So, I completely missed this thread over the Christmas holidays https://forums.station.sony.com/eq/...video-guide-for-any-level-no-aas-reqd.206027/ It eventually evolved/devolved into a discussion of TC/Amp/MR Auras couple with druid auras. There is some bad info based on gut feelings, hence starting a new discussion. I haven't played with this since the level increase, so I am not sure if Wildspark overwrites Reverb ( at 95, Wildblaze was more damage than Reiterate, so it overwrote even though it was the inferior aura ). I suspect it no longer overwrites, but my druids are pretty well trained not to load that aura on raids, so I can't comment on recent experience. The real crux comes down to does Amp+TC+druid Aura do more damage than TC+MR? The answer is a very tepid "yes". Assuming Ethereal Incandescence as the only spell cast, you can expect a little under 900 base damage more with the druid Aura per 10 spells cast, or about 90 extra damage per cast. With any other class than wizard or if the wizard is twisting other spells into the mix, this will no longer be true and TC+MR will be superior ( Hoarfrost loses about 10 damage per cast with the druid setup ). This does assume getting a Re-proc every 10 casts and based on my experience is a good assumption. But the big thing is using the druid aura over MR completely removes the chance for Re-Re procs. Yes, they are somewhat low chance, but getting one completely demolishes the druid setup. A secondary thought are the Tonic of Resonant Elemental potions. Wizards/Mages want to believe these increase their dps. The truth is when they go off, they take the place of the MR proc for a base damage increase of 177 points and block a potential 3930 point DD. Obviously that is a very hard thing to parse, but if we assume 1 in 20 Potion procs may have produced a Re proc, you are losing damage. Amp Aura should be loaded for burns when ITC is being used. It can be used with single target MR, though I generally stay pretty busy even in "non CC' raids and I suspect my loss in dps isn't worth the gain. MR is hands down the better choice over druid aura 99% of the time. MR is hands down the better choice than Amp. MR by itself is a better choice than Wildspark+Amp.
The "Current" (95-100 verson i dont know the level) of Druid fire aura does not overwrite the current lv 100 Mana Reverb aura. The opposite is true for this as MR overwrite the druids (i had rk 2 and druid had rk3 and mine still overwrote his) It is a tepid yes because it is situation dependant. Were the caster class does not have there auto twincast ability up, the answer if a resounding yes, the three together is better than just TC and MR. in cases were auto twincast is being used then Amp + MR should be used but this requires communincation, cordnation and time, something that when burning down a mob typlicaly does not happen (at least for me) As reverb overwrites druid at the current high level there is no need to worry on this Tested this with a mage friend, the aura procs does not stop the use of the potion proc, but the spell does. MR is not the better choice than Amp hands down. It is damage dependant. -Amp does 4% of the spells damage regardless of rank per wave (mage friend did 100 casts of his 5 wave spell and parsed this should be true though i only have it on his word) -Mana reverb at rank 3 adds ~ 4,015 damage per first wave of any given spell (all proc damage* chance to proc summed) (does not proc on multipule wave spells) -Wild spark adds 2909 damage per single wave (does not proc on multipule wave spells) Thus in order for Amp to do more than reverb (average) it must do more than 4,014 damage a cast This meens that Amp is better than MR on Single cast spells that result in > 100,375 damage Dual wave spells that result in > 50,187 damage a Wave Triple wave spells that result in > 33,458 damage a Wave Four wave spells that result in > 25,093 damage a Wave Five wave spells that result in > 20,075 damage a Wave Amp + wildspark is better than MR when Single cast spells that result in > 27,650 damage a Wave Dual wave spells that result in > 13,825 damage a Wave Triple wave spells that result in > 9,217 damage a Wave Four wave spells that result in > 6,912 damage a Wave Five wave spells that result in > 5,530 damage a Wave end result is, it all depends on the damage being done as a result of the spell as Amp aura damage can crit and multiply based off the spell itself (test Chromatic haze with Amp and without Amp)
I did some testing on this as well, and found the following: MR + Twincast is the best for sustained damage non burn MR + Amplify is the best for burn scenarios If granted a Druid, it's best to use Twincast and Amplify. The parse data above confirms my parse data
Well, no spell does more than >28791 base damage today. Unless you are saying on a crit, which is a complete falacy to compare a crit spell to a non crit MR. That's just wrong. How can you say, "well, if I don't crit that spell, it would of been better to use MR, but if I crit the spell, it would be better to use AMP"? It is a completely wrong way to look at it. You can't decide what aura to use after you have cast the spell. By the way, what Rain spell has 5 waves? And I'll double check with my mage tonight, but.... 1: Increase Spell Effectiveness by 4% 2: Limit Class: CLR, PAL, RNG, SHD, DRU, BRD, SHM, NEC, WIZ, MAG, ENC, BST 3: Limit Max Level: 100 (lose 100% per level) 4: Limit Effect: Current Hit Points 5: Limit Type: Detrimental 7: Limit Min Mana Cost: 10 8: Limit Target: Exclude Caster AE 9: Limit Target: Exclude Caster PB 10: Limit Target: Exclude Target AE 11: Limit Target: Exclude Directional AE 12: Limit Type: Exclude Procs Slot 10 would seem to indicate it doesn't work. Tested 4 hours ago. The spell does not stop the potion proc. Actually got 6 "twitches" in 18 casts at one point. Again, you can't make the statement "that result in" because that implies you had fore knowledge of of how focus effects, SD, and crit chance were going to occur. If you are assuming a 100% crit chance scenario, you can't use the non-crit damage on MR as a comparison. All you can look at is base damage. One spell in game today has base damage of 28791, which is the only one that would fit the >27,650. So for any class not named wizard or wizards that have to use anything other than Ethereal Incandescence due to the type of fight, Wildspark + Amp will be lower than what MR can do alone. And even the Incandescence case is very minimally above MR alone and it completely sacrifices the spikes in damage that can be gained by a Re-Re-Re-Re proc.
