Site Notice
Due to recent vandalism, all edits performed by IPs and new users will be reviewed before being published. This means it might take some time for your edit to show up.

Talk:Raid Boss

From KHUX Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

I'm not sure if all this fishing in muddy waters will get us anywhere, there are simply too many unknowns. The best chance to get behind this is probably trying to summon Raid Bosses outside of a party and see if there is a pattern.
By the way, are we sure it's exactly 80 Heartless you need to defeat to spawn a Raid Boss, in this thread it says its exactly 82. --ShardofTruth (talk) 13:23, 31 May 2016 (PDT)
It's definitely 82. 28-24-29, then cid mission.KrytenKoro (talk) 15:14, 31 May 2016 (PDT)

Since that has been debunked, further testing seems to indicate that the count just keeps going down . . . but also that there is more to it than that. I have defeated over 100 Heartless in a row with no raid at all, I have gotten one after 68, and even possibly after 67. If we want to take this seriously, we're going to need input from the devs.

There are definitely some missions that prevent you from summoning a Raid Boss -- mission 3, and the coliseum missions, for one. That could explain how you killed so many Heartless in a row. However, every other mission I've played, I get a raid boss at exactly when I would expect to with a killcount of 82.KrytenKoro (talk) 20:37, 16 June 2016 (PDT)
Mission 221 does not prevent raid bosses. It does, however, totally lack Omega Trickmasters, from the many, many tries that I have given it.

Do five instances of #10. You can even skip eggs and Pretenders if you want to make sure that the kill count stays down. At 70 kills, you'll get a raid boss. If not, enter #174, go right around everyone to the boss battle, and beat those 3. In any case, it will be sure to debunk this 82 mantra. 11:13, 19 June 2016 (PDT)

Then it's a special case for those missions, but I've gotten a raid boss at exactly 82 for every other random combination of missions, whether I use 57, 10, or completely different missions.KrytenKoro (talk) 23:26, 19 June 2016 (PDT)
I currently have a team of more than ten users testing raid boss spawns, and none of them have reported having to go over 75 kills. We classically use the 57-57-10-X method; #57 * 2 = 56 kills, #10 is another 14, and going into any mission after those gives a raid boss. That's 70 + X, and it works on missions with just a few foes. Look, we can go back and forth citing hundreds of raids and hundreds of different experiences, but the fact is that, because there is a difference at all, we have to acknowledge that it's not just a simple matter of "Kill X enemies -> raid boss gogo." There is clearly more to it than that. It would be silly and deceptive of either of us to cling to one particular number as the sole determinant.

That brings me back to what I said before. We need to A) make a concerted effort to contact the devs and bug them to stop ignoring support requests and 2) make a concerted effort to run tests and discover what we can while we wait for them to tell us to shove off, anyway. 11:03, 20 June 2016 (PDT)

