The 6th Ministry's Secret: A Summoner's Guide (v2)

I have a writeup of all the diff setups and buffs I've used for SMN as primary DD:
http://www.ffxiah.com/forum/topic/49650/how-is-smn-these-days/#3169825

It should be updated to include companion's and AM3 for physical though. You should be capped pdif with idris and cor and dia IV though. I've never done it but Nether Void Liberator Absorb VIT would be pretty good too (it's like -92 VIT on the mob). Like I said you should be good though.

You might also want to use Intervene or Odyllic Subterfuge when you conduit too, to give your avatar a lot more chance to live through the full conduit.

With that setup if you bolster probably gonna be quite close to att cap if not just there. Without Bolster I don't think you're gonna be att capped on a target like Tumult Curator and the 3 bosses before the last phase.
Please someone correct me if I'm wrong, I'm not 100% sure.
Honestly in a fight like this I'm not sure wether or not HQ body is gonna win over AF1+1.
I'm sure people like Papesse, Verda, Perg, Frod and others in here have a clearer idea though, they've tackled Tumult Curator way more than I did.

...until AF3+3 comes out and becomes king again! :P But that won't be for a loooong time so yeah, no use thinking about it now.

I barely touched TC. i want to kill him so hard though.

Apogee Mitts +1 Path B would be a wiser choice for TC if no Nirvana or good BP/Pet ACC augments on Merlinic Dastanas.
Definitely need at least EA Frailty for wave2, BoG Frailty for wave3 and Bolster Frailty for final form. Quick Draw and Apogee recast won't follow if mobs are killed fast (the three first waves should take 6~7 min) but they are mostly important for Troll, Hydra/Khimaira and Dvergr.

killed it a few times multiboxing using a rng strat so i'm pretty familiar with the fight, but win rate isn't 100% due to hate issues and getting a bunch of kills in for compensators doesn't sound fun that way

friend's on red mage so i only need to blow one QD per mob, if you've done it with only smns how many bps did it take per mob?(and how many people?)

We killed it over 20 times but never with only SMNs (RUN, BLU and SMN x3, 12~ participants). I have no doubt it can be done with just SMNs now, probably with as low as 8 participants but it could be very slow without Nirvana that allows to exceed 20k dmg per BP on every forms.

Hello

Question ppl


what is better

Convoker's Doublet +2

or

Merlinic Jubbah: Augments : BP dmg +9, pet magic acc+32 and pet mab +35

Definitely the Merlinic. That's a very high MAB augment and easily beats Convoker.

For magical and hybrid bps, sure it's pretty good. For physical, all that magical stuff is really unimportant. This is an important distinction to make.

The better answer is: for physical bps Convoker Doublet +2 is better. For magical or hybrid, your Merlinic will be better.

Does anyone have any sense of conversion on BPD vs physical ATK?

Depends on 2 factors:
* If you've capped PDIF
* How much attack your avatar has

Ex 1: You'd do 10,000 damage, and are at 1 PDIF, the mob has 1000 defense and your avatar has 1000 attack
10 BP damage adds 1000 damage
100 Attack adds 1000 damage

In this situation, 100 attack is equal to 10 bp damage.

Ex 2: You'd do 10,000 damage, and are at 4.2 PDIF, the mob has 1000 defense and your avatar has 4200 attack
In this case 10 BP damage adds 1000 still but the end damage is 46,200
Attack would add zero because PDIF is capped.

In this case 1 bp damage is worth infinity attack b/c that's what you get when you divide by 0.

Ex 3: You'd do 10,000 damage, and are at .5 PDIF, the mob has 2000 defense and your avatar has 1000 attack.
10 BP damage adds 1000 damage but the end result damage is halved due to PDIF, and the end damage is 5500
100 attack changes the PDIF to .55, this changes the end result damage to 5500

In this case 10 bp damage is worth 100 attack.

Ex 4: You'd do 5,000 damage, and are at 2 PDIF, the mob has 2000 defense and your avatar has 4000 attack.
10 BP damage adds 500 damage and the end result damage is 5,500 * 2 = 11,000
100 attack changes the pdif to 2.05 and the end result damage is 10,250

In this case 10 bp damage is worth 400 attack.

