[PTS 2.6] Sorcerer arithmagic
This topic by Asayre contains 1062 posts by 140 members, and was last updated by Latin, 7 months, 3 weeks ago.

Continued at http://tamrielfoundry.com/topic/introductiontopvedamagecalculationhomestead/
Acknowledgement
A special thank you to addon developers for allowing me to understand the mechanics in the game in particular @Atropos for FTC, @SpellBuilder for LUI, @Kith for Srendarr, @Coolmodi for MitigationPercent and TemplarExecute and all the other developers for the bunch of addons I use daily in ESO. I would also like to extend my gratitude to the community for the kind words and valuable discussion about ESO game mechanics
Introduction
This post is divided into two main sections: Fundamental Equations and Application of Equations. Fundamental Equations covers the majority of calculations in the game while Application of Equations uses the derived equations to draw conclusions regarding what trait or mundus to use. While my initial focus was on Magicka Sorcerers, the focus has spread a bit and is probably of interest to most Magicka based classes. Note that a large number of equations can be applied to Stamina builds as well by simply substituting for the relevant stamina analogue. I am lacking healing related equations and I may delve into that in the future. Also include, at the end of this post, are spreadsheets that implements the Fundamental Equations as well as Application of Equations. The equations and values use are valid for the Orsinium PTS so some of it will be incorrect in the current live version 2.1.x. The spreadsheets can be used to determine the relative strengths of different sets. The spreadsheets are view only to prevent tampering but please feel free to make a copy for your own calculations. If you do use the spreadsheets I would appreciate feedback in terms of accuracy or ease of use.
Fundamental equations
Stat pool
Spoiler:
The Base value at C160 is 8744 for Health and 7958 for Magicka and Stamina. Attribute points is the number of points spent in Health, Magicka or Stamina multiplied by 122 for Health and 111 for Magicka and Stamina. Gear covers most things like set bonuses and enchants. Gear1 appears to be a peculiarity unique to the 5 piece bonus of Destruction Mastery and Necropotence.
CPI is a cumulative percentage increase due to points spent in the corresponding constellation and can be calculated as follow
The Lord Mundus gives 1452 Health. The Mage and Tower Mundus gives 1320 Magicka and Stamina, respectively. Divines is the sum of divines. For example 4 pieces of green equipment with divines (4.5% each) means Divines = 1.18. Limited testing on the PTS suggest that Divines is rounded to 2 decimal places.Example
I have a C160 Breton Sorcerer on the PTS. My gear gives me 7924 Magicka. This includes enchantments and gear bonuses. I have 64 points in Magicka, thus Attribute Points is 7104. I have 100 Champion Points in the Mage constellation which means that CPI is 1.134. I am using the Crown Fortifying Meal which gives 3617 Magicka. Skills is 1.31 (8% Bound Aegis, 5% Inner light, 2% Magicka Controller, 10% Gift of Magnus, 6% Undaunted Mettle). Putting this all into the formula, My ingame Magicka pool in the PTS is 38899.
Spell damage
Spoiler:
The Apprentice Mundus provides 166 Spell damage at C160.
Ability tooltip value
Spoiler:
The tooltip value for the majority of skill conforms to where a and b are coefficients. b is typically around 10.5 and a varies for each skill. The range of a is typically between 0.02 to 0.2. It is quite challenging to get extremely accurate values for a even with plane fitting over a large data range. We can fix b without much loss in the fitting for a thus we can introduce to concept of effective pool
This allows a fast evaluation method for different builds with varying Magicka and Spell Damage.
A technically more accurate estimate can be obtained by using
However the first formula presented in this section usually provides sufficient accuracy and will be used for the remainder of this post.
Some skills notably Hardened Ward and Annulment scale of only Magicka. In some cases the coefficient a is modified by Champion Points, at the time of writing, Thaumathurge appears to increase the tooltip for all abilities even nonDoTs. Elemental Expert is correctly being applied to tooltips. In the remainder of this post, it will be assumed that tooltip refers to the base tooltip unmodified by Champion Points.
A very well made skills browser by @uesp
http://esoitem.uesp.net/viewSkills.php
A list of skill coefficients for the PTS 2.3.2 can be found at
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1YN8YWDpi1d4CfoagRy1F9ath2w2nbTniL4MjdJdz4/edit?usp=sharing
A list of all skill coefficients and the weird ones by @uesp
Recovery
Spoiler:
The recovery formula was altered after PTS 2.5. Thanks to @Reorx_Holybeard for the following equation
Base Magicka and Stamina recovery at C160 is 514. Base Health recovery at C160 is 309. The Atronach mundus provides 198 Magicka recovery at C160. Examples of Skills are Magicka Controller [Mages’ Guild Passive], Major Intellect, Recovery [Light Armour Passive], and Spellcharge [Altmer Passive].
Spell Cost
Spoiler:
The Base Cost of a spell is the tooltip cost value, without any points in Magician and without any equipment or skills that provide either a percentage or flat cost reduction. Flat Cost Reduction is typically in the form of enchantments on jewellery and % Cost Reduction comes from skills and passives. Note that the 2 piece Molag Kena is a 33% cost increase when activated.
Example
I am calculating the cost to cast Force Pulse. The Base Cost is 2700 at C160. I have 92 points in Magician (15.2%) and 1 legendary reduce spell cost enchantment (203 each). %Cost Reduction is 0.23, 15% from Evocation [Light Armour Passive], 5% from Unholy Knowledge (Sorcerer Passive) and 3% from Magicka Mastery [Breton Passive]. The cost for casting Force Pulse is
This matches the ingame cost for Force Pulse in the PTS.
The base spell cost varies with level and @uesp has explained how it works
http://tamrielfoundry.com/topic/pts212sorcererarithmagic/page/25/#post645278
http://tamrielfoundry.com/topic/pts212sorcererarithmagic/page/27/#post646518
Spell Critical
Spoiler:
Simply add up all sources that increase Spell Critical. 219 Spell Critical rating is equivalent to 1% Spell Critical
Critical modifier
Spoiler:
This formula has been updated due to changes in [2.2.4]
where Fl is the floor function, Rd is the round function and Elfborn_Real is similar to the tooltip value of Elfborn but when it is used no unexpected rounding errors are found. Rd(x, 2) rounds a number to 2 decimal places and Fl(x, 0.01) truncates a number at the 2nd decimal places. Here are examples of both functions in action, Rd(23.458,2) = 23.46, Fl(23.458,0.01) = 23.45. Skills tested were the Piercing Spear passive and Trap Beast (Minor Force). Thanks to @Beltan3 and @hofawd with some help in getting this formula down. It appears that Critical multiplier is floored after Major Force is calculated but further test are needed to confirm this.
By the way, if you don’t mind some error in your calculation, a simpler formula is
Due to rounding errors, Elfborn still suffers from jump. Any points in between jumps do not increase your critical modifier. @Erraln has kindly listed all the jump points in this thread but for convenience, I’ll put them here as well. The Elfborn jump points are at
1,2,4,7,9,12,15,18,22,26,29,33,38,42,46,51,56,61,66,71,76,81,87,92, and 98.
Resistance
Spoiler:
