Introduction to PvE damage calculation (Horns of the Reach)

  1. Member Avatar
    Latin

    Moderator

    Total Posts: 1131

    Imperial

    myohozen said on August 17, 2017 :

    One question are you using the Glyph of Weapon Damage only with a Infused weapon or is it the go to Glyph for most weapons.

    My interpretation is that they were all with Glyph of Weapon Damage, but it isn’t because it is the definitive “go-to glyph”, it’s more because of the controlled factor, like the IA that was being held constant. It is a reasonable control because as @decay pointed out previously,

    decay said on August 16, 2017 :

    (A Flame or Shock enchant could be minimally better on Single Target, but this changes as soon as a second target shows up)

    HelpFromAbove said on August 17, 2017 :

    can infused and non infused berserk enchants stack?

    They don’t stack.

    decay said on August 17, 2017 :

    Also another question: For me the Weapon Damage Glyph only procs on light and heavy attacks (only first tick) but not on weapon abilities. Does anyone know if this is normal/intended?

    Pretty sure it is ‘normal'; if I recall correctly, this had been the case for several patches already.

    HelpFromAbove said on August 17, 2017 :

    [Side question: Do permanent spell damage buffs now consistently out perform proc SD buffs? Ex. Does the 299 Julianos buff out perform BSW because actual up time (up time term is a little messy here, since I mean uptime in terms of effective spell damage, because it does not always proc immediately after cooldown) for BSW is generally <62% (Which is, based on my math, the break even point, by 299/479 = 0.62)? Obviously BSW to Julianos trades the SD for crit in the 2/3/4 effects, so that has an effect as well…]

    If you are playing as DK, then it could be considered. Problem with it now is that the chance is lower than previously; you simply don’t use as many flame damage abilities on a non-DK to keep a consistently good uptime.

    HelpFromAbove said on August 17, 2017 :

    If one switches to blockade of storms, the only skills which are not shock damage abilities in a normal rotation are Haunting Curse and Crystal Frags (Unless Force Pulse does not count as a shock damage ability – Can someone confirm or deny this for me?). Apparently one option is to switching to Destructive Clench, which does (they claim, though I’m not sure I buy it) comparable damage to crystal frags, without having to wait for the proc. Ignoring that for the sake of conversation – In theory, would the damage loss by having a lower effective spell damage on the non-shock spells I mentioned be compensated for by the permanent spell damage increase to the rest of your abilities? To the same token, would it out-perform the 299 general spell damage buff of Julianos?

    The shock damage component of Force Pulse is included. In a straightforward comparison between the 5p effects, at least 75% of your damage composition must be from shock damage abilities for Netch to be in favour over Julianos.

    HelpFromAbove said on August 17, 2017 :

    The biggest question is, I suppose, is Julianos + IA + Ilambris “officially” (insofar as the math leads us to) BiS for HotR?

    It’s situational. The damage from 2p Ilambris is kind of fixed; so its damage contribution will decrease (percentage-wise), the higher your overall dps. If you could exceed that with an additional 5p set (either 5 IA or a replacement of IA), then perhaps the described setup wouldn’t be the absolute BiS.

    e pluribus unum

  2. Profile Photo
    Jeckll

    Grandmaster

    Total Posts: 2434

    Redguard Nightblade

    decay said on August 17, 2017 :

    Edit: Also another question: For me the Weapon Damage Glyph only procs on light and heavy attacks (only first tick) but not on weapon abilities. Does anyone know if this is normal/intended?

    It is and was that way all the time. That’s why having the Weapon Damage Glyph on the main hand for dual wield users doesnt make sense as all Dual Wield Skills except Twin Slashes only procc the main hand Glyph and if its a Berserker Glyph, you get no benefit at all from using weapon skills.

    I think its intended because otherwise, they could have fixed it years ago.

    Player: @Jeckll || Guild: Chimaira – Raidgroup Hydra || Server: EU

  3. Profile Photo
    decay

    Expert

    Total Posts: 306

    Dunmer Templar

    Jeckll said on August 17, 2017 :

    I think its intended because otherwise, they could have fixed it years ago.

    I’m not so sure if thats a valid reason to conclude its working as intended :D.

  4. Profile Photo
    Jeckll

    Grandmaster

    Total Posts: 2434

    Redguard Nightblade

    decay said on August 18, 2017 :

    Jeckll said on August 17, 2017 :

    I think its intended because otherwise, they could have fixed it years ago.

    I’m not so sure if thats a valid reason to conclude its working as intended :D.

    True, they at least didnt bother my bug report 1 year ago.