I didnt say base damage did I? resulting damage works for this as well. I know that as an enchanter I have landed quite a few spells that hit for over 30k as a result of foci and the other non-critical effects. Based off parses. if you know you did 300k damage and cast 30 spells you know on average you came in at 30k damage a spell. I dont know what rain spell can hit for 5 waves but my mage friend was very vocal about having a wave spell that could hit 5 times. And it may be that Amp doesnt work on the rains, but having only an enchanter Toon meens i must take the word and parse data from others. As such using my Mage buddy's information he wants Amp even though in his sustained and burn spell line up he only casts one single "wave" spell. glad i was wrong about this because then doen't that make it even MORE relevent to use TC and amp aura? But I, and hundreds of other people, can and DO make that statment. Foci effects take place on ALL spells that fit in that catagory and you can take the lowest (45%) and use that or take the average (72%) which still effect. Spell damage takes place on ALL spells. I can factor in crits because Amp damage does Crit (or takes a % of the crit damage and adds it which is still in effect critting). I do admit that i didnt factor in crit damage % into MR calculation however that is can be negleted as i also didnt factor in crit damage to Amp. I am assuming that amp is adding a 4% of what ever final damage the spell does because the final damage is how effective the spell is. To be blunt we dont know what Amp factors into i belive (please prove me wrong on this) i still dont see how you get that. As an enchanter, my main two nukes do 21831 and 13081 at rk 2. with my foci at the LOW end thats bumped up to 31655 and 18967. On average its 37549 and 22499. So for the primary nuke i cast it is more effetive to have Amp, TC and wildspark if I dont want to devote a spell slot to MR spell. secondary nuke i lose out on ~ 50-100 damage, but gain on average ~80-160 overall. Spikes are not being looked at Per you as we are not taking critical damages into account. if we where i would be posting Haze + best nuke parses with amp then with MR. I am posative that amp wins out in the spike damage unless you hit that 1 in a billion chance of critical reverb 5 times.
Filatal. You need to be specific about what your looking at here. Realistically speaking. from a mathmatics perspective. What scenarios are we talking about here? Sustained or burn? I know you like to look at the whole picture. I get that. I respect that. But you seem to miss the point. With AA Cooldowns running, one aura set is going to trump the others While in burn mode. Running Twincast aura is foolish. Your not getting the effects of it. so... While burning, in a perfect world you want Amplify + Mana Recursion. Twincast is doing nothing while Improved Twincast AA is running. Yes yes. I understand, coordinating aura swaps is difficult. Your looking at sustained numbers here, okay fine. Well the simple answer to that is. If you have a Druid in your party, you should run Amplify and Twincast and let the Druid run Wildspark your covering 2 aspect, the Druid covers one. If you DONT have a Druid in your party, you should run Twincast and MR. I box a Magician as well Filatal. For over a decade. I have the parses to prove that this is the best scenario to go. I also have a 100 Druid on third box. So I understand well the Aura dilemma. I talked to you about this well before you hit max level. I'm glad your starting to do the math yourself. But. Be warned that your not the only one with a Parser. So if somebody refutes your data. It's really best to listen. Look. By the way. RANDOM_ENCHANTER is correct here. There's no need to turn nasty and start correcting the guys grammar P.S I suggest you look at the Mage spell called SALVO OF MANY. Random's Mage friend is correct there too. ** slight correction. When I recorded I stated MR was chromatic based. It's magic based
case to point, i am a numbers person i lack grammer and spelling cability. Why and how i can get a spell cast with out a fissile is beyond me. but for him to beable to correct something that is not there in the first place is impossible i think. . . To Dandin's point i am a numbers person, i do what is mathmaticaly sound in most situations. How ever on raids i do always ask the group what they want IF twincast + amp is not acceptable. Typicaly on raids my auras look like this 50% TC and Amp (caster DPS with one chanter, one druid) 10% mix between TC, MR, Amp and Mana regen (caster DPS with 2 chanters, one druid) 30% TC and MR (ranger + shm/cleric) 10% Mana + rune aura (Cleric + Tank). In groups it is 60% Learners and Twincast 30% Twincast & Charm 10% Learners & charm
Aura management and group ADPS are one of the most fundamentally important parts of the Enchanter class