Your spell resistance can be calculated with the following formula
where Gear is the sum of tooltip armour values, Resolve is a Heavy Armour Passive, Defending is a weapon trait. Other includes Breton Spell Resistance Passive, Balanced Warrior Passive (Templars), Major Ward, Spell Warding and Spell Shield CP.
Similarly, physical resistance is calculated as follows
The Lady mundus provides 1980 Physical Resistance at C160 and is put into the variable Other. The Reinforced trait increases the tooltip armour value and will be included when calculating Gear. The Shield Expert passive under the Steed increases the tooltip value of the shield thus is also included in Gear.
Example
I have 5 pieces of heavy armour, 1 medium and 1 light. The sum of all my tooltip armour values, Gear, is 16666. Resolves grants 1811 resistance and Spell Warding grants 363 Spell Resistance. I have a legendary defending weapon equipped (6%). My set bonus for physical resistance is 5805. I have 100 points in Heavy Armour Focus (5281). I also have the Spell Resistance (Breton passive) and Balanced Warrior (Templar passive) passives. With Major Resolve and Ward active, I estimate my physical and spell resistance to be
My actual physical and spell resistance are 35951 and 31828, respectively.Critical resistance
Spoiler:
Critical resistance is not needed in PvE since monsters do not do critical damage. An enemies’ critical modifier can be reduced by equipping gear with the Impenetrable trait or by spending points in the Resilient champion point sign. Every percent in Resilient decreases the enemies’ critical modifier by the same amount and every 250 points of critical resistance reduces an enemies’ critical modifier by 3.5%
Example
If you are PvP’ing against an enemy with a critical modifier of 0.5 and you have 500 critical resistance (2 legendary equipment) and 48 points (15%) in Resilient, then
Miscellaneous equations
Spoiler:
Block Cost
The block formula is
Example
If you have 100 points in Shadow Ward, 8 pieces of Legendary Sturdy gear, 3 Legendary Shield play enchants (203 block cost reduction each), 2 points in Fortress (36% block cost reduction) and Defensive Posture slotted your block cost will be
The ingame block cost is 88.
Base Cost vs Level
@uesp has found how most cost scale with level. The link is provided below.
http://tamrielfoundry.com/topic/pts212sorcererarithmagic/page/32/#post651311
Sneak Damage
@MrTarkanian48 has reported the PvE sneak damage formula to be
where Sneak Bonus is 3.75 for Melee attacks and 1.46 for Ranged attacks. I have verified this using Wrecking Blow, 2H Heavy Attack, Bow Heavy Attack, Focused Aim and Hidden Blade.
In PvP the Sneak Bonus is 0.27.
Damage calculation
Base damage
Spoiler:
The base damage formula is where
Attacker Bonus includes relevant champion point signs, Minor Berserk [Combat Prayer] and Elemental Talent [Altmer Passive]. These stack multiplicatively. Defender bonus refers to relevant champion point signs. Battle Spirit can be included by simply multiplying by 0.5. In 2.2.3, the impact of Thaumathurge is included in the tooltip but the impact of Elemental Expert is not included in the tooltip, so be wary you’re not double counting Thaumathurge. Resistance is the relevant physical or spell resistance. Penetration is the sum of percentage based penetration. For magicka builds, this is either 18% for a legendary nirnhoned weapon or 28% when using a legendary nirnhoned weapon and casting a Destruction Staff spell due to the Penetrating Magic passive. Examples of Flat Penetration are Concentration for Light Armour users, Spell Erosion and Piercing. The base Flat Penetration is 100. Veteran rank 16 corresponds to level 66. For PvE, most mobs have a level of 50. Examples of Armour Debuff are Major and Minor Fracture and Breach, 5 piece bonus of Night Mother’s Gaze and Glyphs of Crushing. The resistance of some bosses in 2.1.x can be found at [2.1] Project Resistance.
PvE Example
A C160 Breton cast Crystal Fragments on Slimecraw (Wayrest Normal Dungeon). Slimecraw’s spell resistance is 18200.The tooltip value without any points in Elemental Expert is 7832 (Refer to the section Ability tooltip value if you’re confused). I have 75 points in Elemental Expert (20.4%) and 25 points in Spell Erosion (1492 Flat Spell Penetration). My Flat Spell Penetration is 100[base]+4884[Concentration]+1492[Spell Erosion] = 6476. I’m using an epic sharpened staff (12% penetration). I have combat prayer active. Given these values
and
The actual damage recorded by CLS is 8243.
Average damage
Spoiler:
The average damage when taking into account critical damage is
Healing calculation
Base Healing
Spoiler:
The base healing formula for a healer using a variety of sources of Healing Done and Healing Taken and Healing Received isThe Tooltip value is increased by Restoration Master, Soul Siphoner, Major Mending and the Ritual Mundus. These add additively. Healing Done was tested with Blessed. Healing Taken was tested with Tormentor and Leeching sets. Healing Received was tested to be additive with Quick Recovery [Champion Point], Rapid Mending [Heavy Armour Passive], Minor Vitality [Swallow Soul & Coagulating Blood], Burning Heart [Draconic Power Passive] and Quick to Mend [Argonian Passive].
Example
A C160 Argonian cast Healing Springs. This character has 12% Healing Taken from the Tormentor and Leeching Sets and has 100 points in Blessed (25% Healing Done) and 100 points in Quick Recovery (16% Healing Received). In addition, this character is wearing 7 Heavy armour pieces (7% Healing Received), has the Minor Vitality buff, has a Draconic Power ability active and has 3 points in the Quick to Mend passive. This tooltip value includes the bonuses from Restoration Master, Major Mending and the Ritual Mundus.
The recorded ingame healing is 3264.
Application of equations
Champion Point System
Warrior
Spoiler:
Most players will be looking to spend points in either Hardy, Elemental Defender or ThickSkinned. Sorcerers will also be looking to spend points into Bastion. Not much can be said for Armour Focus or Spell Shield as a 100 points provides only 5281 resistance which corresponds to 8% mitigation at C160 which corresponds to 20 points in Hardy or Elemental Defender. In addition, Armour Focus and Spell Shield are affected by percentage penetration and are not taken into account when a damage shield is used.
Thief
Spoiler:
For Magicka builds, the decision is on how to spread points between Magician and Arcanist. Essentially, we’re trying to optimise the function
This function represents the average magicka gain per second. Since this spreadsheet is rather complicated, I recommend selecting your Race and Class and then filling in all the grey filled cells. Most of them should be reasonably easy to understand and I’ve made comments for most of them. Ensure that the Final Magicka Recovery and Final Spell Cost matches your ingame values to make sure all inputs are correct. The two inputs that require further explanation are Average Base Spell Cost and Cast per second. Both can be determined from a parse. I’ll provide an example in the future. But for now assume that I casted 10 Funnel Healths and 1 Crippling Grasp over 20 seconds. Look up the Base Spell Cost of both spell which are 1233 and 2923 respectively. The Average Base Spell Cost can be determine from Input – Spell Cost or from the Skill Data spreadsheet. So my Average Base Spell Cost is (1233*10+2923)/11=1387. Cast per second is 11/20 = 0.55. Look over to the right and find Recovery 0, Cost Reduction 0 to determine the ideal CP distribution.