    Player: @Jeckll || Guild: Chimaira – Raidgroup Hydra || Server: EU

  5. Member Avatar
    InfiniteXavier

    Journeyman

    Total Posts: 56

    Asayre said on August 16, 2017 :

    @myohozen, no I haven’t updated those charts. I wasn’t planning to but if you find them useful I shall.

    I think we all do. It really helps make it clear what “to do”,

    Edit: Thanks for the updated charts. They look great.

    • This reply was modified 2 months ago by Profile photo of InfiniteXavier InfiniteXavier. Reason: add commentary
  6. Member Avatar
    HelpFromAbove

    Apprentice

    Total Posts: 27

    Altmer Sorcerer

    @Latin – Thank you for the responses.

     

    Next question – I always see people suggest using 1 medium and 1 heavy piece of armor to benefit from the 6% max stat bonus from the undaunted passive. My question is why? Is the additional 4% max magicka really worth loosing the 8% magicka recovery, 4% cost reduction, and 726 Spell resistance? Perhaps the medium and heavy passives mitigate this issue when combined with the armor rating?

    Trying to decide how to build my Julianos set.

  7. Member Avatar
    meteorictrail

    Scamp

    Total Posts: 5

    HelpFromAbove said on August 18, 2017 :

    Next question – I always see people suggest using 1 medium and 1 heavy piece of armor to benefit from the 6% max stat bonus from the undaunted passive. My question is why? Is the additional 4% max magicka really worth loosing the 8% magicka recovery, 4% cost reduction, and 726 Spell resistance? Perhaps the medium and heavy passives mitigate this issue when combined with the armor rating?

    From my perspective it depends on the character. Most people recommend 7 medium for a stam class, so my stamblade always uses 7 medium for the regen and crit, but on my magDK I would always use 5/1/1 if I can get access to the right pieces of gear. You lose 8% magicka recovery and 6% cost reduction. As you said, the spell resistance should be mitigated by the Heavy Armour passive and the fact the heavy and medium piece have higher base resistance anyway. You gain 4% mag/stam and 6% health, which can allow you to switch stats around for more magicka potentially. As extras you also gain a small amount of stam recovery/cost reduction, slight sprint speed and cheaper dodge roll from medium armour and from heavy you gain a small amount of health recovery (prob kind of pointless) and a small amount of mag/stam back when damaged. Pre-Morrowind 5/1/1 was a no brainer as sustain was almost ignored and post-Morrowind as long as you can sustain enough to not miss the 8% recovery and 6% cost reduction all the extras you get from 5/1/1 are def worth it.

    One advantage using Juli is you can got for a heavy chest and medium legs/head to even further maximise the resistance stats.

  8. Member Avatar
    HelpFromAbove

    Apprentice

    Total Posts: 27

    Altmer Sorcerer

    meteorictrail said on August 18, 2017 :

    HelpFromAbove said on August 18, 2017 :

    Next question – I always see people suggest using 1 medium and 1 heavy piece of armor to benefit from the 6% max stat bonus from the undaunted passive. My question is why? Is the additional 4% max magicka really worth loosing the 8% magicka recovery, 4% cost reduction, and 726 Spell resistance? Perhaps the medium and heavy passives mitigate this issue when combined with the armor rating?

    From my perspective it depends on the character. Most people recommend 7 medium for a stam class, so my stamblade always uses 7 medium for the regen and crit, but on my magDK I would always use 5/1/1 if I can get access to the right pieces of gear. You lose 8% magicka recovery and 6% cost reduction. As you said, the spell resistance should be mitigated by the Heavy Armour passive and the fact the heavy and medium piece have higher base resistance anyway. You gain 4% mag/stam and 6% health, which can allow you to switch stats around for more magicka potentially. As extras you also gain a small amount of stam recovery/cost reduction, slight sprint speed and cheaper dodge roll from medium armour and from heavy you gain a small amount of health recovery (prob kind of pointless) and a small amount of mag/stam back when damaged. Pre-Morrowind 5/1/1 was a no brainer as sustain was almost ignored and post-Morrowind as long as you can sustain enough to not miss the 8% recovery and 6% cost reduction all the extras you get from 5/1/1 are def worth it.

    One advantage using Juli is you can got for a heavy chest and medium legs/head to even further maximise the resistance stats.

    Thank you! This is exactly the kind of answer I was hoping for.

  9. Member Avatar
    HelpFromAbove

    Apprentice

    Total Posts: 27

    Altmer Sorcerer

    Out of Curiosity, with the “fix” to IA, is it still preferable to something like Mothers Sorrow or (insert any better idea here)?

    Update:

    I (think) I answered my own questions, but I would like some community feedback to see if what I am doing is valid.

