User talk:Sephard

In particular, I'm curious about this edit, this edit, and this edit. How did you test these changes? I'm asking because I'm the one who originally created and tested this particular formula. The numbers you replaced are values that might have worked in an older version of the formula, but they didn't quite fit with the newer one I came up with that takes into account many more variables.

EDIT: It is possible of course, that the formula has changed since the Magic Renovation. I definitely haven't retested after that patch.

There was conflicting data, when I compared the magic damage page to the Wand page and the Meteor skill page. I set it to what I'm sure is right (using Mabination)

However, the 1+(Charge Multiplier) thing is just mathematically wrong, since Charge Multiplier counts as 1 already

It sounds like you didn't even test in game before changing it? Please test in-game if it's something this easy to test... If you took values from another site, you also need to keep in mind that the formula here and the formula on the other site may not be the same. Using values intended for one formula in another different formula is just asking for trouble.

About the 1+Charge Multipler thing, that is not mathematically wrong. I put that there to compensate for an abnormality I discovered in firebolt's damage. It's strange, sure, but it's the only thing that fits for firebolt with multiple charges when I was testing. Note that the Charge Multiplier is used again near the end of the formula as well, which is where you would correctly expect it not have the "1+".

Not my fault that you used "Charge Multiplier" for two different variables

Are you seriously saying that it's my fault for writing a correct formula that you just happened to misinterpret? Are you saying it's my fault you didn't test something before changing it? It's my fault that you didn't make sure something was actually wrong before trying to correct it? I am legitimately pissed off that you seem to believe none of this is your fault.

Taking a look at the inconsistencies you mentioned as well, on the Wands List page, there needs to be some rewording (and there's some information that I'm 99% sure is wrong such as "Ice wands will increase Icebolt's damage by 10 points, and increases the range of Ice Spear."). For Meteor Strike's Spell Constant, I'm not sure anymore if I tested that right because I threw a few numbers into a calculator and it seems wrong to me now. I'll go on Mabinogi again tonight after work and do some retesting on a bunch of things, since the Magic Renovation may have changed up a few things anyway.

Ice wands do increase the range of ice spear, I put that there myself. I noticed the range difference when I was ice spearing Sasquatches, and then I tested to confirm. Tested on Shyllien plants. Compared ice wand with hermit staff. Ice Spear with ice wand had the same range as lightning bolt with lightning wand, and Ice Spear with hermit staff had the same range as lightning bolt without a wand.

Looks like you're right.

Really now. That's interesting. Kind of odd that it isn't on the Ice Spear page. I'll try to confirm that as well tonight then.

EDIT: Oh, it IS on the ice spear page in the summary table. Lol, I'm blind.

I put it on the ice spear page in the summary in the range section.

Actually I'm way too tired today to go on Mabinogi after work. Maybe tomorrow, lol. Or maybe I'll wake up way earlier than I mean to like I've been doing lately and I'll test at like 5am.

Something completely changed or I'm doing something completely wrong. Neither formula is working anymore. I feel like they nerfed the spell constant for firebolt at some point or something, but I'm not sure. It feels like a completely different formula is being used for bolt spells since I know I tested this with Lightning Rod when it came out...

EDIT: Strangely, this formula works fine if I use my Savage Fire Wand. Is there some weirdness going on with the phoenix fire wand? It used to reduce damage itself instead of magic attack when upgraded for speed, so maybe there's some sort of bug with lingering effects?

EDIT: NEVERMIND I'M STUPID. Corrected my math. Everything is fine. Results are still a bit off and neither formula matches perfectly, so there's still something missing with the formula somewhere. I'll analyze this deeper over the weekend.

Test Results

Char stats/equipment:

• 348.2~348.4 magic attack (taking into account rounding done by the game)
• 0 damage enchants
• Phoenix fire wand
• No Hebona set bonus
• Rank 1 magic weapon mastery
• Rank 1 bolt mastery
• Rank 1 fire mastery

Old formula after plugging in values for firebolt:
{120 + [5 * (1 + Charge Multiplier)] + (0.5 * 348.2~348.4) + (0 * 0.4)} * [1 + (0.15 + 0.15 + 1.5 + 0 + 0 + 0)] * Charge Multiplier * Full Charge Multiplier * 1 * 1

Old formula simplified:
{(294.1~294.2) + [5 * (1 + Charge Multiplier)]} * 2.8 * Charge Multiplier * Full Charge Multiplier

New formula simplified (just missing the 1 + before the first charge muliplier):
[(294.1~294.2) + (5 * Charge Multiplier)] * 2.8 * Charge Multiplier * Full Charge Multiplier

Expected max damage with old formula:

• 1 charge: 851.48~851.76
• 2 charges: 1730.96~1731.52
• 3 charges: 2638.44~2639.28
• 4 charges: 3573.92~3575.04
• 5 charges: 5898.62~5900.44