If you wanted to mess around with the number of jewellery to enchant remove the impact of jewellery from Magicka Recovery – Gear and Spell Cost – Gear (Flat CR) then just look at the corresponding output line. The spreadsheet can be found at
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1Yp90QzJnsL5PNqSgKqDGv9IpYzJajG_tnlslFNPOf9g/edit?usp=sharing
Mage
Spoiler:
For a Magicka damage dealer, there are five signs of interest, Elemental Expert, Thaumathurge, Spell Erosion, Elfborn and Staff Expert.
The mechanics of all these except Staff Expert have been discussed in the sections on Critical Modifier and Base Damage. Staff expert increases the damage of light and medium attacks that is your weaving damage. Light and medium staff attacks are also increased by Elemental Expert.
In order to determine the optimal Champion Point distribution, we first need to consider the ratio of Elemental, DoT and Staff attacks. Then we can optimise the following function
One way to approach this is to enumerate all possible CP distributions and then calculate the function. However, this is quite a challenging task since with 167 Mage CP and 5 CP stars to consider the total possible of combinations is 30507895 (166C4). Although, some of these can be eliminated through some insight on the relative strengths of the CP stars. While this can be done, I have decided to make the equation a bit more accessible with the loss of a tiny amount of accuracy. I’ve included a spreadsheet that will do this
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1Zp9v1Vp4Z7X6zfDfcxTwyAnejvtEC5LujbXYBiVMDk/edit?usp=sharing
On the first sheet you’ll see a range of inputs including
 Number of Champion Points
 Critical Chance
 Critical Modifier
 Defined as Critical Damage/NonCritical Damage – 1
 Target Resistance
 Target Level
 Percentage Penetration
 Flat Penetration
 Elemental Ratio
 DoT Ratio
 Staff Ratio
It will output the ideal CP distribution in Elemental Expert, Thaumathurge, Staff Expert, Elfborn and Spell Erosion. It does not take into account the Elfborn jump points in the calculation so if it suggest a nonElfborn jump point it will also display the nearest Elfborn jump points. Also all CP passives are ignored. This means that there may be situations where it will not recommend putting 30 points into the Apprentice first.
[b]How it works?[/b]
It starts by assuming you have 0 in all 5 CP stars. It then calculates the following function
for an increase of 1 point in each star. It selects the optimum distribution then keeps going until it reaches your stated number of Champion Points. I had to use a continuous equation to model how the CP stars vary with points spent. The equation used can be seen in Sheet 3. Because a continuous equation was used some deviation from my previous discrete optimisation will be present. In addition, I could not include the impact of Elfborn jump points thus jump points are suggested at the end of the optimisation. While the previous discrete optimisation is probably better to model the jump points, I hope that this method of presenting the ideal mage CP distribution for magicka builds will be easier to use thus increasing it’s accuracy as you can put in your own relevant values instead of looking for the closest table match.Nirnhoned, Precise and Sharpened
Spoiler:
When evaluating between these three item traits it is imperative to recall the average damage formula
where
The skill coefficient, a, depends on the skill in question and an excellent list of skill coefficients can be found at http://esoitem.uesp.net/viewSkills.php. b is around 10.5 for most abilities. Attacker Bonus refers to certain Champion Points like Elemental Expert, Mighty or Thaumathurge and includes certain skills and passives such as Major or Minor Berserk. For simplicity, we can just set this to one and ignore it for the large part.
Armour debuffs include Major/Minor Breach, 5 piece bonus of Roar of Alkosh and the Crushing Enchantment. An example of percentage penetration is Penetrating Magic (Destruction Staff). Flat Penetration includes the base penetration of 100, Concentration and Spell Erosion/Piercing.
In order to compare the three traits, we can convert both the additional flat penetration offered by Sharpened and the extra critical chance into Spell/Weapon Damage. Finally we can convert the Spell/Weapon damage equivalence to an increase in an arbitrary ability tooltip.
I’ll use a generic magicka build as an example, I’ll assume a Magicka pool of 40k and Spell Damage of 3k which is reasonably typical for endgame builds. Only legendary trait values are considered.Nirnhoned
It increases the tooltip value of a weapon by 11% which in turn increases Spell/Weapon damage by 11% before any buffs. For a staff, this corresponds to a base increase in spell damage of 146 Spell Damage and for dual wielding swords it corresponds to 175 Spell Damage. Typically this base spell damage is buffed by 25% by Major and Minor Sorcery. So you would expect 183 Spell Damage for a staff and 219 Spell Damage for dual wielding swords. Thus if we’re dual wielding swords, Nirnhoned leads to an increase ability tooltip of roughly 3.2%.Precise
The 7% increased weapon and spell critical can be converted to an equivalent spell damage with the following equation
A reasonably common spell critical for endgame builds is around 60% and a critical modifier between 0.60.7 is typical for most magicka builds. This assumes around 30 points in Elfborn which is a fairly common recommendation from my Champion Point optimisation spreadsheet (https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1Zp9v1Vp4Z7X6zfDfcxTwyAnejvtEC5LujbXYBiVMDk/edit?usp=sharing) thus the spell damage equivalence for Precise is about
This translates to an increase in average ability tooltip by 3.5%. Note that we can reach this answer quicker by noting that
Sharpened
In a similar fashion to the previous section, the increased physical and spell penetration of Sharpened can be converted to an equivalent spell damage or more directly into an increase in ability tooltip
where Mitigation has been separated into a Sharpened component and everything else. The key concern here is that the Resistance of a target cannot go below zero. Let us consider a typical 4 person dungeon, bosses have around 18k resistance and trash have anywhere from 10 to 18k resistance (http://tamrielfoundry.com/topic/21bossresistance/). The main source of armour debuff is Major Breach (5280) and Flat Penetration for Magicka Characters is at least 4984 (100 base + 4884 Concentration). Flat Penetration is typically higher by around 12k depending on the number of points assigned into Spell Erosion. This means the average boss will have about 6.5k resistance and 100% of the Sharpened bonus is used meaning that it increase ability tooltip by
Unfortunately, Sharpened is useless on any mob with less than about 12k resistance as its resistance is already reduced to zero from other sources. So at first glance, the optimal trait seems to be Sharpened for bosses and Precise for trash, similar to the meta on Live.
