So grabbed this ring and its weird :/ idk what to make of it.
Says Phantom roll +3
Used snake eyes to compare a 1 chaos with and without ring.
204 bass
216 without
235 with
other character in party
847 base
899 without
979 with
so 6% became 15%~ idk how that is related to +3
now with a drk in party to force job bonus
204 base
236 without
255 with
other character in party(:x my dark is pretty low lvl)
71 base
82 without
89 with
so 16% became 25% with this it appers to be a 9% increase? idk just a start at some testin hope others can expand
tried with tact roll and empy +2 body on with 11 got 5.6tp per tic thats a 12% increase
Merirsovo Ring Findings
Merirsovo Ring Findings
With the +5 ring, the tact becomes 60tp/tic instead of 56/tic with +3 ring (if the +5 werent broken for tact atm). Evo +5/tic, dancers +10/tic, etc. Each roll is uniquely affected by the ring(s).
with +3 ring:
Hunter's roll goes from 50 to 65 w/o job bonus at 11
Ninja's roll goes from 30 to 46 w/o job bonus at 11
Dancer's roll goes from 16 to 22 hp/tic w/o job bonus at 11
Evoker's roll goes from 4/tic to 7/tic w/o job bonus at 11
My chaos test showed 26.08% to 33.73% w/o job bonus at 11
with +5 ring:
hunters goes from 50 to 75
dancer's goes from 16 to 26/tic
So anyway, will take some time before someone compiles the full list of bonuses, but it is substantial enough to pat SE on the back because they clearly tried so hard to not give us a third roll, and I'm kind of ok with it.
edit:
the +5 ring is broken for tact in adoulin but not in marjami?...
with +3 ring:
Hunter's roll goes from 50 to 65 w/o job bonus at 11
Ninja's roll goes from 30 to 46 w/o job bonus at 11
Dancer's roll goes from 16 to 22 hp/tic w/o job bonus at 11
Evoker's roll goes from 4/tic to 7/tic w/o job bonus at 11
My chaos test showed 26.08% to 33.73% w/o job bonus at 11
with +5 ring:
hunters goes from 50 to 75
dancer's goes from 16 to 26/tic
So anyway, will take some time before someone compiles the full list of bonuses, but it is substantial enough to pat SE on the back because they clearly tried so hard to not give us a third roll, and I'm kind of ok with it.
edit:
the +5 ring is broken for tact in adoulin but not in marjami?...
where did u get the +5 one?
Yumcax WKR, reportedly.
[+]
:) have to go get one and see if the rings stack. I'd guess no but u NVR no with se
Fenrir.Tesahade said: »
:) have to go get one and see if the rings stack. I'd guess no but u NVR no with se
They don't.
All rolls with Snake Eyes and no chance for Job Bonus:
Since I assumed it goes with the highest equipped ring, I stopped checking what both rings would do.
| Roll | Without Ring | With +3 | With +5 | With Both | Note |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ninja Roll | 4 Evasion | 10 Evasion | 14 Evasion | 14 Evasion | +# on ring multiplied by 2 |
| Gallant Roll | 41 Defense | 80 Defense | 110 Defense | ? Defense | Should probably redo this since I think it's % based |
| Chaos Roll | 509 > 540 Attack | 509 > 588 Attack | 509 > 620 Attack | ? Attack | % Based, don't feel like the maths |
| Evoker's Roll | +1 Refresh | +4 Refresh | +6 Refresh | +6 Refresh | +# on ring directly affects |
| Dancer's Roll | +3 Regen | +9 Regen | +13 Regen | ? Regen | +# on ring multiplied by 2 |
| Samurai Roll | 66 > 71 | 66 > 79 | 66 > 84 | ? | Don't feel like the maths |
Since I assumed it goes with the highest equipped ring, I stopped checking what both rings would do.
