[X] My Assistant

Undead, giants and arthropods all have high health (and arthropods have pretty decent resist), but they also have strong physical attacks. Mages don't care about the second MP attack often, and SP attack pretty much never, because monsters die before they can charge them. On the other hand, melee cannot kill that fast, and celestials have the highest hitting void-type attack as their SP attack, making them the most dangerous monsters in the game if not killed fast. (They also have a pretty good magic attack as their second MP attack, which 1H players are often slightly weaker against than physical attacks.)

...

For arenas: generally we advise 150 rounds -> 80 -> 100 for exp, although for general income I'd do 150>125>110>100 (schoolgirl trophies are valuable). Pretty much anything on the second page is valuable.

Thanks again!

But again, some followup (IMG:[invalid] style_emoticons/default/laugh.gif) :

Don't sprites have even stronger 2nd and 3rd attacks then celestials? According to the "power" on the Wiki at least. Although there's no formula listed for monster magic damage like there is for physical.

At level 280ish I can't do the 150 round arena yet. I'm finding that I really don't get good drops doing the first few arenas even on PFUDOR (the only ones that I can manage PFUDOR reliably). When equipment drops its still trash tier, and I almost never get a token. Is it even worth it to do those at all? On the other hand the arenas from 45 rounds and up seem to have a good token drop rate. Does it matter which difficulty I do them on? I've been doing the hardest I can 99% win at, but wouldn't mind doing them easier and faster if it has no effect, especially for token drops.

Do you really do the 110 and 125 rounds every day? They have so many of those tedious bosses that I did them once and vowed never again.

Thanks again!

But again, some followup (IMG:[invalid] style_emoticons/default/laugh.gif) :

Don't sprites have even stronger 2nd and 3rd attacks then celestials? According to the "power" on the Wiki at least. Although there's no formula listed for monster magic damage like there is for physical.

At level 280ish I can't do the 150 round arena yet. I'm finding that I really don't get good drops doing the first few arenas even on PFUDOR (the only ones that I can manage PFUDOR reliably). When equipment drops its still trash tier, and I almost never get a token. Is it even worth it to do those at all? On the other hand the arenas from 45 rounds and up seem to have a good token drop rate. Does it matter which difficulty I do them on? I've been doing the hardest I can 99% win at, but wouldn't mind doing them easier and faster if it has no effect, especially for token drops.

Do you really do the 110 and 125 rounds every day? They have so many of those tedious bosses that I did them once and vowed never again.

Monster attack strength means nothing, it depens on the specific mitigations and defence of the players that meet them. They usually don't die. They may flee at one point, but that has nothing to do with type of monster. Monster magic damage is probably calculated similar to player damage, but I'm not sure.

Make sure you're hard when facing schoolgirls. PFUDOR is too high for SG arenas on your level. On hard, it's the most income you can get in a day.

Thanks again!

But again, some followup (IMG:[invalid] style_emoticons/default/laugh.gif) :

Don't sprites have even stronger 2nd and 3rd attacks then celestials? According to the "power" on the Wiki at least. Although there's no formula listed for monster magic damage like there is for physical.

At level 280ish I can't do the 150 round arena yet. I'm finding that I really don't get good drops doing the first few arenas even on PFUDOR (the only ones that I can manage PFUDOR reliably). When equipment drops its still trash tier, and I almost never get a token. Is it even worth it to do those at all? On the other hand the arenas from 45 rounds and up seem to have a good token drop rate. Does it matter which difficulty I do them on? I've been doing the hardest I can 99% win at, but wouldn't mind doing them easier and faster if it has no effect, especially for token drops.

Do you really do the 110 and 125 rounds every day? They have so many of those tedious bosses that I did them once and vowed never again.

No, they have slightly lower at both base and max upgrades, although sprites do have the highest crit chance which would make them somewhat competitive... however, they also have such low HP that they rarely pose a threat to anyone besides non-1H melee players (not many of these at high level). Sprites were the second least damaging monster to me in my most recent analysis (only ranking above elementals). My own 2250 sprite gets fewer gifts and fewer wins than my 2250 giant, despite having generally high representation due to giant being a bloated, overpopulated class.

The way I calculated attack weights is independent of specific damage formulas: I simply took the base stats and multiplied them by the attack power. For example, a fully upgraded sprite has base str 180, dex 370, giving them a physical 'score' of 370+180*2=730. With that, you can get the score of their SP attack (as an example) as: 730*150=109,500. In contrast, a celestial SP attack (when using magic) is (350*2+280)*120=117,600. This may not be exactly accurate, but it appears to give accurate enough assessments of relative attack powers based on my experience in game.