So as you can see, the more defense and attack there is, the less attack means as a % change to damage and if you are capped attack ratio/pdif then it means nothing at all. Since the places that attack means the most are also the easiest to cap PDIF on (mobs with lower defense), and since BP damage always scales as a % and attack scaling changes without how much attack and defense there is... against high level targets the best answer is always bp damage and use support to cap PDIF. Against low level targets this is also the best answer. The only interest then for attack is for unoptimal setups or for optimizing a strat for soloing or low manning particular mobs, in which case you need to know their defense rating which isn't exactly easy to obtain unless someone has a quick, fast and easy method they could share with me. Even then however, you'd have to perform this test on any mob you wish to optimize your solo/unoptimal setup for and then do the math for that particular fight.

Personally I just follow the rule of thumb, BP damage first, add attack and accuracy where I can. Accuracy is more valuable than attack for high level groups. Attack matters mostly for soloing or if you aren't properly supported (which I'd try to avoid anyway). However we've all had those parties, like ambuscade frog parties, we're left to our own devices so attack is really good in such a situation.

However going by above, a good take size might be for non pdif capped situations something like:
10 BP damage = Your Avatar Attack / 10

This works for all the examples above but I'm not sure I trust it really.

not really accurate mathematically, with everyone sporting so much BPD it's worth comparatively less

a nirvana smn with other good gear probably has ~155% blood pact damage

take the total BPD you have(counting the base 100%) with the piece and divide by the total without to get the percentage it's increasing your damage

attack however, is pretty well estimated by looking at the proportion

say you're comparing a 10 bpd aug vs an 8 with 25 additional attack:

BP component is 255/253 = 0.79% increase in damage from the 2% BPD(exact)

assuming pdif isn't capped, new attack/current attack will be a good estimate for what you gain from the attack

attack component is ~1325/1300 = 1.9% increase in damage from the 25 attack

weighing for current BPD, you get roughly 5.2 attack = 1 BPD in this case, however just taking away nirvana and replacing it with a 10 BPD griovolr with no other changes will change it to roughly 4.4 attack = 1 BPD

if you straight value 1 BPD as 1%, you'd be seeing 13.15 attack = 1 BPD, which is more than double the real value, this is why it's very important to factor how much BPD you have

Ya that's true, how much BP damage you have will also factor in. I might make a 2nd version of the calculator I made for BP damage vs MAB to help in gearing physical as well, including double attack and AM3. Though in thinking, you should also have to weigh in how the BP damage and attack work together for resulting damage to be accurate as you do with mab and bp damage.

you don't have to look at how they work together, just remove common variables

set A has 25 more attack
set B has 2 more bpd

set A adds approximately '(attack + 25) / attack' damage
set B adds exactly '(100 + BPD + 2) / (100 + BPD)' damage

That looks at the % increase in BP damage or % increase in attack, not the % increase in damage.

2000 * 2.55 = 5100
2000 * 2.53 = 5060
2000 * 1.02 = 2040

5100/5060 = 1.0079
2040/2000 = 1.02

In these examples the % increase in damage is as you estimated.

You do have to care about how they interact too though, because of how multipliers work. 10 * 10 for example isn't the same as 19 * 1 and you're adding numbers to each multiplier. Getting just BP damage as an example vs getting just attack vs getting some of both. Say you can pick between 104 attack and 8 BP damage, but you trade exactly 1 BP damage for 13 attack due to how the gear is designed.