Expected max damage with new formula:

• 1 charge: 837.48~837.76
• 2 charges: 1702.96~1703.52
• 3 charges: 3436.44~3437.28
• 4 charges: 3517.92~3519.04
• 5 charges: 5807.62~5809.44

Actual test results against a brown fox - highest non-crit value over multiple trials:

• 1 charge: 843
• 2 charges: 1714
• 3 charges: 2614
• 4 charges: 3541
• 5 charges: 5845

Doing math with these results while at work because this is really bugging me. Instead of multiplying the Wand Bonus with the Charge Multiplier, I think it'd be easier just to list the Wand Bonus at varying charges for each bolt. Obviously, the "each bolt" part only REALLY matters with Firebolt. As such I propose revising the formula into this:

[Base Damage + Wand Bonus + (Spell Constant * Magic Attack) + (Damage Enchants * Damage Constant)]
* [1 + (Bolt Mastery Bonus + Elemental Mastery Bonus + Magic Weapon Mastery Bonus + Staff Elemental Level Bonus + Hebona Set Bonus + Rosemary Glove Bonus)]
* Charge Multiplier * Full Charge Multiplier * Thunder Multiplier * Distance Multiplier

And then changing the description of Wand Bonus into this:

• Wand Bonus is a constant for bolt spells while using a wand of the same element.
  • The value for Spirit Weapon wands depends on the Social level of the spirit. Actual values are unknown, but generally equal or higher than non-spirit wands.
  • For non-spirit wands, the values are as follows:
    • Icebolt with any non-spirit Ice Wand at 1 to 5 charges: 10.0
    • Firebolt with any non-spirit Fire Wand varies depending on number of charges:
      • 1 charge: 7.0
      • 2 charges: 12.0
      • 3 charges: 17.0
      • 4 charges: 22.0
      • 5 charges: 27.0
    • Lightning Bolt with any non-spirit Lightning Wand at 1 to 5 charges: 7.0
  • All other cases, including with Bare Hands or Staff: 0

I need to do further testing with bare hands at different numbers of charges to make sure about this formula though.

Just realized these results are wrong because of my ALO Asuna title that I was wearing at the time (or at least I think I was wearing it this morning), which adds 2% damage to bolts somewhere. I'm going to have to retest without that title to get the real Wand Bonus, and figure out after that where the title adds its bonus.

Okay, the wand bonus at 1-5 charges for firebolt appear to be 5, 10, 15, 20, 25. This means that Sephard's edits to remove the "1 +" and double the icebolt and lightning bolt wand bonuses are actually correct. However, even though you happened to be right this time, I still don't think people should be changing something just because it looks wrong until they test it and prove that it's wrong.

Meteor Strike Spell Constant

With one meteor on a large group of monsters with ~554.6 magic attack, I crit for 72072 on one of the monsters. Dividing by 2.5, the base value before crit should be approximately 28828.8.

Formula after plugging in values for meteor:
{16200 + [0 * (1)] + (Spell Constant 554.6) + (0 * Damage Constant)} * [1 + (0 + 0.15 + 0 + 0 + 0 + 0)] * 1 * 1 * 1 * 1 = 28828.8

Simplified formula:
[16200 + (Spell Constant * 554.6)] * 1.15 = 28828.8

Solving for the spell constant:
16200 + (Spell Constant * 554.6) = 25068.521739130434782608695652174
Spell Constant * 554.6 = 8868.5217391304347826086956521739
Spell Constant = 15.990843381050188933661550039982

So the max damage spell constant for meteor, according to this test is ~16.0. It's definitely not 30.0, but I was wrong as well since I had put 15.0 initially. Minimum damage is harder to get test values for so I'll refrain from doing that for now.

If you're updating the pages, I have a compiled list of changes. Don't ask why I'm not able to put them out myself.

Also, Meteor Strike's MP cost per second did not change at all; it stayed entirely the same, meaning with the decreased load time its using drastically less MP. I am definitely not using 200 MP for Rank 1 Meteor.

You're right, I just used meteor and it only took about 50 mana instead of 100 (at rank 8) Also, the drain for keeping it loaded seems to be even less

If I cut the numbers on the page in half, I still don't know what I would put down for the Loaded Mana Use

There's one other thing I noticed with Meteor and is that I can't use it while at 150 MP, despite the drastic MP reduction; the mana necessary (or total mana needed to load it in pre-Renovation) seems to be unchanged. It kind of makes reducing its MP cost somewhat pointless.

Hail's MP cost may or may not have changed while loaded, since the duration did increase. I haven't run conclusive tests on it to be sure (and with high Int and Rank 1 Ice Mastery, it's hard to tell for me).

Fireball, Thunder, and Hail's loading had their consumption increased to counterbalance their reduced load times, so their total mana prior to Renovation remains the same.