[+]
So, I noticed that Beast Roll was acting up sometimes with both rings so I tested with the +5. Seems job bonus proc on the 2 lucky rolls is about -50% pet attack... Tested on SMN with 121 ifrit, no other buffs on, has 893 attack normally if anyone feels like doing the math.
| Roll | With bonus | w/o bonus |
| 1 | 1175 | 1088 |
| 2 | 1189 | 1102 |
| 3 | 1203 | 1116 |
| 4 | 449 | 1255 |
| 5 | 1217 | 1130 |
| 6 | 1231 | 1144 |
| 7 | 1259 | 1172 |
| 8 | 1147 | 1060 |
| 9 | 1273 | 1186 |
| 10 | 1287 | 1199 |
| 11 | 505 | 1311 |
For Samurai Roll, using Mahayaya's numbers, it looks like the extra store tp is the number on the ring multiplied by 4. For a 1 roll without ring, it would be +8 store tp, with +3 ring it would be +20 store tp, and with +5 ring it would be +28 store tp (the BG wiki seems slightly off for a 1 roll, it says it's 7 store tp, but since SE rounds down for TP, it would have to be +8 to go from 66 to 71 and +8 store tp would still match Kirschy's tp numbers). So for +3 ring it will be an extra +12 store tp and for +5 ring it will be an extra +20 store tp.
What is the name of the +5 one can anyone say?
Never mind I finally found it.
Never mind I finally found it.
Fenrir.Duvelamilla said: »
What is the name of the +5 one can anyone say?
Barataria Ring, drops from Yorcia Weald WKR or purchasable from AH. On Day Two, it was like 500k on AH, so I imagine it has plummeted by now. It's not on ffxiah, but you can check in-game AH for it.
Bismarck.Josiahkf said: »
you can also get it from the wkr Key items "six wonders of the wkr" option
Seven treasures actually.
+5 Ring makes Miser Roll viable again especially with Ionis up.
Lucky Roll will deliver 275 TP after every WS
11 will deliver 325 TP after every WS
Ionis will grant an additional +10 Save TP on top for a whole lot of 375 or 425 TP after a WS.
Lucky Roll will deliver 275 TP after every WS
11 will deliver 325 TP after every WS
Ionis will grant an additional +10 Save TP on top for a whole lot of 375 or 425 TP after a WS.
Each boost is a set bonus based on ring, and not effected by the roll number you get.
| Roll | With +3 | With +5 | Note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ninja Roll | +6 | +10 | +2 per +1 |
| Blitzers Roll | -3% | +5% | -1 per +1 |
| Hunters Roll | +15 | +25 | +5 per +1 |
| Gallant Roll | +7% - +8% (Thinking 7) | 11% - 12% (Thinking 12) | +2.4% per +1 |
| Chaos Roll | +9% | +15% | +3% per +1 |
| Evoker's Roll | +3 Refresh | +5 Refresh | +1 per +1 |
| Healer's Roll | +3% | +5% | +1% per 1 |
| Samurai Roll | +12 stp | +20 stp | +4 * ring |
| Tactians Roll | +6 | +10 | +2tp per +1 |
| Corsair's Roll | +6% EXP | +10% EXP | +2 per +1 |
| Misers Roll | +45 Save TP | +75 Save TP | +15 per +1 |
| Casters Roll | +9% Fast Cast | +15% Fast Cast | +3% per +1 |
| Fighters Roll | +3% Double Attack | +5% Double Attack | +1% per +1 |
| Companions Roll | +5HP + 15TP | +10HP +25TP | +1HP/Tick +5TP/Tick per +1 |
| Allies Roll | +3% Bonus | +5% Bonus | +1% Per +1 |
| Beasts Roll | +9% Pet Atk | +15% Pet Atk | +3% per +1 |
| Wizards Roll | +6 MAB | +10 MAB | +2MAB per +1 |
| Drachen Roll | +15 Pet Acc | +25 Pet Acc | +5 Acc per +1 |
| Puppet Roll | +9 MAB | +15 MAB | +3 Mab per 1 |
| Monks Roll | +12 Subtle Blow | +20 Subtle Blow | +4 per 1 |
| Magus Roll | +6 MDB | +10 MDB | +2 MDB per 1 |
| Rogues Roll | +3% Crit rate | +5% Crit Rate | +1% per +1 |
[+]
Fighters roll is a bit disappointing, +1%*(# on ring). Tested with 1000 attack rounds, with a 1 roll, 1069 swings - 2% from the 1 roll.