2000 * 1 * 1404/1300 = 2160
2000 * 1.08 * 1 = 2160
2000 * 1.04 * 1352/1300 = 2163.2

Basically 1.08 which is what 1404/1300 is too, and while 1.08 * 1 is the same as 1 * 1.08, those are the same as 1.04 * 1.04, as both numbers grow so too will the differences between them being balanced or not.
For example say you could add 6 multipliers worth of bp dmg or attack andd add them to either variable you choose:
2000 * 1 * 1 = 2000
2000 * (1 + 6) * 1 = 12000
2000 * (1 + 3) * (1 + 3) = 32000
This is why with MAB and BP damage you want to properly balance them too and something you have to care about if you want to optimize your gear for attack vs bp damage, because you're adding numbers to BP damage, and Attack, but they are multiplied together, which Pergatory, I and others have discussed in this thread many times. Granted gear lines aren't so neat as the examples but you do have to worry about how they work together.

Also I think your comparison is bit misleading at times, as you need to keep in mind as shown with the first examples above, adding 2 BP damage whether you have 153 or none, in both examples adds exactly 40 damage to a 2000 damage BP. While 40 damage compared to the 2000 and 40 damage compared to 5060 are different percents, 40 damage is 40 damage and you can know in that way at least there's not diminishing returns on damage done and in that way the 155th bp damage counts for as much as the 153rd BP damage, though that gets more complicated when interacting with other multipliers. I also remember reading on BG-wiki that a % increase in attack is more than a % increase in damage but don't remember why and can't find it.

This stuff usually won't matter though because if it all possible you want to cap PDIF for any job doing physical damage and think I've spent enough time on it for a while D:

The % increase in BP damage is always the % increase in damage, which is why I said exactly.

The % increase in attack is always approximately the % increase in damage, unless you are at capped pdif, which is why I said approximately. Unless level correction is applied, a % increase in attack is very close to a % increase in damage, but there is no level correction on any relevant content.

You sure typed a lot of letters, but there isn't any situation where you are only comparing attack/bpd that the simple calculation I listed won't return an accurate result.

I didn't mean to upset you if I have, my point is only that pdif, base damage and bp damage are multiplied together so you need to worry about how they interact in balancing gear for final damage.

not upset, but you're making a much more complicated post that provides no additional data.. and no, base damage doesn't effect an att/bpd comparison because multiplication is linear

if X * base damage beats Y * base damage, then X * (base damage + 1) will beat Y * (base damage + 1) in all circumstances

if you have multiple pieces it is smart to draw a comparison for all swaps you're considering, but it still comes down to the same thing.. calculate which combination is better based on the differences between them, and all you need for that is the extremely simple calculation i mentioned

I do 1000 damage and add 10 BP or if I do 1100 damage and add 10 BP, the result is still 10% increase (from zero BP at least.) Assuming I have 1000 attack and 10 BP and I do 1100 damage, adding 100 attack would still be a 10% increase for 1210 damage. I don't see where the confusion is.

The confusion I think is based on where you define the starting point. If your point of reference is the damage you do at BP 0, then yeah it scales linearly. But in terms of real damage in game when you add BP, the starting point isn't BP 0, its' whatever you had before. So if your BP 0 is 1000 dmg and you added 120 BP, you'd be doing 2200 dmg. Adding 10 BP more would increase your damage to 2300, a 4.5% increase in your damage due to the add. It's the law of diminishing returns - the more you add the less of an impact it has in terms of a % damage increase.

pDIF is similar, so what matters is your starting point for both numbers. If you have a .8Pdif, getting it to .9 would result in a 12.5% damage increase. A helluva lot more damage than the 4.5% inrease above. But that same amout of extra attack getting you from 4% to 4.1 - that's a 2.5% increase, worse than adding the BP above.

Basically, it's impossible to compare one vs the other without defining the starting point for each one. Not all of the if/then scenarios in the last few posts discussing this do so adequately.

That's the point. If you increase your attack by X percentage and multiply by Y BP damage, the total will still be increased by X percent. Likewise for the reverse.

No - it won't. It will only do that in the very specific example of when you have a starting pdif of exactly 1.0.

Given how specific that scenario is, I think it's just more accurate to say that you're wrong.

If I have 1.5 pdif and boost it to 1.6, that's a 6.67% increase. If I did 20K with 10 BP damage with 1.5 pdif I will do 21333 damage with 1.6 pdif, a 6.67% increase. Unless my starting pdif is capped or adding the attack pushes me over the cap, it doesn't matter.