    Using the HotR CP optimizer, I calculated the Combat Metrics using the Brute Force method. For baseline, I ran the setup exactly as it loads, with the exception of spell critical which was set to 56% (to eliminate the 0.5%), added 100% up-time on non-infused crusher enchant (as that most closely matches how my groups tend to go), and added 8% damage done modifier, as combat prayer is 100% up time in my normal group. Interestingly, for ALL the setups I tried, the optimal metric was Lover + Infused, so keep that in mind. Baseline Metric comes out at 166551.

    Next, I tried a few different armor sets, adding spell crit, damage, damage done modifiers, max magicka, etc, appropriately.

    Adding a 4p Burning Spellweave set increased metric to 175333 (5.27%), and a 4p Mother’s Sorrow set gave an increase to 175311 (5.26%). I did this because I was trying to determine what I want to run while I grind for IA set pieces. It was interesting that BSW and MS 4p sets provide approximately the same DPS increase.

    I also found that IA 4p set gave an increase to 179490 (7.77% above baseline). Based on this, IA is the clear winner, which is not suprising.

    Since I was already working on this I also decided to try to figure out where the line between using illambris and using a 5 piece set was. For this work, I tried Mothers Sorrow in 5p and IA in 5p.

    Adding Mothers sorrow 5p gives a metric of 189732 (13.92% above baseline). This means that the benefit of using the 5th piece of MS gives an additional 8.66% increase. Using the assumption that the DPS add of using illambris can be approximated at 2k (Is this a good assumption?), and knowing that, in order to make the 5th MS piece worthwhile, it must exceed such DPS contribution, I found that in order to replace Illambris 2p with a 5th piece of MS your overall DPS must exceed 2000/8.66% = 23098.4 DPS. Or to put it more clearly, if you are doing more than 23098.4 DPS, you should switch to 5p MS. Does this math sound reasonable to everyone? Does it make sense? Is there something I have forgotten?

    In the same manner, as the above, I found that a 5th piece IA (with 100% uptime for 8% DT bonus) gives a metric of 193431 (16.14% above baseline, 8.37% above IA 4p). So in this case, Illambris 2p should be replaced if DPS exceeds 23893.7.

    Obviously if my DPS estimate for Ilambris is too high, then the break even point would lower. Also, I assumed that, when the second piece of Ilambris was removed, that the 1st piece was left unchanged, though a Iceheart or White Gold Tower piece could have a better 1p effect (I didn’t test that).

     

    Update #2:

    I re-ran the analysis using much lower starting values in the tool (30k Magicka, 2000 Spell Power, 30% Spell Critical, 0% base DD bonus), working under the suspicion that the baseline was overly high in my last attempt. New results shown below for Base, Wise Mage, Burning Spellweave, Mother’s Sorrow, and Inf. Mage. Ilambris DPS was assumed to be 2k in order to be consistent with previous.

    https://pasteboard.co/GHaRbBg.png

     

    At this lower baseline, it seems that the improvement of IA is even more significant. It also appears that, for those of us switching from old builds to the new patch, retaining our BSW or Wise Mage gear as a 4P is best for now.

     

    Ancillary Questions: @Asayre or @Decay, can you explain what the <label>Magicka Multiplier % and Spell Damage Multiplier % fields are for, and why they default to what they do? Also, What are the underlying assumptions of the CP optimizer? For instance, does it assume that you are running the Major Sorcery, or would I need to increase spell power 20% manually? Also, would I need to increase the WD/SD from infused 20% Manually as well? Last question about WD/SD from infused – For brute force, does it apply this 100% of the time, or does it only apply the additional SD from that field when evaluating combinations with infused?</label>

     

    Please share your thoughts, critiques, etc. I would like to know if I am onto something here.

    • This reply was modified 1 month, 3 weeks ago by Profile photo of HelpFromAbove HelpFromAbove. Reason: I'm needy and have a lot of questions... I'm sorry
  10. Member Avatar
    InfiniteXavier

    Journeyman

    Total Posts: 56

    Do you know offhand if there any significant difference in healing whether you get your power/force from damage or max?

  11. Member Avatar
    Kammakazi

    Scamp

    Total Posts: 2

    Console noob here… how do I figure out damage percentages on my Magicka Sorcerer?

    The calculator is pretty straightforward until the percentages part comes in

    • This reply was modified 1 month, 2 weeks ago by Profile photo of Kammakazi Kammakazi.
  12. Member Avatar
    HelpFromAbove

    Apprentice

    Total Posts: 27

    Altmer Sorcerer

    Kammakazi said on September 6, 2017 :

    Console noob here… how do I figure out damage percentages on my Magicka Sorcerer?

