I've been chipping away at this Sneak EP all day with my 0 EE fire charm i have for melee stats. I decided to look through my marketplace and found an Ice charm with a little EE for some slightly higher damage.

I popped the Ice charm in my secondary charm slot, and it seems to be using less mana than my fire charm, despote being the same tier and showing the same mana cost on the tooltip.

Here are the charms:

Angelic fire VII
Level Req: 20
Spell Damage: 22 to 58
Mana Cost: 53

+23 Dexterity
+2% Experience Gained
+2% Mana Syphon
+1% Glancing Blow


&


Magical ice VII
Level Req: 20
Spell Damage: 49 to 59
Mana Cost: 53

+36% Enhanced Effect


Ice appears to be using 39 mana instead of 53.

Any ideas why?

e: typo

This post was edited by Gearic on Aug 17 2017 02:52pm

the 2nd slot works at 75% mana cost and 75% dmg. so you safe mana but lose dmg

ls portal:

The Accessory Charm is an additional Equipment slot reserved for a second charm. The Accessory slot however does not reflect stats that are on that charm, with exception to Enhanced Effect. Efficiency is reduced by 25% of the total displayed. This charm is used just like the main charm slot and is not reflected by your total inventory space restrictions like the rest of your equipment. When used in Catacombs, the mana usage is also reduced by 25%.
In the inventory, it is abbreviated as Acc. Charm

This post was edited by ahs_darkhunter on Aug 17 2017 02:53pm

Oh wow, so that thing does have some useful and not obsolete info.

Thanks!

To get more effect, have an intelligence charm on the first slot. Really makes a difference, a good int charm can almost egalize the lost 25 % and rumors have it that you increase the chance of a critical hit.

Since secondary slot (ACC) is basically -25% mana cost and also -25% damage, your Ice deals better average (optimum wording) damage than the fire charm while using less mana.
Basically the Ice is better even with higher int, your damage increases on both charms, but, the mana pool is higher since using more int.

How does -25% damage and mana cost imply "better average"?

Your ice charm is +36% EE, so if you minus 25% you get +11% more damage (AVG)... UNLESS the mechanics of the game is different.

EDIT: mind you, even if the -25% is overall, your ice charm with +36% ee still does more damage (AVG) than the fire.

This post was edited by izParagonzi on Aug 18 2017 10:45am

So, you're just saying that ice has a better average than fire? Or just pointing out that, even with the penalty, this particular ice is still better than the fire?

I can see those things, the math is pretty clear. The wording, I think, is less than "optimum," given the ambiguity.