But there may be another way around this, given that we are reaching unmitigated damage it is reasonable to remove all points from Spell Erosion and apply it all into Elfborn instead. Then a more interesting question would be how much resistance does Sharpened need to remove for it to be equivalent to Precise. Precise provides 3.5% increase in ability tooltip, this value can be achieved if Sharpened removes at least 1750 resistance. My optimal champion point spreadsheet tends to suggest around 30 points in Elfborn which corresponds to this value. Thus it is possible to simply use Sharpened for most trash and all bosses and put 66 points in Elfborn (67 points in Elfborn works the same as 66 points so spent the last point in something else like Staff Expert. In this way Sharpened is acting at worst equivalent to Precise but you get additional points in Elfborn thus increasing your average damage or it significantly outperforms Precise on bosses.Although I’ve only discussed magicka builds primarily, this conclusion of using Sharpened in most situations holds true for stamina builds as well. Stamina builds do not have a Flat Penetration skill but this is compensated by several armour debuff methods.
Divines and Infused
Spoiler:
The current meta advice suggest using Infused on large pieces (Head, Chest, Legs and Shield) and Divines on small pieces (Shoulders, Waist, Hands and Feet). There are no other viable traits for optimising damage. However, with the buffs to the Thief and Shadow mundus stones this advice is called into question. In this section, I will derive the conditions where Infused or Divines should be used. It is quite laborious mathematics and this section has been implemented in my spreadsheet. The equations here are to explain how the calculation is done.
The amount of magicka gained from using Infused on a legendary large piece instead of Divines, Inf, is173 is the difference between in enchantment of a C160 legendary Magicka enchant on an Infused large piece compared to a nonInfused large piece. CPI and Skills were defined in Stat Pool.
The average damage when using an Infused piece is
The coefficient, k, in this section isDmg_Inf can be separated into two parts, Dmg_Base and Dmg’_Inf. The former is the damage component from not using any trait and the latter is the bonus damage coming from using infused
The average damage increase when using Divines depends on the mundus stone. For completeness, I’ll analyse the Apprentice, Mage, Thief and Shadow mundus stones.
Apprentice
The average damage increase when using Divines with the Apprentice mundus isSkill_SD refers to abilities and buffs that increase spell damage, notably Minor and Major Sorcery and the Expert Mage passive.
Again this can be separated into two components, Dmg_Base and Dmg_Divine^App’
Mage
The average damage increase when using Divines with the Mage mundus isSkills refers to abilities and passives that increase maximum Magicka and was defined in more detail in <b>Stat Pool</b>.
Again this can be separated into two components, Dmg_Base and Dmg_Divine^Mage’
Thief
The average damage increase when using Divines with the Thief mundus is
Again this can be separated into two components, Dmg_Base and Dmg_Divine^Thief’
Shadow
The average damage increase when using Divines with the Shadow mundus is
I’m using a simplified form of the Critical Modifier equation here but in my implementation of the equation in my spreadsheet I use the more exact form of the Critical Modifier. Skill_S refers to skills that increase the critical modifier such as Piercing Spear [Templar passive], Hemorrhage [Nightblade passive], Trap Beast [Minor Force] and Aggressive Warhorn [Major Force].
This can be separated into two components, Dmg_Base and Dmg_Divine^Shadow’
The way to decide between Infused and Divines is then to evaluate Dmg_Inf’  Dmg_Divine’ with the corresponding mundus stone. Since several variables need to be taken into account, I’ve simply implemented my calculation into my spreadsheets. On a personal note, in the majority of calculations that I have performed Divines with Thief or Shadow outperforms Infused. However, if the Apprentice or Mageis used then Infused on large pieces is preferred.
Mundus stone: Apprentice, Mage, Thief and Shadow
Spoiler:
There are four mundus stones of interest to optimising Magicka based damage dealers. They are the Apprentice, Mage, Thief and Shadow. I’ll begin with the average damage equation for each mundus. Astute readers might notice a striking similarity with the section <b>Divines and Infused</b>.
ApprenticeIn this section, the coefficient, k, is defined to be
Skill_SD refers to abilities and buffs that increase spell damage, notably Minor and Major Sorcery and the Expert Mage passive.
Dmg_App can be separated into two components, Dmg_Base and Dmg_App’. The former is the damage component without any mundus active and the latter is the damage from using the Apprentice mundus.Mage
Skills refers to abilities and passives that increase maximum Magicka and was defined in more detail in Stat Pool. Separating into a base and Mage component yieldsThiefOnce again, this can be separated into a base and Thief component.
Shadow
I’m using a simplified form of the Critical Modifier equation here but in my implementation of the equation in my spreadsheet I use the more exact form of the Critical Modifier. Skill_S refers to skills that increase the critical modifier such as Piercing Spear [Templar passive], Hemorrhage [Nightblade passive], Trap Beast [Minor Force] and Aggressive Warhorn [Major Force].
This can be separated into two components, Dmg_Base and Dmg_Shadow’From this, we can easily conclude that the Apprentice mundus is preferred to the Mage mundus in nearly all cases for increasing damage sincewhereAt C160 the Apprentice provides 166 Spell Damage, <i>b</i> is approximately 10.5 and Skill_SD is typically 1.2 due to the Major Sorcery buff. The Mage gives 1320 Magicka at C160 and Skills is typically around 1.31 for a Sorcerer and is lower for Templars. Putting this into the equation, we obtainThus the Apprentice is preferred. The Mage mundus is sometimes preferred due to increasing Magicka pool for stronger shields and higher pet damage as these scale solely off Magicka.
For the comparison between the Apprentice and Thief there are no easy simplifications and one is left to evaluateThere are many variables and no obvious simplifications thus I have simply implemented the laborious calculation in my spreadsheet. Similarly the comparison between Apprentice and Shadow is very involved and is implemented in the spreadsheet.
While the equations presented for the Thief are a crude approximation due to the complicated rounding in the more accurate formula for Critical Modifier, it is possible to make a rough comparison between the Thief and Shadow mundus stones.Thus the Thief is better ifThis is equivalent toIn the Orsinium PTS, the Shadow mundus increases Critical Modifier by 12% and the Thief increases Critical Chance by 11%. Putting this values in, we get the following inequalitywhich means that Thief is better than Shadow if your Critical Modifier is at least ~10% greater than your Critical Chance.
Percentage Penetration and Spell Damage Equivalence
Spoiler:
Since Maelstrom weapons cannot come in Nirnhoned, it is natural to ask how does a nonset Nirnhoned destruction staff compare to a Sharpened Maelstrom destruction staff.
To evaluate this, let us consider T1 and T2, where T1 is the base damage with S1 extra spell damage and T2 be the base damage with no extra spell damage but 4% extra penetration. Then
where M is Max Magicka, S0 is the base spell damage, S1 is the extra spell damage for T1 and
Note that any penetration that is common to T1 and T2 can be seen as just a reduction in the Resistance.
We then proceed to solve T1T2=0 for S1
We can rearrange this to get
Now we have to put some typical endgame values, I’ll let M=43487, S_0=3764 and Mit=0.19 (17k boss resistance, 14% penetration, 4984 Focus, 0 Spell Erosion). Mit’=0.04*0.34