    The calculator is pretty straightforward until the percentages part comes in

    I used a target dummy. You can generally get an idea of what each set of skills will run if you use them exclusively on the dummy. For example, to get an idea of what your DOTs do, just case your DOTs on the TD, keep them up for a while, and see what you get. You can do the same with single target/DD attacks, and then mess with staff attacks. Of course if you are running a proc set, you might have to play around with getting it to proc on the TD correctly. What I did for Ilambris was take off the 2nd piece and did only staff attacks, then I put it back on and did the same thing (of course it would now proc since I had the 2nd piece on), and then subtracted my staff dps from what I got.

     

    Its not nearly as easy as it is on PC, but it can be done.

  13. Member Avatar
    HelpFromAbove

    Apprentice

    Total Posts: 27

    Altmer Sorcerer

    @Asyere @Decay

    Am looking for some information and could not find it elsewhere, hopefully you can help:

    In a single target boss fight, how is priority determined for spell resistance debuffs from enchantments? For example, if one person is running a crusher enchantment, and another is running an infused crusher, is priority first come first serve, or will the more powerful infused version displace the previous? If multiple people are running crusher, will it refresh on the target before the previous instance of the debuff times out?

    Playing on Xbox it is impossible to test for this, because the crusher debuff is not displayed on the boss bar unless the effect is coming from you… I assume that even though it does not display correctly, crusher enchants, minor breach poison debuffs, etc, are being shared between raid members, since it would make no sense to have a different spell resistance for each player on the same target.

  14. Profile Photo
    decay

    Expert

    Total Posts: 306

    Dunmer Templar

    HelpFromAbove said on October 6, 2017 :

    @Asyere @Decay

    Am looking for some information and could not find it elsewhere, hopefully you can help:

    In a single target boss fight, how is priority determined for spell resistance debuffs from enchantments? For example, if one person is running a crusher enchantment, and another is running an infused crusher, is priority first come first serve, or will the more powerful infused version displace the previous? If multiple people are running crusher, will it refresh on the target before the previous instance of the debuff times out?

    Playing on Xbox it is impossible to test for this, because the crusher debuff is not displayed on the boss bar unless the effect is coming from you… I assume that even though it does not display correctly, crusher enchants, minor breach poison debuffs, etc, are being shared between raid members, since it would make no sense to have a different spell resistance for each player on the same target.

    As far as I know (haven’t tested) the Buff which has the longer (remaining) runtime wins. So if infused crusher is down a few seconds, the non infused can overwrite. So generally I heard if an infused crusher is around, ppl with noninfused crusher should shange their weapons.

     

  15. Member Avatar
    Latin

    Moderator

    Total Posts: 1131

    Imperial

    HelpFromAbove said on October 6, 2017 :

    how is priority determined for spell resistance debuffs from enchantments

    decay said on October 6, 2017 :

    the Buff which has the longer (remaining) runtime wins

    This is the case. So it is imperative for others not to use non-infused crusher if there is already an infused crusher user (tank) on a single target.

    e pluribus unum

  16. Member Avatar
    HelpFromAbove

    Apprentice

    Total Posts: 27

    Altmer Sorcerer

    @Decay and @Latin

    Thank you very much for your responses! This helps quite a bit.

  17. Profile Photo
    Tabatta

    Novice

    Total Posts: 22

    Altmer Sorcerer

    Dear @Asayre, I’ve been re-doing mundus stone calculations, and I’d like to point out (what I think are) two mistakes in the formulas you showed in this section.
    First, in the calculation of the damage boost created by the Mage mundus, it seems to me that the CPI factor disappears from your analytical expression to your numerical expression. Indeed, the analytical expressions show the product CPI x Skills, and you specify underneath that CPI = 1.2 while Skills is between 1.2 and 1.4 (I assume you took 1.3 as a representative value). The numerical estimation, however, shows only a factor 1.3.
    Second, in the calculation of the damage boost created by the Thief mundus, I think you used 9% for the Thief boost in critical rate, while the live version in Horns of the Reach is only 7%.
    Correcting these two mistakes, and keeping the other values you used unchanged, it seems that the Mage is better than the Thief.

    Thank you for all your work !

