[luckykrazy]

I'm not sure how much M.Acc our AF1 hat gives, but at the moment I use Denali Bonnet for Light/Dark shot for the Agi+4. Assuming 1M.Acc=~2Agi (I'm a firm believe in m.acc affecting QD, but not sure of the ratio) then corona would be a superior light/dark shot piece.

My question is, where is it!? I'm assuming this is found in a casket in sky given the elemental stats and such. Can anyone confirm where this comes from? Thanks ^-^

Jak~Ramuh

[OneForTheKidsYC]

till you can provide proof that macc effects QD, then it isnt true. i personally have used warlock's roll and rolled 11 and also stacked gear with macc and had more resists then when i just use Agi.

[luckykrazy]

till you can provide proof that macc effects QD, then it isnt true. i personally have used warlock's roll and rolled 11 and also stacked gear with macc and had more resists then when i just use Agi.

Well you'd be one of the few that don't believe m.acc has some affect on Quick Draw.

Given the fact elemental staves, obis, MAB, etc. affect quick draw.. you'd be silly to assume M.Acc didn't affect it in some way. How much? Who knows. But even merely eyeballing using Warlock's Roll and M.Acc where I can't put Agi+ I find much better results.

The mobs I've seen a huge increase in accuracy on aren't really the hardest mobs but things like Byakko (still massive resists but less so), Kirin, Jormy, Etc. to name a few. But, to each their own. () Wasn't really a debate, just honestly want to know where you can find Corona!

[Kilhart]

till you can provide proof that macc effects QD, then it isnt true.

This statement isn't entirely correct. Until proof is provided, you can't say that it is true, but you can't say that it's untrue, either, since there is no proof to show that it doesn't affect QD. Obviously, we can't prove this without asking the programmers or going through the source code.

We can show the statistical probability of there being a relationship between magic accuracy and QD, however. Unfortunately, all of us are too lazy to do any testing for these statistics to come out.

[OneForTheKidsYC]

This statement isn't entirely correct. Until proof is provided, you can't say that it is true, but you can't say that it's untrue, either, since there is no proof to show that it doesn't affect QD. Obviously, we can't prove this without asking the programmers or going through the source code.

We can show the statistical probability of there being a relationship between magic accuracy and QD, however. Unfortunately, all of us are too lazy to do any testing for these statistics to come out.

thats what im looking for, but like you said, no one is willing to do the testing haha

[Blueyes]

I'd look into it if I actually had the gear to test in. >.>

[Melos]

I don't know about anyone else, but I have enough personal evidence that proves M.Acc does have some effect on the accuracy.

[Corrderio]

Same, having Warlock's Roll up on Tiamat REALLY made a difference in my resists.

[loyaltrekie]

till you can provide proof that macc effects QD, then it isnt true. i personally have used warlock's roll and rolled 11 and also stacked gear with macc and had more resists then when i just use Agi.

Please do us all a favor, and go away, just off the internet in general.

[Ezekial]

till you can provide proof that macc effects QD, then it isnt true. i personally have used warlock's roll and rolled 11 and also stacked gear with macc and had more resists then when i just use Agi.

100% agree

[Banggugyangu]

till you can provide proof that macc effects QD, then it isnt true. i personally have used warlock's roll and rolled 11 and also stacked gear with macc and had more resists then when i just use Agi.

The lack of proof supporting a concept is NOT proof against a concept.

If someone makes the statement that M.acc Affects QD, then the burden of proof falls on him.
Failure to provide evidence merely keeps this argument in the gray area.

If someone makes the statement that M.acc does NOT affect QD, then the burden of proof in turn falls on him.
Failure to provide evidence still only keeps this in the gray area.

[hideo]

how about Light Shot was resisted every shot I used. Put on Warlocks roll with a RDM with me and I could sleep it more often then not.

[Sirbacube]

Iunno, I've used Fire Shot on some ZNM and have gotten somewhat consistant decent results, then would throw on a 11 Warlock's roll and get almost full resists.






...Then again my QD set sucks

[Ezekial]

Assuming 1M.Acc=~2Agi (I'm a firm believe in m.acc affecting QD, but not sure of the ratio)

I am guessing you pulled this number out of a hat?

Telling some people macc don't work has the same effect as telling people dark day does not increase HQ chance on crafting(yeah people seem to still believe that). If people want to gimp there characters quick draw build with M.Acc let them does not effect you in any way.

[Banggugyangu]

I am guessing you pulled this number out of a hat?

Telling some people macc don't work has the same effect as telling people dark day does not increase HQ chance on crafting(yeah people seem to still believe that). If people want to gimp there characters quick draw build with M.Acc let them does not effect you in any way.

I really wouldn't think it would be all that difficult to test honestly. There are macc pieces that COR has access to and a macc roll. A sample size of 1000 would probably be enough to have some kind of conclusive result. Light Shot on goldfish in sea would be a safe way of testing it. Simply have to avoid light and dark day. Would obviously take quite a bit of time, however.

[Aledacia]

Right now at most I have the Elemental Grips & Warlock's Roll, but if someone wants to aim me at something to test on, I'll gladly go ahead. I have a lot of free time. lol No sea access yet tho, so don't send me there.

[Blueyes]

I'm bored. I might go test this, although don't know if Warlock's Roll alone is enough. Maybe I'll try to get Diana Corona and play around with that. Anyone know what would be a good mob to test on?

[Antithesis]

I honestly do not know why people keep saying MACC needs to be "tested." When your at an event where you are fighting a high level HNM or something (Einherjar bosses are perfect) shoot some QDs with no Warlocks and then shoot some with Warlocks. I guarantee you are going to see the difference.

[hideo]

I honestly do not know why people keep saying MACC needs to be "tested." When your at an event where you are fighting a high level HNM or something (Einherjar bosses are perfect) shoot some QDs with no Warlocks and then shoot some with Warlocks. I guarantee you are going to see the difference.

You are. Theres no math about it.



I did it with sleep shot even. on mobs that resist it higher then other. Without every now and then I would connect. With, Almoy 100% of the time I slept it.

[Requim]

My anecdote trumps your anecdote.

Provide numbers and the situation. Noticing something doesn't constitute proof. Look at how inaccurate people eye balling stuff is when it comes to damage. At the moment there is no proof that macc does or does not affect QD, meaning that someone failing to provide proof that it doesn't or does affect it does not negate the ambiguity of its effects.

Find an area that people have a decently known resist rate (maybe don't use ele staves). Maybe mamool camp. Try to sleep the same type of mob, ideally zoning it near it's pop location so it really is the same mob. Try it with light shot and a damage shot, who knows, maybe warlock's roll only affects sleep. If you're using warlock's roll try to break the resists down given the average added macc, and either bring a rdm or don't use AF2 hat and try to track your rolled values.

Then return and say that without the averaged X macc from warlock's roll my QD's resisted Y% and with Z%, so I found that (Z-Y)% difference, implying an (no) effect.

Otherwise you're just bickering with arbitrary numbers. A mithra with full HQ QD gear might say warlock's does nothing compared to the galka relying on it.

I'm surprised this still hasn't been tested since you have access to a macc roll and I would think that the ele staves would be similarly tested.