Difficulty increases drop rates and exp rates, so it's preferable to play them on high difficulty. The 25 round arena and below have a sub-50% chance of any tokens with full Tokenizer & drop trainings, but above that should still be worth doing. If PFUDOR is especially tedious, drop it to IWBTH and try that?

Yes, I play every arena (and some fests) every day, but I'm also a well-equipped mage, so the entire set takes less than an hour. When I was lower level, I played dual wield, and I did only the schoolgirl arenas and the 100-round arena every day. They're tedious and slow at low level - especially if you're not using Monsterbation - but it gets a little better with better gear, better perks, forging and experience.

This post has been edited by lestion: Aug 27 2020, 09:05

(IMG:[invalid] style_emoticons/default/huh.gif) Hey, how does the training that serves to improve base proficiency work?

I just improved one more level, because I had plenty of credits to spend, and I started doing a quick IW, and now it turns out that not only my defense improved considerably, but now my base damage is very noticeable.

How much does base proficiency affect your ADB and defense?

This post has been edited by Arkoniusx: Aug 28 2020, 01:34

Thanks again for the answers! Gunna grind some of those arenas I've been skipping and actually see how much coin I get I think. (IMG:[invalid] style_emoticons/default/cool2.gif)

(IMG:[invalid] style_emoticons/default/huh.gif) Hey, how does the training that serves to improve base proficiency work?

I just improved one more level, because I had plenty of credits to spend, and I started doing a quick IW, and now it turns out that not only my defense improved considerably, but now my base damage is very noticeable.

How much does base proficiency affect your ADB and defense?

You imagined it.

Proficiency is gained as a tiny % of experience. In this example, let's imagine your next level of proficiency requires 100 exp, with 0 Assimilator.

Assimilator increases the proficiency gain you get from the same amount of exp. If you had Assimilator 25, you'd now only need to get 80 exp: 80*1.25=100, reaching the requirement faster.

Proficiency doesn't affect melee directly like it does mages; melee gain benefit from proficiency through abilities. As an example, the DW Damage ability gives +50 ADB for every 5 points of Dual-Wielding proficiency. Defensively, the Dual-Wielding proficiency does nothing, but Light Armor gives you 0.25% attack speed for every 10 points, as another example.

Why does wiki mention 0.68 as a minimum prof factor for elemental mages? (and 0.7 on the same page as a minimum viable?) Is it result of some calculation (like 0.79) or something from experience?

Why does wiki mention 0.68 as a minimum prof factor for elemental mages? (and 0.7 on the same page as a minimum viable?) Is it result of some calculation (like 0.79) or something from experience?

It's an old number given by either the opinion of the writer of the page, or by error. 0.68 combined with imperil reduces enemy mitigation by 68 - 7 points short of the max resistance - but some players argue this is enough in most cases.

I am of the opposite opinion, and I think hitting 0.79 is by far the strongest thing a player can do for their damage - because round clear speed is held back by the slowest monster to die, and there's so many high level monsters these days it's almost guaranteed you will have one monster with 75 resist.

In fact, it's possible that at the time of writing, the highest level monster had only 68 resist, I guess. But this is definitely not the case anymore (IMG:[invalid] style_emoticons/default/tongue.gif)

It's an old number given by either the opinion of the writer of the page, or by error. 0.68 combined with imperil reduces enemy mitigation by 68 - 7 points short of the max resistance - but some players argue this is enough in most cases.

I am of the opposite opinion, and I think hitting 0.79 is by far the strongest thing a player can do for their damage - because round clear speed is held back by the slowest monster to die, and there's so many high level monsters these days it's almost guaranteed you will have one monster with 75 resist.

In fact, it's possible that at the time of writing, the highest level monster had only 68 resist, I guess. But this is definitely not the case anymore (IMG:[invalid] style_emoticons/default/tongue.gif)

That means if you want maximum speed, since the limiting factor are the most resistant mopnsters, you should aim for higher prof.

But what if I'm a week mage (due to level, no forge and whatever) whose aim is just pruning rounds with high monster numbers, to reduce the number of survivng monster after first shot so as to reduce the risk and damage taken to acceptable levels ?
Then if going faster is not that much important to me, and since in a 7 to 10 monsters' round only some will have max resistance, I could possibly be better off trading a lower prof. factor (either putting the cotton in a weaker slot, or using 4+1 instead of 3+2) for more magic damage boost from phase ?

This post has been edited by mundomuñeca: Aug 28 2020, 15:10

But what if I'm a week mage (due to level, no forge and whatever) whose aim is just pruning rounds with high monster numbers, to reduce the number of survivng monster after first shot so as to reduce the risk and damage taken to acceptable levels ?
Then if going faster is not that much important to me, and since in a 7 to 10 monsters' round only some will have max resistance, I could possibly be better off trading a lower prof. factor (either putting the cotton in a weaker slot, or using 4+1 instead of 3+2) for more magic damage boost from phase ?

