other than for people to get mad and vent about the facts I mentioned above. I guess things could go further in depth, such as the variances in power between the two Mage attacks, but that's not really what the topic is asking for either.
Genesis is much lower MP cost, and it is, by all accounts, faster as well. This means that on level playing field, Genesis has the highest DPS potential.
No endgame monsters to grind on are weak to fire or ice, yet there are holy weak. This gives Bishops heavy advantage in the goal to gain levels at endgame, although this could be changed at any time in the future.
With functional elemental weapons, the percentage based boost puts neutral Mages about on par with advantaged Bishops in attacking power (particularly if you consider a lukless Mage using the 130 wand and a Bishop using a Maple Wisdom Staff). With these weapons and a level playing field has Mages heavily in the lead (although it is worth noticing that because of the situation with monsters as mentioned above, this instance not that practical to consider).
That's all there is to it. No need for a thread really. Further discussion won't really take it any further other than for people to get mad and vent about the facts I mentioned above. I guess things could go further in depth, such as the variances in power between the two Mage attacks, but that's not really what the topic is asking for either.