I'm not going to point fingers; I like arguing math with math.
The barrier I'm referring to is as its name said, the minimum requirement for something to kick in without the need of another external influence.
What is this "something" and what is this "other external influence"?
I'm not aware of any MATK bonus that is reliant on some sort of external influence while being achievable with more MATK. It doesn't even make sense.
It would basically require a card that said "if you have more than 1100 MATK, or have external influence X, +100 MATK."
By mere maths (and probabilities thanks to the misc matk), once you pass the 1100matk mark, there will be not need of increasing regular +MATK (equipment) anymore but to increase your %MATK since the Percent value will increase the MATK even further than focusing on +MATK.
It is this kind of sketchiness which causes a lot of confusion in people, leading to my earlier post. 1100 (stat, I presume) MATK is irrelevant to whether or not %MATK or +MATK is beneficial, but it depends on the actual bonuses in question. I can imagine that for your build and your stats 1100 MATK is your magic breakpoint at which this happens, but no math or proofs have been posted as to why this is so.
I politely request the "mere maths" you speak of.
And that is why people are getting confused. Even
if that 1100 MATK barrier turned out to be universal, your point is moot without proof as to why it exists.
That concept is pretty much the same one in where the DEX and LUK gets a "Balance point", in which even if you increase your DEX, it will be kinda pointless because the amount of points invested will be higher than the MATK you will obtain from it, therefore, finding a balance in where points are not wasted is another way to see a Balanced Build.
That is an entirely different concept. DEX and LUK are bound variables in a very well-defined system. It is mathematically simple to determine an optimal amount of matk from any given stat points, distributed between dex and luk. And because I like proofs:
Benefit = floor(DEX/5 + LUK/3)
StatCost(DEX) + StatCost(LUK) <= N
For Stat < 100:
StatCost(Stat) = ∑(Stat,k=1) [Floor((k-1) / 10)] + 2
For Stat >= 100
StatCost(Stat) = (∑(99,k=1) [Floor((k-1) / 10)] + 2) + (∑(Stat-99,k=1) [Floor((k-100) / 5)]*4 + 16)
More or less that (it's not exact, and I probably missed a few points here and there since I didn't test it, but that's the gist of it). From there it becomes a two-variable system. Or you can do it iteratively.
What you're describing as a "barrier" is as much a barrier as a car has a "60MPH barrier" because it's the point where it stops going faster when you push the pedal. There may very well be a reason for it, and there very well may be a solution, but - without proofs - it's relative to that car and shouldn't be pushed around to other people without justification.
Forgot to add... trying to limit %MATK around the 50% (middle value) will be the best you can do... its by statistics, the best way to increase the MATK (the closest to the curve, the better... please, don't make me post my graphs and such >_<).
I assume this is your justification for your 1100 MATK number. Please, do post your graphs, I'd love to see them. I'm not sure I understand this paragraph at all, because I'm not sure how statistics factor into this. You're a scientist, please back up your claims. I'd simply like proof as to why you call this 1100 MATK point special and, from the way you say it, universal.
Edited by Rirezz, 19 March 2013 - 04:09 PM.
This topic is locked
