So i’ve seen a lot of people claim that elementalist skills scale well with m.att. And that it’s better to stack raw m.att than elemental property attack.
However, they always fail to be specific or give evidence for this supposed scaling. Quick-cast is also not an answer to this because is a multiplier at the end of the damage formula i.e m.att and elemental property damage are both multiplied equally
AFAIK, meteor is the only skill that has a “true” scaling of > 1 with magic attack. When I say true scaling, I mean the damage increase for one damage instance of the spell. So for example, Hail’s true scaling is 1:1 but it’s overall scaling with m.att is much higher because each hit applies the bonus m.att. Consequently, this also means each hit applies bonus elemental property damage.
I guess what I’m trying to get at here, is why are people saying m.att is so much better for elementalists? Sans meteor and elemental weaknesses/strengths, elemental property attack should be better than m.att because it also applies to additional lines of damage?
Of course my whole argument can be invalidated if there is some hidden true m.att scaling that I’m unaware of in certain skills. For ex. if Hail scaled 150% with m.att instead of just 100%.
- all ele skills sans meteor has a true scaling of 1:1 with matt, no difference from ele.att.
- quickcast amplifies TOTAL dmg so both m.att and ele.att gets amplified
- attribute multipliers apply to both m.att AND ele.att so again no difference.
- ele.att applies to all lines of damage whereas m.att does not. so therefore it’s actually better?
- unless ele skills have hidden true scaling over >1 with m.att then ele.att is absolutely the same if not better than m.att – ele weaknesses notwithstanding.