Thus for the stats assumed a Sharpened Maelstrom Destruction Staff is better than a nonset Nirnhoned Destruction Staff as the 4% additional penetration is equivalent to 133 Spell Damage which is less than the Maelstrom enchantment of 189 Spell Damage
Julianos and TwiceBorn Star
Spoiler:
Due to changes to Elfborn and skills that increase critical damage, TBS is no longer optimal from a DPS point of view. In the spreadsheets below, I have introduced a new metric called the Combined Metric. This metric was introduced because staff attacks scale differently from abilities. For most abilities 10.5 Max Magicka ~ 1 Spell Damage but for staff attacks 40 Max Magicka ~ 1 Spell Damage. To obtain the Combined Metric, I assume approximately 15% of total dps comes from Heavy (Medium Attacks) and 85% comes from abilities, then the weighted average of the Ability and Attack metric results in the Combined Metric.
We see then that for the Combined Metric on staffs, Law of Julianos is better by about 1.5%. Previously, my calculations showed that Law of Julianos was ~0.5% better than TBS but that was without taking into account the higher Attack Metric. On the dual wield bar, we should use the Ability Metric since no weaves are used and in this situation Julianos is better by around 0.5%.
If you were to replace one magicka enchantment on a large piece in favour of health so that the Health with Julianos and TwiceBorn Star are comparable then on the staff bar Julianos is better by 0.1% but worse by 0.1% on the dual wield bar. To help put all these percentage differences into context, my rough calculations suggest that not having Divines on one piece (maybe you have been unlucky and have a bank full of WellFitted Molag Kena shoulders/helm) equates to a loss of ~0.5%
I’ve heard of people saying that TwiceBorn Star is better with lower CP but I have yet to see extensive calculations that demonstrate this. Using the spreadsheets below, I varied the amount of CP by adjusting both the number of points invested into the Mage Tree and assumed that the first 100 points will be put into Elemental Expert followed by all points (up to 66) into Elfborn. While this CP distribution is not absolutely optimal, it is reasonably close. In this case, even with 100 Mage CP (300 total CP) Julianos is better than TwiceBorn Star on the staff bar (0.3%). On the DualWield bar, Julianos outperforms TwiceBorn Star at 129 Mage CP (387 total CP)
Note: Ignore the Magicka Recovery and Spell Cost boxes. I was too lazy to move them away before I took the pictures.
TwiceBorn Star Staff
TwiceBorn Star Dual Wield
Law of Julianos Staff
Law of Julianos Dual Wield
Damage distribution
Spoiler:
Damage calculation in ESO is rather straightforward you either crit or don’t crit. This leads to a binomial distribution. If you repeat the event (of using an ability) a sufficient number of times you can approximate the binomial distribution with a normal distribution with the following statistics
Since stats can already be estimated along with tooltip values and base damage numbers, it is possible to create total damage normal distributions (or DPS distributions) for different item sets.So if I were to redo my section on Julianos and TwiceBorn Star, I could use the calculated stats to calculate the tooltip value of Force Pulse. Here is a summary of the data required to create the normal distributions
and the distributions themsevles
It’s rather interesting because initially I thought that while the average of Julianos was greater than TwiceBorn Star, I felt that the higher crit modifier of TwiceBorn Star would mean that there would be a good chance of it doing more damage than Julianos if crits went your way. However, in the case of 300 Force Pulses which is 100 cast or about 100 seconds of just using Force Pulse, not only is the average damage of Julianos greater than TwiceBorn Star but the maximum damage for TwiceBorn Star is rather similar to Julianos. It is still true that the SD of Julianos is smaller than the SD of TwiceBorn Star. Even if Force Pulse were casted only 10 times (30 counts), you would expect similar’ish distribution.
From here it’s straightforward to calculate the difference of the distributions
We can setup damage thresholds and calculate the chance that a single test will be incorrect, inconclusive or correct. Someone a bit more motivated than me could then calculate the minimum sample size to get a reasonable estimate of the distribution and the chance of Type 1 or Type 2 errors.To show that the calculated curves are reasonably close to the simulated curves, I’ll start of by showing the situation where you cast Force Pulse a 100 times so 300 data points and your recorded the total damage. If you repeated it a 100 times you’ll get something like the green curve below
It doesn’t match the calculated curve (blue) that well because repeating it 100 times is a bit low. If you repeated it 10000 times, things get much better
For me this means that I’m better off just calculating the mean and basing my conclusions off that or calculating the damage distributions (now that I’ve done the maths once and have a few scripts that are easily editable) than spending time in game casting Force Pulse on a boss repeatedly to get determine which set is better. I’ll still keep testing in game to ensure the base equations are accurate though.Scathing Mage and Law of Julianos
Spoiler:
In the Thieves Guild update, the Scathing Mage set was buffed. In this post, I’ll compare Scathing Mage to Law of Julianos.
There are several approaches in determining when Scathing Mage is preferred over Julianos. I suggest looking at the number of attacks required to proc Scathing Mage. From there we can estimate the uptime of Scathing Mage and then it is a straightforward comparison to Julianos. I’ll show some example calculations based on my sorcerer.
The proc chance per attack with Scathing Mage is quite simplistically
Assuming that all attacks are independent we can model the resulting distribution of required attacks to proc Scathing Mage with a geometric distribution. In order to demonstrate that the geometric distribution is a suitable model I did some ingame testing. I counted the number of hits required to proc Scathing Mage. I only did 50 trials but I was reasonably convinced by the results. I trial here is defined as the number of hits needed to proc Scathing Mage. The image bellow summarises my ingame testing as well as the theoretical model. I was reasonably convinced with validity of the model despite the low number of trials.
The median of this distribution is
The median corresponds to the point where 50% of the time you’ll need less than X attacks to proc Scathing Mage and equivalently 50% of the time you’ll need more than X attacks to proc Scathing Mage. From this, it is reasonably straightforward to calculate the median amount of time required to proc Scathing Mage
From this the uptime of Scathing Mage is expected to be
where there is an implicit assumption that the internal cooldown of Scathing Mage is the duration of the proc, which is based on personal testing during the IC PTS. The effective spell damage of Scathing Mage is then
Or to simplify it in a single equation
Let us consider a magicka Sorcerer using the Thief mundus (6 pieces of Legendary divines) and with a precise staff. The spell critical of this character is 71.2% or 74.2% with Minor Prophecy active. I timed myself doing 50 Force Pulse/LA weaves and could do it in 1.16 seconds per weave or equivalently 3.45 attacks per second. Since this is probably close to the upper limit of attacks per second, I would estimate that the upper limit of the Scathing Mage 5 piece bonus for the magicka Sorcerer in question is