Well, I never criticized your grammar, but whatever. You have basically proved my point. So much is based on gut feelings and people don't want to let it go. But your main argument against what I was saying was your mage friend. I was fairly sure I was correct, but waited to get home and run some actual simulations. Amp aura does not affect Salvo of Many. It does not affect rain spells. It does not affect servants. The only thing it will affect is Spear, which to my understanding of what the gurus at the Mage's Tower say, you should only be casting on burns. On burns is when I say Amp does have a place ( replace TC ). Outside of burns, your mage friend is sacrificing 3.5k damage on every Rain, Salvo. and Garg pet for a tad over 1k on his Spear, assuming he uses that during sustained. The problem everyone faces is accounting for the Re-procs. Even you, who claim to be "mathematically sound" put it at 1 in a billion. Bit hyperbolic, isn't it? Everyone tends to make the age old "gambler's falacy". "If it is a 10% chance, and I just got one, the odds are against me getting another one". This is what makes Vegas rich; numbers have no memory. Just because the roulette wheel hit black the last 10 spins, black is no more or less likely to hit on the next spin. Thankfully, EQ is a bit more forgiving than a Vegas craps table. In the grand scheme of all EQ servers over time, I am sure the random number generator approaches 10% 1% .1% and .01% on MR. But within the slices of time that you are actually fighting, you can be lucky or unlucky. If you are unlucky, MR will be slightly behind Amp+Wildspark. If you are lucky, it will be way out in front. Another reason it gets discounted is because it is very, very difficult to parse. I know of no parser that has the ability to find Re-procs and tell you when/how many you got. The only way I can ever tell is to comb my log file and look for multiple lines of "enveloped". Finally, to answer a couple of questions: Not 100% sure what you are saying, but I think this is it. If I don't answer it well enough, I'll try again. Take a spell, base damage is 10000. Your crit rate is 3.4 times base. If you crit this spell ( again, I'm ignoring focus for simplicity sake ) the spell will do 34,000 damage. With Amp, it will do 10400 base and 35,360 on a crit. Or you can look at it as Amp did 1,360 damage. Take the Ethereal example, and Amp can do around 3740 base crit and 7480 crit with 100% focus. Add to that, 2900 x 3.4=9800 crit for Wildspark and it looks pretty nice, especially compared to 3500 for MR. That's where I take exception; its an apples and oranges comparison. MR crits for close to 12k with a decent chance for a 13k crit. Obviously, I rounded a bunch of the numbers here. And remember, in a burn, 100% crit chance scenario, I said use MR+Amp. That is where Amp can shine, on random crits it is ok, but in the long run tends to lag behind. You were right the first time. Its Chromatic.
Which is why i take the average amount of damage done by it (not accounting for criticals). I stated that an aura MR proc adds ~ 4,015 (its 4,014.5) damage per proc, this accounts for the addional proc rate. It seems like you are asking for the craps table effect to happen and banking on it to happen. I am averaging it out by saying that the first proc from MR aura adds ~3500 Damage per cast. The second proc, which happens 10% of the time and does ~4000 Damage per cast adds 4000*10% to the overal damage per cast, putting the overall at about 3900 pull this out to the 5th iteration of reverb aura and you total the 4014.5 damage per cast on average per cast with MR aura on. I'm not discounting anything. Amp aura + wild spark needs to make up the 4014.5 damage per cast that Reverb does in order for it to be better on raids. as Wildspark does 2900 base (and once again discounting criticals) that leaves Amp to make up ~1100 damage per cast. well we know that Amp adds 4% damage. Based on what you said you think Amp takes FINAL damage done, not base, Foci and spell damage included. that meens that AFTER foci and spell damage are accounted for, a spell must do ~ 27,500 damage on a raid. Raid foci's effect at a min 45%. That meens at Max a spell must do 18965.52 damage after spell damage secondary has been applied in order for Amp +wildspark to be effective. Raid foci's effect at a max 100%. That meens at min a spell must do 13750 damage after spell damage secondary has been applied in order for Amp +wildspark to be effective. Averaging thease out (as you so kindly pointed out the RNG will do this for us) gives an average spell needing to do 16357.76 damage after spell damage secondary has been applied in order for Amp + Wildspark to be MORE effective than Mana reverb. in the Raid enviroments im in caster dps "bruning" meens they use discs. otherwise they cast the same spells. I'm after more ADPS added. If the group does not tell me that they are burning (using ITC, auto crit etc) I assume that they are not and do not change out auras. Changing out auras to effect my parse, and my parse alone meens that im screwing them over and Unless i can do more damage than I am screwing them out of, i do not. We are enchanters, we are not Big parse damage (unless charming) I personaly will refuse to make a blantant attempt to screw out a Big parse damage caster by swiching auras to help myself when i do not know if they are using discs.