I've done the 57*2+10, and it does not immediately summon a raid boss after doing the next mission unless that mission has around twelve enemies. I have consistently gotten 57*2 + 57- to let me summon on the next mission (57 with all 28 twice, then 57 with all but the last 4, for 28+28+24=80). If the 57+57+10 is working for your guys, then it's not universal -- 82 is definitely a set constant for my account, at least, and I've seen reports that that's the same for others. Maybe it's like Munny Missions, then, where it's a personal variable for the account. As far as your guys, I would ask them to try doing any other mission but 57+57+10, and record their results -- I'd be happy to record mine as well, but the "they have not reported it" is an iffy way to make that claim.
I'm fine with noting that the number of Heartless required varies from 82, but I'd ask for the priming to be more than just the same three missions over and over. But if you guys can definitely prove it true...then it throws most of the raid boss research y'all have been doing into murky waters, because the basic system clearly isn't shared between all players, and if I can get Omegas in sub-100 missions when you guys can't, that can't be waved off as a glitch.KrytenKoro (talk) 12:39, 20 June 2016 (PDT)
Okay, I guess that I should have made some things clearer. The 57-57-10-X method was developed a good while ago. I developed it, so I would know. It's a simple analysis of AP efficiency. Why go into 57 and kill all but 4 foes when you can go into 10 at half the cost and still get a raid spawn from almost any mission? An erroneous kill count of 75 was established before it, just as with your 82 count. Especially during free AP campaigns like this, though, differing paths have been tested, and values are absolutely everywhere, trending toward 75. 221 * 3 = 72. Take the last three of 224 to hit 75. 270 * 5, last enemy only, to hit 80 for an Omega Guard Armor. 221 * 3 + 1 egg = 73 for Trickmaster. I had written down many other results (Off the top of my head, one mission finished at 84, and I still had to play again, landing on 92, to get a spawn. Separately, I got a raid with less than 40 kills. Yes, less than 40. I was only running against Munny Eggs and Growth Eggs.), but my computer crashed, so I lost a ton of this. The point is that many, many prep routes have been taken, and most of them come up above or below 82. Also, there are a lot of us testing, so it's not like just a few people are miscounting, but also a lot of different results come from the same people. Those that I mentioned here and plenty of other different values are from my testing alone, never mind others' variances. Moving beyond priming disputes, this does nothing against the rest of our studies, which are showing that many missions have abysmal Omega rates, while others, which I have dubbed "Prime Omega" missions, have upwards of 40%. However anyone primes their raids, it'd be nice to get some volunteers to test individual missions. We just need ten raids of a mission that has not been tested in order to be confident enough in the findings. Meanwhile, I just need a few more other results to confirm some postulates that I have on the raid boss (any) spawn mechanic, and then I'll be submitting the results. 20:29, 23 June 2016 (PDT)
Okay, that sounds different from what you said earlier. The main point of my post was that if you can demonstrate you're getting different results than me with the same setup, then stuff isn't global. If stuff isn't global, then each member of your team has to run the same test cases -- you can't divy the cases up and have each person test something different, because there's no reason to assume their results apply for anyone but themselves. The results of your team's studies are still valid, they're still results, but any conclusions you draw from them which rely on treating them as applying to more than that one player would not be.
As far as looking for volunteers, that might work better on the reddit -- most of the players on the wiki that I know of are on KHWV, and most are focusing on getting full info, beyond raid bosses, for the current crop of quests, or simply using the 1 AP week to get from Rank E to Rank A.
While 57+57+10+X may work if X has a lot of enemies, my goal in using it is to determine which missions have which raid bosses, so it absolutely fails to help me when I'm dealing with high AP cost X with less than twelve enemies (which is most everything but the evolve medals missions). There's also the plain annoyance of having to scroll from 350 to 57 to 10. It's simply less frustrating to just filter it so that only Blue, Complete, Without Cutscene missions show up, and do 57 again. For people grinding top-ranking Lux, the AP is more important, but for players like me, not having to deal with tedium is more important. Your goal in this seems to be finding the most efficient way to grind Lux, and that's not quite what I'm trying to figure out here.
That being said, I definitely think we need to scrub the "82" from the wiki -- everyone's results have conclusively demonstrated that it's not a global constant. I think we should replace it with "a certain number of", though, since the number of Heartless slain still factors in to the final trigger.KrytenKoro (talk) 06:59, 24 June 2016 (PDT)
Yeah, to be clear, the ongoing tests are really two distinct projects: The first is to evaluate raid boss locations in the unmarked range (251-300) and regular:omega spawn frequencies (When a Prime Omega mission is found, it is validated by multiple users across different unions to ensure that there is no IV. At this point, that step is being dropped because multiple proofs have shown that there is definitely no IV.), and the second is to mix up every variable that we can control in order to determine raid kill counts, which gives us the results that you expressed below. They have shown that people using the same setup, using yours as well as many others, get differing results. I think that we're on the same page, now. You just wanted to be sure that my tests were being managed in a way that provides universal results, and I have shown that I had put the necessary thought into them.
I am not on Reddit and don't intend to be. As it is, my communications are too scattered already. I will, however, shortly post a request on GameFAQs, and I manage lots of info through the Facebook page, North America Kingdom Hearts Unchained χ ( If you or anyone else wants to get on Reddit and refer people to me through either of those, you won't hear me object. I just can't realistically see myself signing up for yet another community just to use it once.
Most missions have more than twelve enemies, so it's not like the 57-57-10-X method is too specific. I also listed missions within each of the eight (at the time) ranges that have many enemies, thus ensuring that the method always worked when people used those missions as X. Though, for regular Behemoth, the recommendation was just 5 instances of 10, since I, too, found that to be valid. To your assessment of my goal: Well, not exactly. My goal isn't specifically just for lux farming. That's just one of the perks of AP efficiency. If you save 3 AP per raid and do just seven raids in a day, that's 21 extra AP. That can be used for extra tries against the raid bosses that would get away, a special mission or two, story missions, what-have-you. It's more gameplay.
For the tedium argument, let me show it this way:

57-57-57 (-4)-X: Spend 18 AP. In stead of killing all 84 enemies plus Pretenders, skip a group of four and all Pretenders, willingly sacrificing some foes-per-AP efficiency and potential Merlins. When you skip four, carefully navigate around them to get their treasure chest, because screw sacrificing that, too. If you screw up, either retry by S/L or face a regular Guard Armor and start over. Get tired of running the same mission over and over. 57-57-10-X: Spend 15 AP. Spend two seconds scrolling from 57 to 10. Blow through 10 in less time than 57. Kill Pretenders and eggs with impunity. Win.

". . . a certain number of . . ." sounds great to me, too. I will take a hint from the FF wiki and put up an equation that shows our results, which is basically what you wrote below in paragraph form, to express how that certain number is determined. 14:00, 24 June 2016 (PDT)

On another note, are we just ignoring Savage/Venomous Spider? Just pretending that it doesn't exist? :/ —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talkcontribs)

This page is missing the Spider Raid boss gotten from the adamantite missions. -—Preceding unsigned comment added by (talkcontribs)

Thanks for pointing it out, but you guys don't need to afraid to edit the actual page to add these yourself. -Rikki21 18:40, 16 June 2016 (PDT)
I was too lazy for that. -—Preceding unsigned comment added by (talkcontribs)

Non-Heartless enemies[edit]

Do Cloud, Cerberus, or Hades count towards Raid Boss summoning?KrytenKoro (talk) 13:21, 21 June 2016 (PDT)

I did managed to summon one from Cloud's quest but there are also heartless there so I'm not sure if he'll be counting.--Xabryn (talk) 14:21, 21 June 2016 (PDT)

We need to try priming it with the 57-57-57^, then fighting only Cloud and Hades and seeing if it goes off. If so, we need to revise the wiki from saying "82 Heartless" to "82 enemies". We also need to test the assertion that you can get it with less than 82 Heartless.KrytenKoro (talk) 14:56, 21 June 2016 (PDT)
I tested both, I did 57-57-57 (minus the last 4 enemies in the lighthouse) then defeated only Cloud and summoned a Venomous Spider so Cloud definitly counts, as for the number of enemies I defeated 27-27-23-1 and still summoned a Raid boss.--Xabryn (talk) 15:17, 21 June 2016 (PDT)
Also I believe the number of enemies you need to defeat is 78, could someone check?--Xabryn (talk) 18:34, 21 June 2016 (PDT)
I just now got 82 doing the Keyblade Materials mission over...and over and over and over. This looks to be confirmed as individual values, like munny mission. Perhaps those are actually tied together?KrytenKoro (talk) 19:21, 21 June 2016 (PDT)
TSH got 84 doing the same thing, so yeah. The 57-57-10 strategy definitely only works for --certain-- players, and we need to encourage people to find their own value.KrytenKoro (talk) 05:59, 22 June 2016 (PDT)

I've been getting 78, myself. -Rikki21 21:16, 22 June 2016 (PDT)

