INT vs. INT

[ItazuraNhomango]

I've seen this kind of statement in several difference places:

"Elemental Magic potency/effectiveness is based in part on the difference between the caster's INT and the target's INT."

Maybe not stated in exactly the same way, but all imply that, more or less. (Check out Wiki's entry on Magic Damage, for example.)

To me, it seems to make little sense to use INT as some sort of shield against magic attack. In S-E's own literature, MND is listed as an aide to magic defense, while nothing said about INT is along those lines (IIRC).

Looking physical melee damage, STR isn't compared against STR for damage--it's STR vs. VIT. Accuracy wise, it's (sort of) DEX vs. AGI. Seems like it would be more analogous if it's INT vs. MND instead of INT vs. INT.

I'm very curious as to why INT is so widely cited as defense against nukes.

[Armando]

Re: INT vs. INT

Because it is I know that's probably not the answer you're looking for, but...well, you can see for yourself. Get a BLM buddy to find a mob close to his own level and use a nuke that's not soft capped for damage. Burn the mob, and try again. I've also tested this in Ballista. There's no mistake, INT is checked against INT for black magic, and MND against MND for white magic.

[Jei]

Re: INT vs. INT

Lowering your target's INT really raises your nuke damage at an noticeable amount. You can test it out by casting burn.

[ItazuraNhomango]

Re: INT vs. INT

So, there are experiments comparing effects of various nukes with Burn (INT down), Shock (MND down), Absorb-INT, Absorb-MND, and control groups?

Anyone has links to those handy? I would especially like to see pointers to carefully conducted experiments using Absorb-INT and Absorb-MND.

[Jei]

Re: INT vs. INT

I can't recall threads about this. But I have tried it. Around level 65, my best nuke was doing 900-ish without burn. With burn, I was able to push my damage up to 1,000+. Tested with shock (lower MND) and my damage stayed in the 900 range.

It wasn't a huge jump in damage or anything... only 50 something damage boost at best. But was pretty memorable to me because of the 1k mark.

[Armando]

Re: INT vs. INT

So, there are experiments comparing effects of various nukes with Burn (INT down), Shock (MND down), Absorb-INT, Absorb-MND, and control groups?

Anyone has links to those handy? I would especially like to see pointers to carefully conducted experiments using Absorb-INT and Absorb-MND.

Sadly, I can't help you there. I can tell you that I've seen proof with my own eyes, and I can tell you how it could be tested, but I didn't bother actually recording anything, nor do I have any links to experiments. I do, however, have a link to the magic damage formula (the info is written under the context of black magic, but it applies equally to white magic.) It was developped and refined by a few members of the Allakhazam's Black Mage forums. You can find it here. It's quite accurate.

It's basically ((Base damage) + (Caster/Target INT difference) * (Tier Multiplier)) * MAB/MDB. Change INT to MND for white magic. The tier multiplier is 1 for tier I and II spells, 1.5 for tier III, and 2 for AM. They also have a handful of the values for base damage and the INT difference soft caps.

[Mhurron]

Re: INT vs. INT

Magic isn't physical damage and magic resistence isn't physical resistance. The rules do not have to be the same for both, so just because you use one stat to counteract another in one instance, doesn't mean it has to be that way for everything.

Also, from your own quote "Elemental Magic potency/effectiveness is based in part on the difference between the caster's INT and the target's INT." MND can still play a part, it's just not the whole story.

[Icemage]

Re: INT vs. INT

Melee combat derives accuracy from:
DEX vs. AGI and Accuracy vs. Evasion and Lvl vs. Lvl *

* I've not seen any comprehensive proof that DEX vs. AGI is or is not predicated on the 2DEX = 1 Acc / 2AGI = 1 Eva formulas, or if there's an additional computation in there.

Melee combat damage derives primarily from:
STR+Weapon Damage vs. VIT and ATK vs. DEF and Lvl vs. Lvl

Black magic elemental accuracy derives accuracy from:
INT vs. INT and Magical Accuracy (Elemental Skill + boosts from staves, Magic Accuracy+, etc.) vs. some unknown (and probably unused) Magical Evasion stat and Lvl vs. Lvl

Black magic elemental damage derives damage from:
INT vs. INT and Base spell damage and Magic Attack Bonus and effects of weather/day/staves

White magic works the same way as black magic offensively, replacing INT with MND, and Divine Magic for Elemental Magic.


Icemage

[Armando]

Re: INT vs. INT

Black magic elemental accuracy derives accuracy from:
INT vs. INT and Magical Accuracy (Elemental Skill + boosts from staves, Magic Accuracy+, etc.) vs. some unknown (and probably unused) Magical Evasion stat and Lvl vs. Lvl

I'm quite confident that what the game uses for Magical Evasion is the your elemental resistance stat (the very same one in the status screen, except that the value in the status screen isn't the total, but the ammount you have relative to your base magic resistance.) I say this because some time ago I accidentally found a way to see a player's base magic resistance, and for any given level it was equal to the value at which a C-ranked skill caps (wether it's C-, C, or C+ is impossible to check, though.)