A more practical approach to estimating SM SD equivalence is by looking at a parse and determining the number of nonDoT attacks per second. In the example parse below, I estimate the number of nonDot attacks to be 84 (Force Pulse + Crystal Fragments + Light Attack) which means that the number of nonDoT attacks in this example is 2.37 (parse duration 35.5s).
This is 97 SD greater than the 5 piece bonus of Julianos. Since this character has 43486 Max Magicka and 3189 Spell Damage, the 80 spell damage corresponds to an average tooltip damage increase of ~1.7%
So based on the example parse above, if I were to use Scathing Mage instead of Julianos I would expect a DPS increase of around 425 (1.7%*25000). There is a slight simplification here since Light Attacks depend more strongly on Spell Damage than abilities so in fact my Light Attacks will do more than 1.7% damage with Scathing Mage.
However most Sorcerers rely quite a bit on Overload so the SM SD equivalence during Overload needs to evaluated. The magicka Sorcerer is using Nirnhoned swords (Spell Critical of 64.2%) for Overload and does 0.862 nonDot attacks per second
This is 38 SD less than the 5 piece of Julianos and corresponds to an average damage loss of ~0.6% during Overload or around 200 DPS (0.6%*32000).
During Overload, I use about 18 Ultimate per second. It takes 6 seconds of nonOverload time to generate 18 Ultimate. Thus on average Scathing Mage provides an increase of 336 DPS.
This is based on the assumption that you Overload all things equally.
To Precise or not?
An additional question that arises when using Scathing Mage is whether a Precise or Sharpened/Nirnhoned weapon should be used.
Percentage penetration can be converted into equivalent spell damage with the following equation
where the variables Mit_pen and Mit_Base are defined as
For simplicity, b is assumed to be 10.5. Using some typical values, 14% penetration (Sharpened) is worth about
Additional Spell Critical from Precise can be converted into equivalent spell damage with the following equation
Again using typical values, 7% Spell Critical (Precise) is worth about
This means that for mobs with 13k resistance which is a typical value for bosses debuffed with Major Breach, Sharpened/Nirnhoned is preferred over Precise. However, going with Precise will increase the uptime of Scathing Mage and the question is whether the increased uptime will compensate for the difference. Using my first parse with Force Pulse, the spell damage equivalence of Scathing Mage is expected to be 418 with a Sharpened Staff
While the spell damage equivalence with Precise is
Thus the average Spell Damage gain from using a Precise weapon with Scathing Mage compared to Sharpened is 9 base spell damage which is increased to around 11 by Major Sorcery and Expert Mage. However, the spell damage equivalent difference between Sharpened and Precise on a PvE monster with 13000 resistance is 93 which is larger thus a Sharpened weapon is still preferred even when Scathing Mage is used.
Molag Kena and Nerien’eth
Spoiler:
In this post, I’ll demonstrate how to compare Molag Kena to Nerien’eth on a single target.
The image for Nerien’eth was taken without CP. The tooltip is increased by both Elemental Expert and Thaumathurge.
My Max Magicka and Spell Damage with Nerien’eth is 43486 and 3189, respectively. The spell damage is with Major Sorcery and 3 Sorcerer abilities slotted. Molag Kena provides 129 Spell Damage and an additional 516 Spell Damage when proc’ed. I estimate a maximum uptime of Molag Kena at 86% (6/7 as you cannot reproc it when it is active). This means that the maximum Spell Damage from Molag Kena is
This is increased to 722 Spell Damage after taking into account Major Sorcery and 3 Sorcerer abilities (6% increased Spell Damage from Expert Mage passive). Based on my Max Magicka and Spell Damage, this corresponds to an increase of ability tooltips by ~9.8%
So we can roughly say that we would expect a DPS increase of ~9.8% with Molag Kena. This is an approximation since Light Attacks depend more on Spell Damage than abilities so will be increased by more than 9.8%.
There are two ways to determine the contribution of Nerien’eth. One way is to look at a parse. In the example parse below, we can estimate the DPS increase of Nerien’eth by dividing the total damage contribution of Lich Crystal by the total damage dealt less the damage done by Lich Crystal. For the example parse below it turns out to be ~9.8%, similar to the estimated upper bound DPS increase with Molag Kena.
The method above does depend on the RNG or a particular parse so a theoretical approach would be beneficial. The DPS contribution of Nerien’eth can be modelled by first modelling the number of attacks required proc Nerien’eth with a geometric distribution and then we will be able to obtain the uptime of Nerien’eth and finally estimate the DPS from the uptime.
I first tested the validity of a geometric distribution with ingame testing. I counted the number of attacks required to proc Nerien’eth and made the following image
The median number of attacks required to proc Nerien’eth is
which means that the median amount of time required to proc Nerien’eth is
Since you cannot have two Lich crystals at once, the internal cooldown of Nerien’eth is estimated to be 3 seconds. Thus, I would expect one Lich crystal every
From my parse above, I did 84 nonDoT attacks over 35.5 seconds which means the number of nonDoT attacks that could proc Nerien’eth is 2.37. So I would expect one Lich crystal every
The average damage for each Lich Crystal is
Let’s say I have 100 in Elemental Exper (25%) and 2 in Thaumathurge (1.6%) and my spell critical is 71.2% and my critical modifier 0.62 then the average damage for each of my Lich Crystal is
So my expected DPS with Nerien’eth is 2319 (13385/5.77) which was reasonably close to the example parse. Based on this, I conclude that Nerien’eth is comparable to Molag Kena for the rotation shown in the parse.
Additional note: I considered making a comparison between Molag Kena, Nerien’eth and Skoria but there is something very peculiar about Skoria. It appears that DoTs must be running for some period of time before it can actually proc. I counted the number of Puncturing Sweep hits required to proc Skoria and found that for the first few hits Skoria will never proc. This is shown in the image below. A similar result can be obtained when using Elemental Blockade (data not shown)
Cost increase in Dark Brotherhood
Character SpreadSheets
Best character building site
http://www.uesp.net/wiki/Special:EsoBuildEditor
Spoiler:
Only made them for Sorcerers, Templar and Nightblades at the moment.Feel free to make a copy for your own calculations.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1e2M7ZU9ZKBxCNhDmvfS4GKPs_Nx7YLUny9vBmPaUmgA/edit?usp=sharing
@Beltan3 has made an awesome calculator. The post is at
http://tamrielfoundry.com/topic/statscalculator/
and the calculator itself can be found at
Other useful spreadsheets (I’ve listed them at various points in the post but sometimes I forget where they are too :/ )
TG Mage CP Distribution
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1Zp9v1Vp4Z7X6zfDfcxTwyAnejvtEC5LujbXYBiVMDk/edit?usp=sharingTG Skill Coefficients
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1YN8YWDpi1d4CfoagRy1F9ath2w2nbTniL4MjdJdz4/edit?usp=sharing This topic was modified 7 months, 3 weeks ago by Asayre.