So doing omen with a dual set of smn doing 3k tp aftermath af/ac spam we have been able to drop craver and gorger in <5 minutes each (and have a potential setup for Thinker[pain sync]) With finishing run times on kei of 30 and 35 minutes start to finish :D

Setup is PLD, GEO, SMN x2, SCH x2.
Adloquium and melee on way up to cap at 3k for mid.
On midboss SMNs take turns setting up and doing GoB, AF/AC and predator claws with Whispering wind if you or your pet get hit with a nasty aoe or start pulling hate.

For Glassy thinker, we are considering either separate sacrificial conduits with everything else out of range (whoo, potential for taking capped damage), or testing mewling spam to see if it stops pain sync.

For Kei boss SCH x2 alternate healing duties and fragmentation skillchains, burst thunderstorm. PLD can range the 75/50/25/10 move with a little practice, or just sac and reraise, tanking while weakened.

Yes, but this is true because you changed from discussing attack to discussing pdif. Raising simply your attack by 5% will not result in a 5% damage increase unless the mob just so happens to have defense equal to your starting attack.

700 attack / 900 defense = .777777777 ratio

If I add 100 attack, 800/700 = 14.28% increase. If I multiply that by my previous ratio I get .888888888

Man, guess 800/900 being the same number is just a coincidence.

That's true, but the point is knowing how much each is worth means you need to know how much of each you have.

1000 * 1.4 * 1.4 isn't the same as 1000 * 1.3 * 1.5

Comeatmebro's representations do indirectly take that into account since he divides both attack and bp damage by how much you have, but what I was saying isn't wrong either. Mine takes a look at how the formulas work together where as his is a quick way to determine effectiveness. I'd say it's both true and untrue that you have to worry about how they work together. True, if you look at the base damage x pdif x bp damage and then know that because of that the weight of bp damage and pdif change based off how much you have. Untrue, if you only look at it as a % increase from both stats over what you have. Two ways of arriving at the same answer doesn't make either method wrong and discussing it in terms of things like pet mab * bp base damage * bp damage or pdif * bp damage * bp base damage is just a lot more commonly done here so that's where the confusion comes from.

In the end all the matters is the weights are represented, which is what Sidra is saying too. Dividing by how much you have like Comeatmebro did is a good way to do that and simpler, the only downside imo is it obscures it from the base formulas some which we are more used to which you may or may not think is important.

The funny thing is I think everyone is trying to say basically the same thing and no one is actually getting they are saying the same thing. I'm not afraid to admit when I'm wrong, done so several times the past week on this forum actually. Either way, I'd rather not argue and I doubt anyone but tychefm wants to read it because he likes to popcorn.

you're really over complicating it.

Sure if you just use or teach memorized methods while not actually either understanding or teaching how anything works. Using shorthand methods for a problem are fine, using them and not recognizing another's point or how it relates to final damage formulas isn't. That's like teaching the mnemonic rules for multiplying by 9 but not actually teaching how multiplication works. Sure it works and it's easy to find answers, but it's use case is limited and if that's all you know it will lead to problems.

If all that was understood or explained from your perspective from the start no one would be arguing back and forth in the first place.

That's one reason of many just knowing a method without knowing the why isn't good, simple as your representation was, it lead to confusion because it wasn't explained in a meaningful way. You also didn't get or acknowledge the points I made, I had to understand both yours and mine. Of course if you multiply something times 1.067 it will be 1.067 bigger that's how multiplication works. When you're stating that over and over though, when that had nothing to do with the original point that the weights of what you have need to be represented and here's why due to the damage formula (because they multiply together), it's like watching someone scream into an empty hallway. In reality you're adding numbers to multipliers which is multiplied by base damage. Discussing in terms of % increase in damage over what you have rather than % increase in damage over unaltered damage can be useful but alone just gets myopic and weird as the last page of this thread shows too it isn't explained very well if you just throw it out there. Personally I think arguing method is petty and pointless in the first place but you did insist on stating mine is more complicated rather than dropping it, so here's a bit of why.