If you're above about level 80, learner's aura does virtually nothing. Pick anything else, but having learner's up has the same effect as not having a second aura up.
It's +% experience so level doesn't matter you just don't see the results as much because XP bar moves less as you get higher up. Can you say confirmation bias? Either way I don't think its a very good idea to run learners unless you have no caster dps in the group.
By definition you always have caster dps in the group (you, the enchanter). The problem with learner's is that it's x% of the base mob xp, before any modifiers. It takes many, many kills to see any difference at all. More info here.
No, apparently I explained it poorly. Amp does base. Its 4% of whatever damage you see listed in spells_us.txt ( using whatever your favorite spell parser is ). It can crit, at which point that 4% of base will be multiplied by your crit rate. My early testing seems to point to spell damage is calculated on the base spell before Amp effects are applied, but I will admit I need to test this out more. Mana Reverb does get spell damage effects applied. Mana Reverb is not focusable ( fairly easy to test ), but it is much more difficult to test focus effects on Amp ( since focus is random and Amp effects are inside the random damage). I think I I have thought of a way, will look into it more. Another thing that I wasn't thinking of at the beginning ( its been at the back of my mind and this discussion helped remind me ). So, we have already learned that most of a mage's best spell line up get no benefit from Amp Aura. We also have to be aware that Ethereal Incandescence and Pyre of Marnek will get zero benefit from Amp Aura as their robes have at least a equal amount of SPA 413. While I haven't done testing to make sure, I am willing to bet it is not an additive SPA ( will do some testing and report back, if it does turn out to be additive I will have to re-examine ).
i dont know, I notice a difference myself in casual groups on the per kill AA exp with it on than with it off. Granted its about 1-2% AA exp per kill but that adds up over time. It is also what the group wants and as i have another aura slot and reverb as a spell it doesn't bother me much to keep it up and make 5 people happy rather than making myself do slightly more damage. as i said i only use it in group settings, and typicaly when i'm in a group the group is after exp. Learners increases exp, regardless how little, as such it helps. If were not after exp i dont run it that simple. If you add 1/1000 of an inch to every step you take you will eventualy have added on enough distance to walk around the world. sure its in small increments but it does add up. Seems to me that Amp aura doesn't do BASE damage as "Spell Effectiveness" as foci effects that increase damage state As i stated before we have no idea as to the true effect of amp aura. we know that it adds 4% of the damage somewere but we have no idea were that somewere is in the math. it could be off base damage, it could be off base + spell damage. It could be off the foci. We dont know and i highly doubt Dzarn will be spoiling this for use as well. i have never noticed this and will look tonight to see if it is true. However I personaly belive that it is not true as the 2edary stat spell damage calculates added damage based off [(total spell damage stat*7)/(cast time+recast time)] and reverb aura has no cast time nor recast time. Easy to test though and can be done very easly. once again this goes to not knowing what amp aura does. it can stack, it may not. I would like imperical data that can be verifyied to prove or disprove this. Before making any final call.
Well, here's what I came up with. I turned off my tribute, took off all of my gear, didn't have any buffs or stat food that added spell related damage. No auras going. Started nuking my eye with Mindcleave rk3. Mindcleave rk3 is supposed to be base damage of 22922, still, somewhere I'm getting an extra 74 damage. Non-crits were consistently 22996. Crits were consistently 78186. (3.3999 more damage than a non-crit) ----------------------------------------------- Add in AMP aura. 22996 * 0.04 = 920 78186 * 0.04 = 3127 So they should have hit for 23916 81313 (3.3999 more than non-crit) Non-crits were consistently 23912. Crits were consistently 81300 (3.3999 more damage than a non-crit with AMP aura as well) 23916 - 23912 = 4 81313 - 31300 = 13 13 / 4 = 3.25 (wtf) **Disclaimer: I'm pretty sure I suck at math so I probably messed something up somewhere. At least I TRIED! What do you guys get from it?
