Open Steam-arch opened 2 years ago
Ice Spikes proc was always high.
You might be right, the only thing im positive about is that the potency of the para it procs is wrong.
Thought it procced it abit too often too but I can be wrong. Ill check this out abit later
Tested Reactor cool's Ice Spikes on eden, From 108 autos 53 got paralyzed and 55 didnt.
Ice spikes para's potency is set to some insane number like ~50%
Paralyze I´s maximum cap is 25% and Paralyze maximum II's 34% so ice spikes is like paralyze III.
Abit harder for me to test but paralyze seemed to proc usually from just 1-2 hits aswell.
If my potato memory serves me right, took like 1-5 hits on retail for it to proc, and the potency was 25% or less.
Would make sense if the paralyze ice spikes procs followed para1's calculations during the time it sticks, but propably need someone to test on retail.
Note: if someone tests this on retail, ice spikes calcs might differ from reactor cools (or not?), but I think on eden they are the same.
ice spike para test on eden vs ep panna cottas
Is that retail?
nope eden
but true though there has to be some rdm solo videos with ice spikes! shall try to find
Also what level difference is the mob you were testing? I believe the Para potency is based on the caster's int vs mob int.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dH-H0bbIbnM
Rdm/blu doing ODS on retail with ice spikes. Weaker potency in ice spikes para.
Its about 50% para potency per scorp on eden. Defo much stronger than retail.
Looks like a pretty powerful Para in that video, but you can't tell which mob has Para on when.
~50% proc rate on same scorps tanking all 6 aswell.
To me it looks more like paralyze I potency in the video and not Paralyze III. Edens spike para seems to proc in 1-3 hits almost every time, and in the retail video the scorpions hit a solid 3-7 hits before they start getting paralyzed
Set to casters int/mnd vs mobs int/mnd or not, it should still have a cap thats reasonable.
I level synced to RDM75/BLM37 and let a Mousse have at it for 15 minutes.
This seemed to be the longest streak I saw: https://i.imgur.com/GMkvD6B.png
I'll post the vid shortly if that helps at all. It's definitely nowhere near your Panna Cotta proc rate. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U7_nw-9WFQQ
Seems like its nearly an uncapped para atm, nearly 100% potency rate on weak stuff only allowing things to hit when it wears off.
@dowzer also tyvm
The first half of dowzer's video looks like 50% proc rate when the mousse is paralyzed. Para, double attack, para, double attack, para, double attack. In the second half, he starts getting naked and the proc rate goes down.
Also, it shouldn't be based on MND because it's black magic.
Found in this thread: https://www.ffxionline.com/forum/ffxi-game-related/general-ffxi-discussion/60349-the-lesser-colibri-dilemma
The spikes stuck "MUCH BETTER" than paralyze did. While they aren't quantifying, spikes para was noticeably better than the spell.
oh yeah you are right, gonna edit my upper comment since its false
From Dowsers video:
With gear on (counting after first para procing, but not including it, untill para wears) Parad attacks: 14 Non parad attacks: 28
Autos till first para (with same gear on): 3 10 3 4 2 8
Only mention I found about ice spikes para
ill just upload the whole thing since its midly interesting, 2013 post.
Cnt find any more info about the ice spike numbers. Would maybe help to compare ice spikes proc rates to under lvl 30 mobs. But idk, personally id still throw my guess para capping at 25% and the actual proc rate is between 20-50%
I understand this needs retail research to get completely accurate numbers, but have you all considered bringing it down to a more reasonable potency in the mean time, like 30%? I've noticed this is heavily abused in pve currently to super tank, and it disrupts pvp balance significantly, making the already strong RDM stronger than it should be.
Checklist
Details
Ice spikes needs a small audit on proc rate and potency from retail, because it was never this strong on retail. ll try to find some testing on it but might need an actual retail check.