     

  18. Profile Photo
    Floliroy

    Apprentice

    Total Posts: 31

    Redguard Dragonknight

    Tabatta said on October 11, 2017 :

    Dear @Asayre, I’ve been re-doing mundus stone calculations, and I’d like to point out (what I think are) two mistakes in the formulas you showed in this section.
    First, in the calculation of the damage boost created by the Mage mundus, it seems to me that the CPI factor disappears from your analytical expression to your numerical expression. Indeed, the analytical expressions show the product CPI x Skills, and you specify underneath that CPI = 1.2 while Skills is between 1.2 and 1.4 (I assume you took 1.3 as a representative value). The numerical estimation, however, shows only a factor 1.3.
    Second, in the calculation of the damage boost created by the Thief mundus, I think you used 9% for the Thief boost in critical rate, while the live version in Horns of the Reach is only 7%.
    Correcting these two mistakes, and keeping the other values you used unchanged, it seems that the Mage is better than the Thief.

    Thank you for all your work !

    If I remember correctly, this topic was modified before Horns of the Reach was on live server (so with value of PTS). That can maybe explain the 7% / 9% of thief mundus ^^

     

    Another things : Did some people have found changements for clockwork city ?

    Stam will still be n°1 DPS ? Some stuff better than other or important class changements ?

    By reading natch potes I haven’t found something very relevant …

    Arkadium_Floliroy

  19. Member Avatar
    Latin

    Moderator

    Total Posts: 1131

    Imperial

    Tabatta said on October 11, 2017 :

    Dear @Asayre, I’ve been re-doing mundus stone calculations, and I’d like to point out (what I think are) two mistakes in the formulas you showed in this section.
    First, in the calculation of the damage boost created by the Mage mundus, it seems to me that the CPI factor disappears from your analytical expression to your numerical expression. Indeed, the analytical expressions show the product CPI x Skills, and you specify underneath that CPI = 1.2 while Skills is between 1.2 and 1.4 (I assume you took 1.3 as a representative value). The numerical estimation, however, shows only a factor 1.3.
    Second, in the calculation of the damage boost created by the Thief mundus, I think you used 9% for the Thief boost in critical rate, while the live version in Horns of the Reach is only 7%.
    Correcting these two mistakes, and keeping the other values you used unchanged, it seems that the Mage is better than the Thief.

    Thank you for all your work !

    Actually, the absence of CPI in the Mage mundus calculation makes sense. The mundus magicka of 2028 is not modified by CPI – it is actually just additive with the base pool. So whether you incorporate 1.2 into your calculation or not will not affect the result of that comparison, because it only modifies the base pool. Either way, the mage mundus with zero divine pieces works out to be 1.0349 when using the same 75500 effective magicka as benchmark.

     

    Consider thief, using 0.07 as it is on Live, while retaining 0.5 crit chance and 0.7 crit mod in Asayre’s example. we get 1.0363.

    If we drop the crit mod to 0.6, the difference is reduced to 1.0323, at which point the Mage becomes favourable.

     

    e pluribus unum

  20. Profile Photo
    Floliroy

    Apprentice

    Total Posts: 31

    Redguard Dragonknight

    Latin said on October 12, 2017 :

    Tabatta said on October 11, 2017 :

    Dear @Asayre, I’ve been re-doing mundus stone calculations, and I’d like to point out (what I think are) two mistakes in the formulas you showed in this section.
    First, in the calculation of the damage boost created by the Mage mundus, it seems to me that the CPI factor disappears from your analytical expression to your numerical expression. Indeed, the analytical expressions show the product CPI x Skills, and you specify underneath that CPI = 1.2 while Skills is between 1.2 and 1.4 (I assume you took 1.3 as a representative value). The numerical estimation, however, shows only a factor 1.3.
    Second, in the calculation of the damage boost created by the Thief mundus, I think you used 9% for the Thief boost in critical rate, while the live version in Horns of the Reach is only 7%.
    Correcting these two mistakes, and keeping the other values you used unchanged, it seems that the Mage is better than the Thief.

    Thank you for all your work !

    Actually, the absence of CPI in the Mage mundus calculation makes sense. The mundus magicka of 2028 is not modified by CPI – it is actually just additive with the base pool. So whether you incorporate 1.2 into your calculation or not will not affect the result of that comparison, because it only modifies the base pool. Either way, the mage mundus with zero divine pieces works out to be 1.0349 when using the same 75500 effective magicka as benchmark.

    Consider thief, using 0.07 as it is on Live,while retaining 0.5 crit chance and 0.7 crit mod in Asayre’s example. we get 1.0363.

    If we drop the crit mod to 0.6, the differenceis reduced to 1.0323, at which point the Mage becomes favourable.

    I think the Mage can only be usefull on Sorc wich have a lot of Magicka Bonus ^^

    And pets are more affected by Magicka than by Spell Damage, it seems to me.

    Arkadium_Floliroy

Reply To "Introduction to PvE damage calculation (Horns of the Reach)"

You are not currently logged in. You must log in before replying to this topic.