Something brought up on reddit -- doing Mission 10 five times (70 enemies) summons a raid boss, at least for me and presumably the person who relayed that. Doing 5* Evolve Medals: Speed three times (100 enemies) does not. In fact, you have to play that mission four times to get a raid boss. The mission appears to matter (at least if played repeatedly), which means testing this further will be almost impossible.KrytenKoro (talk) 06:52, 23 June 2016 (PDT)
Actually, if you're only considering that variable, it's totally impossible . . . because even that isn't a constant. To exemplify, I completed 57 thrice, omitting a few enemies to land on a desired kill count, recorded the results, and repeated. I got nothing at 80, but success at 81 and 82. However, when I first went to 270 (straight to boss, so one kill) and then did three runs of 57 with some restraint, I got a raid at 80. Then, again starting with 270 (just 1), I ran 221 enough to have 81 kills and got nothing. There was still nothing at 85 and finally a raid at 89. As I said a bit ago, I'll be finalizing my results soon, but as a little preview, I see the following: Eggs count double. The value appears to depend on both the starting mission (first one that you go to after a raid) and the end (last one before a new raid spawns). The value trends toward the 70-80 range. 14:00, 24 June 2016 (PDT)
Yes, the order seems to matter. There's definitely an individual value, or my team running the same missions and killing the same enemies wouldn't have gotten Raid Bosses at different points. So, like you said, there seems to be several factors at play:
  • The first mission that you go to after your counter resets (sets the overall range)
  • An individual value (adds or subtracts from this overall range, this has been demonstrated to be required)
  • Possible factor of doing the same mission several times in a row (could just be an implication of the first mission priming the range -- check whether doing Mission 10 first also gives a raid boss at ~70 for people who get /=70 with 57)
  • The final mission that takes you over the range set up by A and B (determines the specific species)
Assuming that A is correct and that C is not necessary, then each quest would have a "raid value" in addition to a "raid boss" parameter -- but testing it would require doing that mission, then doing a mission where you can ensure that you kill only one enemy in that quest once you get close to the raid boss point, in order to narrow it down. I'm not confident on your claim about eggs, since I've gotten 82 both with 57-57-10-Keyblade Materials x times and by starting with 57 and not doing eggs or pretenders at all. If Eggs counted double, I'd definitely expect the Keyblade Materials missions to have taken much less runs than they did. This should be fairly simple to test for you, though -- run your preferred missions (57, 57, 10, X) both with and without killing Eggs, provided X is quantized so that you can pinpoint which enemy takes you over.

KrytenKoro (talk) 06:48, 24 June 2016 (PDT)

I, too, wondered whether or not running missions consecutively might interfere with the count. From what I've observed with various tests, no, but I intend to have one more test run to confirm. For the eggs, I'm a step ahead of you. It took a lot of giving up and reentering to do it, but I got a test of 80 (2 Prize Eggs) to fail, which means that they can't count double. I was sure that Growth Eggs did, though, due to getting a raid at just 39 kills from EXP Medals: Speed III. Then, the conclusions that I can draw are that either Growth Eggs count double, but Prize Eggs don't (and I've no idea on Munny Eggs), or the special missions, at least that one in particular, have a ridiculously beneficial raid value. I can't test further because I'm a free player, but if someone could run that special mission, then 57 three times, skipping enemies to land on 70 kills or so, and report back, that'd be as close to hard evidence as we're going to get.
The really scary notion is that the algorithm for raid boss spawning could be exceedingly convoluted. There could be no "highs" and "lows" at all; it could be an untraceable matter of combinations having arbitrary values. I suppose that there's not much to say about that, though; we have to keep testing with hopes that our resultant equation is at least mostly accurate, or else it's all for naught. 14:00, 24 June 2016 (PDT)
I don't think eggs count double. When I tried to get a raid boss, I had 75 Heartless in evolve medal quests, and had to do 9 exp medal quests before I got a raid. TheSilentHero 14:20, 24 June 2016 (PDT)
Wow. Well, good enough for me. It's just that mission that has a great raid initiation value. 15:23, 24 June 2016 (PDT)

Here is the link to the GameFAQs thread in which I am coordinating help on omega farming:


What's going on with the gallery here? Why are the images different scales?KrytenKoro (talk) 11:45, 30 June 2016 (PDT)

Dunno why it was messed up, fixed it though. -Rikki21 11:50, 30 June 2016 (PDT)

Prime Omegas[edit]

There is currently a campaign to test missions for Omega Raid frequencies, as it is clear that not all missions are made equal. Missions with exceptionally high rates are dubbed "Prime Omegas." When complete, the results will be uploaded here. To follow along and/or participate in the meantime, go to [1]this GameFAQs thread.—Preceding unsigned comment added by [[User:{{{1}}}|{{{1}}}]] ([[User talk:{{{1}}}|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/{{{1}}}|contribs]]) That's strange. I was sure that I put that on the main page, hence why I didn't sign it. By the by, I'm also the one that was first to report a 68 raid, and I've also gotten them at much, much lower values. Since you have infinite AP right now, just run to 270 and go straight to the boss over and over, as though you were farming Fantastia Mickeys, and you'll see that raid values have more variance than we initially gave them credit for. ". . . usually ranging from 68 to 78" would probably be the most accurate representation of the algorithm before I do the more comprehensive write-up. 19:27, 25 August 2016 (PDT)