Cerberus.Balloon said: »
Fighters roll is a bit disappointing, +1%*(# on ring). Tested with 1000 attack rounds, with a 1 roll, 1069 attack rounds - 2% from the 1 roll.
That's actually a potent bonus when you factor in how much Double Attack you already get. Now if Corsair could do 3~4 rolls at once, Hunter's, Chaos, Samurai? and Fighter's roll would be very nice, although I guess if there's no Samurai in Party a Misers roll for a Suedo Tsurumaru effect on all weapons would be very nice.
Cerberus.Conagh said: »
Cerberus.Balloon said: »
Fighters roll is a bit disappointing, +1%*(# on ring). Tested with 1000 attack rounds, with a 1 roll, 1069 attack rounds - 2% from the 1 roll.
That's actually a potent bonus when you factor in how much Double Attack you already get. Now if Corsair could do 3~4 rolls at once, Hunter's, Chaos, Samurai? and Fighter's roll would be very nice, although I guess if there's no Samurai in Party a Misers roll for a Suedo Tsurumaru effect on all weapons would be very nice.
Kinda curious about optimal roll after update with above data. Time to play with spreadsheet!
Ragnarok.Afania said: »
Cerberus.Conagh said: »
Cerberus.Balloon said: »
Fighters roll is a bit disappointing, +1%*(# on ring). Tested with 1000 attack rounds, with a 1 roll, 1069 attack rounds - 2% from the 1 roll.
That's actually a potent bonus when you factor in how much Double Attack you already get. Now if Corsair could do 3~4 rolls at once, Hunter's, Chaos, Samurai? and Fighter's roll would be very nice, although I guess if there's no Samurai in Party a Misers roll for a Suedo Tsurumaru effect on all weapons would be very nice.
Kinda curious about optimal roll after update with above data. Time to play with spreadsheet!
Remember there are always eranous results with Spreadsheets.
Fenrir.Motenten said: »
By Fenrir.Motenten 2014-06-16 22:48:29
Link | Block | Pm | Quote | Reply | Report | Score: 3 +
"Rough guess" method is the most common initial approach, based solely on people's experiences with how different stats affect DPS outcomes. Unless there's something truly unique about a given setup, a few percent DA is going to outweigh a few points of a given stat. Likewise, something that can change a weaponskill's damage by over 5% (compared to a similar item) is *huge*, and if the underlying gear changes are not likewise huge, asserting such a result is dubious. This method is never itself accurate, but it is the most common means of finding errors in the more accurate methodologies.
Approximation methods present all the numbers used (or at least should) right in the comparison. If something doesn't look right, you can immediately check the math used. If you want to make a counterargument to such a presentation, it's expected that you show exactly where the error occurred.
For example:
Cerberus.Doctorugh said: »
If you have 40% crit, your base attack is 1000 and the mobs def is 1000, how uch is one attack worth? 1400/1000 or 1.4 ratio, so add one attack (make sure to add it pre buff or you'll need to add that too) and 1401/1000 = 1.401, 1.401/1.4 = 1 attack is worth 0.071%
This is in error in a few ways. First, 1000 att vs 1000 def is 1.0 Ratio, not 1.4. 40% crit does not create a 1.4 Ratio. Adding 1 attack does not add to the nonsensical rendition of the ratio as 1401/1000. Average pDif varies notably relative to Ratio, and one cannot count on a linear relation (though in times past I did so because the math to get a proper average pDif is complicated). A couple other minor technical quibbles derive from the above problems.
Simulationist methods are most vulnerable to 'hidden' errors -- exactly the sorts of mistake that you made. They are subject to dozens of unknowns, partly because the presenter never provides 100% of all set conditions, and partly because the provider is relying on tons of automated math inherent in the model itself. A single error (such as one I corrected in the Cor spreadsheet just today, referencing Set2TPBonus instead of Set2RTPBonus) can completely destroy a comparison without you even realizing it (particularly since frequently the error makes no difference at all, so isn't something that stands out).
Thus, when someone notes that the assertion you made doesn't really make sense, there's a greater burden on the simulationist to verify their own methodology, since most of the math that backs is up is something only they have access to.
