Quote:
Originally Posted by Splade
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
I thought AL was 20/20
|
I just pulled the numbers from the wiki. I'm pretty sure they're right, but since any idiot with a keyboard can write whatever they want there, let's use our brains and test it.
/scientist on
Standing without any buffs, in one tick I went from 1427 hp to 1439 hp and 2526 mana to 2527 mana.
My baseline regen (standing) is then 12 hp and 1 mana per server tick. Changes to my hp and mana pools under the effects of a lich spell will need to be adjusted by these values.
__________________________________________________
Using Demi Lich, in one tick my hp dropped from 1469 hp to 1449 hp. My mana went from 2643 mana to 2675 mana.
(1469-1449)+12=32
(2675-2643)-1=31
On p99, Demi Lich trades 32 hp for 31 mana.
Its mana:hp ratio is 31/32=0.96875.
__________________________________________________
Using Arch Lich, in one tick my hp dropped from 1711 hp to 1703 hp. My mana went from 3027 mana to 3048 mana.
(1711-1703)+12=20
(3048-3027)-1=20
On p99, Arch Lich trades 20 hp for 20 mana.
Its mana:hp ratio is 20/20=1.0.
__________________________________________________
I conclude that I was wrong (along with the wiki) concerning the hp costs of both spells. Both spells are more efficient than I suspected, Arch Lich is indeed the more efficient of the two (sorry thebutthat), and the gap between their efficiency is about 46 times larger than the wiki values indicate. I do, however, still stand by my previous assertion:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Synthlol
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
They are are so close you should just consider them be equally efficient.
Arch Lich is for scaring lowbies or if you really need See Invisible in some situation where you can't or don't have DMF. (EDIT: And you forgot to buy Deadeye.)
|
I submit my findings for peer review.
/scientist off