Okay, I don't know how to respond to editing comments directly, so I'll just say it here: What about that is self-promotion? I didn't mention that I'm the one running it. It's not a thing that anyone is glory-hogging or getting paid for. It's a community project . . . by, of, and for the community. I reached out to the community. I don't . . . That criticism is frankly just stupid. :/

It's self-promotion for the fanproject. This is not a wiki about the fanproject, it's a wiki about the game. You're free to advertise it on the talk page, or ask the community whether it's acceptable to advertise it in the sitenotice (they will probably say yes, as they did for advertising the wiki's in-game party), but the article is about the raid bosses, not the fan project.KrytenKoro (talk) 12:11, 26 August 2016 (PDT)

Does you not see how contrived that is, though? The wiki is entirely one big fan project. The Raid Boss page and that GameFAQs thread have the same goal, and if you narrow down the latter to a nub, it's specifically to get info for this wiki page. It's not like this is some side project with just one common element; this is explicitly a project on this content. We should be on the same side, here. Now, I'll grant that I don't know this wiki's rules because every wiki is different and their rules are unwritten and largely imaginary, but I'd think that some cooperation would not be too much to ask for. If you want it in the sitenotice, not here, who am I supposed to ask? The last time that someone asked for permissions to edit something, they didn't need it because this is a wiki and they were just being lazy . . . 19:06, 26 August 2016 (PDT)

It's not contrived. The scope of the wiki is the game, not fan efforts about the game. If we included fan efforts, then we would include articles about the wiki itself, like "The Great Anon Immigration of 2016" or other navel-gazing.
I mean, maybe a see also link would be okay, but I've not seen any other publication-based wiki have a full section for "fans are investigating this article at this address". That's not what the community agreed to focus on, and that's not what we've done anywhere else. If you want to start a discussion on Talk:Main Page to see if the community is interested in widening the scope, be my guest.KrytenKoro (talk) 18:01, 27 August 2016 (PDT)

No, all that I wanted was to reach out to the community to provide for itself. As always, a small collection of people are supplying all the information for everyone. It's not navel-gazing, it's not promotion, and it's not even asking for "recognition." It's a project that requires outsourcing to complete in any reasonable length of time, so I tried to outsource. You want it to take forever? Fine. It will. This isn't like other articles because it's not just some descriptors and maybe loot tables; it's an expansive, detailed undertaking. But hey, fine, if you can't get that, it's your wiki. Do with it as you please. 00:56, 28 August 2016 (PDT)

I think you're latching onto some other definition of what self-promotion means? This is a good example. I'm not saying that you're trying to "trick" anyone, I'm saying that what you're doing literally falls outside of the agreed scope of the project, and if you'd like it to be included in a substantial manner, it's on you to convince the community to widen the scope. I mean, readers may be interested in the events of KH2 as well, but that's outside the scope of the wiki so we don't report on it. 10:23, 29 August 2016 (PDT)

I don't understand how you fail to understand that raid boss mechanics are not irrelevant to the raid boss page. This is not some fanfiction, a meme that some kids came up with, or story speculation. It's research into the mechanics of this friggin' content. I don't know what could be any plainer. Enough, anyway. If you can't bring yourself to cooperate, and you can't even fathom how a discussion that you initially took part in and should understand the validity thereof is valid, you have no business insulting my intellect. Just . . . bloody . . . drop it. 02:49, 30 August 2016 (PDT)

I've outlined three times now the exact steps you need to take in order to get your info covered and advertised. Stop trying to turn this into "help help, I'm being repressed" -- I've done everything but the actual legwork for you. "Raid boss mechanics" are not irrelevant to the raid boss page. If that's what you were posting, we wouldn't even have this discussion. You were instead posting a recruitment drive, which would be potentially allowable, but would require the community to agree on changing the previously defined scope of the wiki. You're demanding something that the community has, before now, decided was something outside what they would cover on articles (though, as I've said before totally allows to be posted in the splash notice that appears on every single page). If you want it covered, you need to respect that other editors actually have valid opinions, and try to change their mind rather than consistently attacking their intellect or character. I have been consistently trying to outline a more productive path to you getting what you want, please actually read it with an open mind. 06:26, 30 August 2016 (PDT)

Quests that always spawn a boss[edit]

For filtering, all have cutscenes. Proud mode quests are convenient for repeated summoning because the current proud quest doesn't change when a raid boss appears.