This is very interesting, thank you for sharing.

Jesus. Well, that was a great read. Thanks for sharing!
One question: Why do you take Weapon critical into account in your formulas regarding the examination of the Scathing Mage set? As I understand it, staff weapons work off of Spell Critical, not Weapon Critical. So, those values will change with a higher critical chance for your light attacks. Am I missing the point of including Weapon Critical here? Thanks.

I also wonder if the Force Pulse thing is intended.

Oh I didn’t realise staff attacks work of the Spell Critical. Thanks for that. I’ve updated it accordingly. Turns our the Shadow becomes slightly better. It appears that these things are like very well balanced or maybe I’m just unlucky with the value of my Magicka and Spell Damage.

my brain hurts

Asayre said on August 22, 2015 :
Oh I didn’t realise staff attacks work of the Spell Critical. Thanks for that. I’ve updated it accordingly. Turns our the Shadow becomes slightly better. It appears that these things are like very well balanced or maybe I’m just unlucky with the value of my Magicka and Spell Damage.
That’s great, thank you. Think I might just mull over this for a day or two.
My independent tests agree with your conclusion on Hardy and Elemental Defender.
For the last section, what is the function, as depicted by the figure, which describes the relationship between NirnhonedPrecise damage and spell resistance?
btw: with your latest edit, you seem to have cut off a section of the tooltip spell damage – namely the formula – was it intentional?

My last major edit was to change the calculation of Scathing Mage proc rate since I made the mistake of assuming staff attacks used weapon critical. By changing the formula I found that the Shadow mundus is slightly better than the Thief Mundus. It shows that this calculations should be performed individually for the best results. I was attempting to show how the formulas provided could be used for such things.
Latin said on August 23, 2015 :
For the last section, what is the function, as depicted by the figure, which describes the relationship between NirnhonedPrecise damage and spell resistance?
With that said, the figure was based on the assumption that the Thief Mundus stone was ideal. The same calculation can be redone for the Shadow Mundus. I wrote a script in Matlab for that figure. I’ll explain but keep in that I thought the Thief was best at the time I made it so the Spell Critical and Average Damage values are not suitable for the Shadow mundus.
The idea for the last figure is to do the following
1) Calculate the average damage for a nirnhoned weapon. I begin by calculating the mitigation with a nirnhoned equipped, MitN. I assume nirnhoned works the same way as sharpened but cannot test it since the PTS doesn’t provide nirnhoned.
MitN= SR(i,j)/(10*Tgt_Lvl)*(1Sharpened/100)Atk_Focus/(10*Atk_Lvl)0.12*Spell_Erosion;
SR is target spell resistance
2) I then calculate the damage I would achieve with this mitigation
DmgN(i,j)=TD(i,j)*(1+Ele_Expert/100)*(1+Ele_Talent/100)*(1MitN/100)*(1Tgt_Hardy/100);
TD is the tooltip damage
3) And then calculate the average damage taking into account critical damage
AvgDmgN(i,j)=DmgN(i,j)+0.5*SC_N*DmgN(i,j);
Here SC_N, spell critical with nirnhoned is 0.601.
The same is repeated for precise
MitP = SR(i,j)/(10*Tgt_Lvl)Atk_Focus/(10*Atk_Lvl)0.12*Spell_Erosion;
Sharpened is set to 0
Calculate the damage
DmgP(i,j)=TD(i,j)*(1+Ele_Expert/100)*(1+Ele_Talent/100)*(1MitP/100)*(1Tgt_Hardy/100);
And finally the average damage including crits
AvgDmgP(i,j)=DmgP(i,j)+0.5*SC_P*DmgP(i,j);
where SC_P=0.671
Then simply subtract the average damage for nirnhoned and precise
DmgDiff(i,j)=AvgDmgN(i,j)AvgDmgP(i,j);
For that particular figure
I set Tgt_Hardy, Ele_Talent, Spell_Erosion and Ele_expert to 0. I left those variables in my code in case I wanted to mess with it more.
Latin said on August 23, 2015 :
btw: with your latest edit, you seem to have cut off a section of the tooltip spell damage – namely the formula – was it intentional?
Sorry which section was that? The spell damage formula near the top is still there. I was doing some typo edits and I may have inevitably deleted the wrong thing. I have checked that the formula
Spell damage=(Gear+Apprentice(Divines?)+Molag Kena [2P]+Scathing Mage[5P]*(Surge+Expert Mage+Offensive scroll bonus)
is still there
Edit note: Include a figure to show that 2H is favoured at higher magicka. Also included the role of drinks in Magicka recovery
 This reply was modified 2 years, 1 month ago by Asayre.

Really nice work and appreciate the transparency.
Will definitely read again.

Asayre said on August 22, 2015 :
A rough test suggest that I can accomplish 14 Force Pulse and 13 light attacks in 18 seconds without doing any other things like proccing Crystal Frags or swapping to my secondary bar to buff myself or drop some DOTs. This turns out to be about ~1.5 attacks per second. The probability that any attack will proc Scathing Mage is 0.1*Spell Critical. This means that in 50% of all cases the Scathing mage set will proc in
Time_50% = 0.66 s * ln(0.5) / ln (10.1*SC) = 6.58 s
The proc duration for the Scathing Mage is 6 seconds. Based on this estimate, the average Spell Damage is 3184 (Max SD is 3524 when proced and 2874 when not proced).
Thx for all your post
It’s just a question: force pulse is 3 attack (fire, frost, …), and the critique can apply to only one, two or the three, so maybe, it’s more than 1.5 attack per second but maybe for you math it’s 3 or 4 attack per seconde

Smajestic said on August 26, 2015 :
It’s just a question: force pulse is 3 attack (fire, frost, …), and the critique can apply to only one, two or the three, so maybe, it’s more than1.5 attack per second but maybe for you math it’s 3 or 4 attack per seconde
Thats excelent point I belive one FP is considered as 3 attacks. Every1 has seperate chance to proc scathing bonus. But it need to be checked in statistical trial. Note that for reflective scale its one attack.