Demeaning and insulting behavior after having been proven wrong, particularly against someone who did not make any additional comment against you, is really bad form.
Link | Block | Pm | Quote | Reply | Report | Score: 3 +
"Rough guess" method is the most common initial approach, based solely on people's experiences with how different stats affect DPS outcomes. Unless there's something truly unique about a given setup, a few percent DA is going to outweigh a few points of a given stat. Likewise, something that can change a weaponskill's damage by over 5% (compared to a similar item) is *huge*, and if the underlying gear changes are not likewise huge, asserting such a result is dubious. This method is never itself accurate, but it is the most common means of finding errors in the more accurate methodologies.
Approximation methods present all the numbers used (or at least should) right in the comparison. If something doesn't look right, you can immediately check the math used. If you want to make a counterargument to such a presentation, it's expected that you show exactly where the error occurred.
For example:
Cerberus.Doctorugh said: »
If you have 40% crit, your base attack is 1000 and the mobs def is 1000, how uch is one attack worth? 1400/1000 or 1.4 ratio, so add one attack (make sure to add it pre buff or you'll need to add that too) and 1401/1000 = 1.401, 1.401/1.4 = 1 attack is worth 0.071%
This is in error in a few ways. First, 1000 att vs 1000 def is 1.0 Ratio, not 1.4. 40% crit does not create a 1.4 Ratio. Adding 1 attack does not add to the nonsensical rendition of the ratio as 1401/1000. Average pDif varies notably relative to Ratio, and one cannot count on a linear relation (though in times past I did so because the math to get a proper average pDif is complicated). A couple other minor technical quibbles derive from the above problems.
Simulationist methods are most vulnerable to 'hidden' errors -- exactly the sorts of mistake that you made. They are subject to dozens of unknowns, partly because the presenter never provides 100% of all set conditions, and partly because the provider is relying on tons of automated math inherent in the model itself. A single error (such as one I corrected in the Cor spreadsheet just today, referencing Set2TPBonus instead of Set2RTPBonus) can completely destroy a comparison without you even realizing it (particularly since frequently the error makes no difference at all, so isn't something that stands out).
Thus, when someone notes that the assertion you made doesn't really make sense, there's a greater burden on the simulationist to verify their own methodology, since most of the math that backs is up is something only they have access to.
Demeaning and insulting behavior after having been proven wrong, particularly against someone who did not make any additional comment against you, is really bad form.
Cerberus.Conagh said: »
Cerberus.Balloon said: »
Fighters roll is a bit disappointing, +1%*(# on ring). Tested with 1000 attack rounds, with a 1 roll, 1069 attack rounds - 2% from the 1 roll.
That's actually a potent bonus when you factor in how much Double Attack you already get. Now if Corsair could do 3~4 rolls at once, Hunter's, Chaos, Samurai? and Fighter's roll would be very nice, although I guess if there's no Samurai in Party a Misers roll for a Suedo Tsurumaru effect on all weapons would be very nice.
Assuming 1st roll is chaos like usual, looks like DA > SAM > miser for none mythic 2h DD. SAM > DA for mythic AM3, just like pre-update.
Haven't check none SAM DD but I highly doubt miser can beat SAM/DA roll.
Under Ionis even non sam can get near cap tp return with Miser.
If you're outside Adoulin is bad as usual.
If you're outside Adoulin is bad as usual.
the rings won't stack with each other but they stack w/ Lanun Tricorne, if you're not worried about the nominal difference between +3 and +5 then stick w/ sparks ring, but wkr ring is +5, can't beat that. I've noticed nothing unusual about them cept they don't stack together.
That's mostly all of them, the others aren't easy to test or having unknown values (Listed below)
Choral's Roll, Warlock's Roll, Scholar's Roll, Coursers Roll.
Some things we noticed with testing:
Rogues roll has been reported wrong for a long time, XI roll without THF bonus is probably around 14%, THF bonus is between 5-7%. Rogues roll is pretty crappy without a thf, basically.