Then aim for a prof factor that will simply destroy the elemental resistance of monsters that have only 50% against your element. You can even aim for a bit lower than that, if you consider that the extra EDB will make up for it.
In the case of an elemental mage, reaching 75% mitigation reduction (with Imperil) requires 0.79 prof, 50% is reached with 0.35 prof factor, which I believe is attainable with the staff alone.

But don't forget that further than removing elmental mitigation, the prof factor also grants you a fairly big amount of counter-resist. And don't forget that forging phase is more expensive than forging cotton, so it's a better idea to just get a higher prof factor than a higher EDB if you're short on money.
I remember doing that quick calculation myself when I was a beginner mage, so I just decided forge two cotton instead of only one, and leave the phase barely Forge 5.

Thanks!
I can only say that in my current experience 0.816 (3+2, 679 effective, ~17k arcane) is far, far safer and considerably less elixirs-thirthy than 0.612 (4+1, 603 effective, ~19.5 arcane).

Thanks!
I can only say that in my current experience 0.816 (3+2, 679 effective, ~17k arcane) is far, far safer and considerably less elixirs-thirthy than 0.612 (4+1, 603 effective, ~19.5 arcane).

Proficiency also affects mana cost and cast speed of spells with that element; the caps for each spell are fairly high (up to 900 for T3 spells), so that'd be why (IMG:[invalid] style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

Proficiency also affects mana cost and cast speed of spells with that element; the caps for each spell are fairly high (up to 900 for T3 spells), so that'd be why (IMG:[invalid] style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

yes, already get it by experience. Proficiency=lower cast speed=life, at least on my level (and without charged cloth). It was the reason for the question, how 0.68-0.7 could be enough. Maybe later, when all caps are passed. Or not on PFUDOR.

(IMG:[invalid] style_emoticons/default/huh.gif) Quick question, which of these 2 shields is better?

Legendary Cobalt Force Shield of Stoneskin

Legendary Zircon Force Shield of Stoneskin

(IMG:[invalid] style_emoticons/default/huh.gif) Quick question, which of these 2 shields is better?

Imo they are both not great, but i would say the Cobalt shield because it has higher block and because it gives you some End.

Then aim for a prof factor that will simply destroy the elemental resistance of monsters that have only 50% against your element. You can even aim for a bit lower than that, if you consider that the extra EDB will make up for it.
In the case of an elemental mage, reaching 75% mitigation reduction (with Imperil) requires 0.79 prof, 50% is reached with 0.35 prof factor, which I believe is attainable with the staff alone.

But don't forget that further than removing elmental mitigation, the prof factor also grants you a fairly big amount of counter-resist. And don't forget that forging phase is more expensive than forging cotton, so it's a better idea to just get a higher prof factor than a higher EDB if you're short on money.
I remember doing that quick calculation myself when I was a beginner mage, so I just decided forge two cotton instead of only one, and leave the phase barely Forge 5.

Thanks for the detailed answer, indeed I hadn't considered the effect on counter-resist. As for forging, I would only forge staff and cotton, not phase (not even to 5) because doing it on very mediocre equip would be a waste; I'll forge phase someday, when I'll get what I could consider as final equipment.

Anyway, with a staff of elementalist and a single cotton forged a bit, I could already probably go near 0.6 or at least 0.5, with the fourth phase giving some of the damage that you loose not using a staff of Destruction. Since staff of elementalist are generally easier to find and cheaper then staff of destruction, that's something to think about imho.

For the moment I'm just experimenting a bit around and keeping profs at level; my main persona is still 1H and will be for the foreseeable future. Secondary personas are DW and NiTen.

Elem mage and 1H mage are just a "let's do it different this time" build, where I won't invest much, also because I want to be sure to understand all that is important to know beforehand.

not phase (not even to 5) because doing it on very mediocre equip would be a waste;

I wouldnt recommend that.

(IMG:[invalid] style_emoticons/default/huh.gif) Quick question, which of these 2 shields is better?

Legendary Cobalt Force Shield of Stoneskin

Legendary Zircon Force Shield of Stoneskin

The two shields probably won't get the minimum bid because the PAB is not SDE. Also the block is not high enough. If you really want to compare the two, I agree with what Uncle Stu said.

My Stoneskin Shield also has shit performance, but I use it somehow because it is SDE.
This is a shield of sadness.

This.JI (IMG:[invalid] style_emoticons/default/blush.gif)

My Stoneskin Shield also has shit performance, but I use it somehow because it is SDE.
This is a shield of sadness.

This.JI (IMG:[invalid] style_emoticons/default/blush.gif)

There's absolutely nothing wrong with a shield being Stoneskin though. (IMG:[invalid] style_emoticons/default/huh.gif)
That's a very good shield.