This is simple amazing!! marking for studing more later.

mariusz2304 said on August 26, 2015 :
Smajestic said on August 26, 2015 :
It’s just a question: force pulse is 3 attack (fire, frost, …), and the critique can apply to only one, two or the three, so maybe, it’s more than1.5 attack per second but maybe for you math it’s 3 or 4 attack per seconde
Thats excelent point I belive one FP is considered as 3 attacks. Every1 has seperate chance to proc scathing bonus. But it need to be checked in statistical trial. Note that for reflective scale its one attack.
Thank you for pointing that out. It does seem that Scathing Mage was proccing a bit more often than I expected. I’ll have to consider some ways to take this into account.

Asayre said on August 23, 2015 :
Latin said on August 23, 2015 :
btw: with your latest edit, you seem to have cut off a section of the tooltip spell damage – namely the formula – was it intentional?
Sorry which section was that? The spell damage formula near the top is still there. I was doing some typo edits and I may have inevitably deleted the wrong thing. I have checked that the formula
Spell damage=(Gear+Apprentice(Divines?)+Molag Kena [2P]+Scathing Mage[5P]*(Surge+Expert Mage+Offensive scroll bonus)
is still there
Edit note: Include a figure to show that 2H is favoured at higher magicka. Also included the role of drinks in Magicka recovery
My apologies, I must have been reading it while you were making edits.

Edit note: Merged into OP
 This reply was modified 2 years ago by Asayre.

Not gonna lie I love reading this shit. As I do a lot of similar stuff to min max my do it really amazes me how complex the formulas are to figure this stuff out. Are you aware that they changed dw to only give weapon damage now? You still get the general spell damage bonus for using a melee weapon though just not that 5% bonus from twin blade and blunt. Also have you considered nerieneth over Kena? Would use the same formula as Apprentice just remove a because you’re just trying to find the percentage change that Kena will give and then multiply your desktop by that and compare that to 750 or so which isis about how much did nerieneth does. So it would be like base_multiplier_kena=mag+10.5(s0+s1) where s0 is buffed damage from Kena and s1 us the rest of you dmg. also MIT doesn’t really matter because it’s a not going to change between one set of gear and another. Then you take that number and divide it by base_multiplier_ner=mag+10.5(s1) and take that and multiply your dps by it and if it’s >750 then Kena is better.

Edit note: Moved to OP
 This reply was modified 2 years ago by Asayre.

asneakybanana said on September 9, 2015 :
Not gonna lie I love reading this shit. As I do a lot of similar stuff to min max my do it really amazes me how complex the formulas are to figure this stuff out. Are you aware that they changed dw to only give weapon damage now? You still get the general spell damage bonus for using a melee weapon though just not that 5% bonus from twin blade and blunt. Also have you considered nerieneth over Kena? Would use the same formula as Apprentice just remove a because you’re just trying to find the percentage change that Kena will give and then multiply your desktop by that and compare that to 750 or so which isis about how much did nerieneth does. So it would be like base_multiplier_kena=mag+10.5(s0+s1) where s0 is buffed damage from Kena and s1 us the rest of you dmg. also MIT doesn’t really matter because it’s a not going to change between one set of gear and another. Then you take that number and divide it by base_multiplier_ner=mag+10.5(s1) and take that and multiply your dps by it and if it’s >750 then Kena is better.
I am not sure what you mean that DW only gives weapon damage. Equipping 2 swords/axes/mace will give you the same amount of spell damage as weapon damage. This is increased by up to 5% with 2 points in Twin Blade and Blunt. Note that the 5% increases the spell damage coming from the swords it doesn’t affect spell damage from other sources, namely, other pieces of gear.
I am not a fan of 2 pieces of Kena since sustain issues are exacerbated so I didn’t consider it previously. In addition, I believe the purposes of Molag Kena and Nerie’eth are different. Nerie’eth is more for PvE since in PvP people would just get out of that lich crystal and the 2 piece set bonus of Molag Kena is probably best used in PvP to burst someone down. Also Nerie’eth is more interesting in PvE since it may be helpful in clearing trash or adds since it is an AoE albeit quite a small’ish one.
If I were to compare the two, I would first estimate my attack rate to obtain the chance of proccing Nerie’eth. Using this I would then calculate the uptime of Nerie’eth in order to work out the average damage increased with Nerie’eth. I would then compare this to the increase damage from using 2 pieces of Molag Kena. It seems a rather involved calculation that would require knowing how to calculate the damage from light attacks.

Asayre said on September 9, 2015 :
asneakybanana said on September 9, 2015 :
Not gonna lie I love reading this shit. As I do a lot of similar stuff to min max my do it really amazes me how complex the formulas are to figure this stuff out. Are you aware that they changed dw to only give weapon damage now? You still get the general spell damage bonus for using a melee weapon though just not that 5% bonus from twin blade and blunt. Also have you considered nerieneth over Kena? Would use the same formula as Apprentice just remove a because you’re just trying to find the percentage change that Kena will give and then multiply your desktop by that and compare that to 750 or so which isis about how much did nerieneth does. So it would be like base_multiplier_kena=mag+10.5(s0+s1) where s0 is buffed damage from Kena and s1 us the rest of you dmg. also MIT doesn’t really matter because it’s a not going to change between one set of gear and another. Then you take that number and divide it by base_multiplier_ner=mag+10.5(s1) and take that and multiply your dps by it and if it’s >750 then Kena is better.
I am not sure what you mean that DW only gives weapon damage. Equipping 2 swords/axes/mace will give you the same amount of spell damage as weapon damage. This is increased by up to 5% with 2 points in Twin Blade and Blunt. Note that the 5% increases the spell damage coming from the swords it doesn’t affect spell damage from other sources, namely, other pieces of gear.
I am not a fan of 2 pieces of Kena since sustain issues are exacerbated so I didn’t consider it previously. In addition, I believe the purposes of Molag Kena and Nerie’eth are different. Nerie’eth is more for PvE since in PvP people would just get out of that lich crystal and the 2 piece set bonus of Molag Kena is probably best used in PvP to burst someone down. Also Nerie’eth is more interesting in PvE since it may be helpful in clearing trash or adds since it is an AoE albeit quite a small’ish one.
If I were to compare the two, I would first estimate my attack rate to obtain the chance of proccing Nerie’eth. Using this I would then calculate the uptime of Nerie’eth in order to work out the average damage increased with Nerie’eth. I would then compare this to the increase damage from using 2 pieces of Molag Kena. It seems a rather involved calculation that would require knowing how to calculate the damage from light attacks.
but if it were to increase tooltip damage by x% couldnt it also be said that it would pretty much increase your dps by x%?

Oh that’s awesome! Can i ask you where did you find that formulas? Are all yours? And is there a site where i can find them? Because i like to calculate a little
Reply To "[PTS 2.6] Sorcerer arithmagic"
The topic “[PTS 2.6] Sorcerer arithmagic” is closed to new replies.