Bolters roll changed with the movement speed update, new values are listed at http://wiki.bluegartr.com/bg/Bolter's_Roll and are listed the way the game reports speed. We were at 4.0, we got changed to 5.0. We can actually get 2.0 with +5 ring and XI, which is pretty quick.
Puppets Roll is pretty potent now, getting +15 from the ring, and being +40 at XI.
Blitzers Roll is capped at 15% delay reduction, but this is not the total delay reduction, it can be increased past that with equipment.
Big thanks to Byrth for helping with the testing, should find that most if not all of the values are reflected on bgwiki too.
Choral's Roll, Warlock's Roll, Scholar's Roll, Coursers Roll.
Some things we noticed with testing:
Rogues roll has been reported wrong for a long time, XI roll without THF bonus is probably around 14%, THF bonus is between 5-7%. Rogues roll is pretty crappy without a thf, basically.
Bolters roll changed with the movement speed update, new values are listed at http://wiki.bluegartr.com/bg/Bolter's_Roll and are listed the way the game reports speed. We were at 4.0, we got changed to 5.0. We can actually get 2.0 with +5 ring and XI, which is pretty quick.
Puppets Roll is pretty potent now, getting +15 from the ring, and being +40 at XI.
Blitzers Roll is capped at 15% delay reduction, but this is not the total delay reduction, it can be increased past that with equipment.
Big thanks to Byrth for helping with the testing, should find that most if not all of the values are reflected on bgwiki too.
Wtf are you on about, no reason to stick with +3. You can even buy from ah the +5 if you don't wanna do wkr.
Cerberus.Balloon said: »
Warlock's Roll
Valefor.Sehachan said: »
Cerberus.Balloon said: »
Warlock's Roll
Yes, but I meant there'd be difficulty testing the amount of macc the ring bonus gives - At least quickly.
I think it'd be reasonable to assume that it gives +1macc per +1 Phantom Roll, but who knows. That roll giving +15 when capped is absurd.
Also yeah, I wouldn't say the difference between +3 and +5 is nominal, pretty big differences in most rolls.
Cerberus.Balloon said: »
Valefor.Sehachan said: »
Cerberus.Balloon said: »
Warlock's Roll
Yes, but I meant there'd be difficulty testing the amount of macc the ring bonus gives - At least quickly.
I think it'd be reasonable to assume that it gives +1macc per +1 Phantom Roll, but who knows. That roll giving +15 when capped is absurd.
Also yeah, I wouldn't say the difference between +3 and +5 is nominal, pretty big differences in most rolls.
the rings are the same as lanun tricorn in how they work w/ phantom roll. i have both, but if for some reason the +5 is god knows how out of reach for someone, the +3 ring isn't a bummer. i'm happy if a cor even has lanun tricorn if i'm not on cor myself. beggers can't be choosers w/ PUG
Bahamut.Soraishin said: »
the rings are the same as lanun tricorn in how they work w/ phantom roll. i have both, but if for some reason the +5 is god knows how out of reach for someone, the +3 ring isn't a bummer. i'm happy if a cor even has lanun tricorn if i'm not on cor myself. beggers can't be choosers w/ PUG
What are you talking about.......+5 ring is a lot more potent than hat and they're different.
There's a chance I'm very wrong here, but I was under the assumption that Roll Effects +50 is just saying that there's a 50% chance to get the Job Bonus, up from the 33% chance of the NQ.
The rings work in all situations, but if you a DRK in your party and use Chaos rolls the hat shouldn't be doing anything but making you look piratey.
They also work for rolls without a job to give them a bonus.
I also wouldn't be surprised if some of our Emp refresh has some + Phantom Roll on it too.Seeing how it augments some of our rolls, that'd be a nice bonus.
The rings work in all situations, but if you a DRK in your party and use Chaos rolls the hat shouldn't be doing anything but making you look piratey.
They also work for rolls without a job to give them a bonus.
I also wouldn't be surprised if some of our Emp refresh has some + Phantom Roll on it too.Seeing how it augments some of our rolls, that'd be a nice bonus.
All FFXI content and images © 2002-2024 SQUARE ENIX CO., LTD. FINAL
FANTASY is a registered trademark of Square Enix Co., Ltd.