Simple Questions – Simple Answers Thread IX
This topic by Latin contains 52 posts by 10 members, and was last updated by FrancisCrawford, 4 days ago.

1. What were the claims that Healing Ward is buggy about? Was the problem that the healonexpiration wasn’t working?
2. Is Healing Ward currently buggy?

I am a returning player from 2014. I installed the current launcher into my existing game folder, in hopes it would help save some downloading, since my connection is kind of slow (max download speeds about 60 kilobytes/sec). The launcher says it is version 1.3 but the current PC game version is like 3.2. I have tried searching online for answers to the below but haven’t had any luck, so any info would be greatly appreciated.
Is the launcher reflective of the current game patch?
Am I going to just keep patching from base to current, or would it be better to just do a fresh download/install?

Azalie said on December 8, 2017 :
Is the launcher reflective of the current game patch?
No, launcher version is not reflective of the game version. My launcher is 1.3.6.
Whenever the launcher needs to update itself, it should do so automatically as it starts (you will note that it restarts itself after downloading the necessary changes).
The launcher will update the game whenever there is a new version (I think it defaults to start automatically when you start the launcher, but it can be changed under Settings). When you download the game, you will also download all the DLC content irrespective of whether or not you own them. So when you read the patch notes for a new patch, that approximate download (usually at the top of the page) is pretty much fixed (assuming your game was previously uptodate, but if not, you should expect more depending on which version it was previously in).
If you had been away since 2014, you should expect to download the entire game again (~60 GB) due to the many patches since.

1.) Is it normal that by default Magicka Recovery is higher than Health Recovery?
3.) Does Tumbling also reduce the costs of Roll Dodge while fatigued?
2.) Is it true that Champion Points just count by full percentage?
4.) How much Critial Resistance is 1%?Can someone help with these general questions, please?
 This reply was modified 5 days, 1 hour ago by Latin. Reason: merged with Simple Question thread

Bierdeife said on December 8, 2017 :
1.) Is it normal that by default Magicka Recovery is higher than Health Recovery?
3.) Does Tumbling also reduce the costs of Roll Dodge while fatigued?
2.) Is it true that Champion Points just count by full percentage?
4.) How much Critial Resistance is 1%?Can someone help with these general questions, please?
These are good questions for the Simple Questions/Simple Answers thread, which is stickied in every (sub)forum.
I’ll answer one here — yes, if a champion point investment gives a benefit that is expressed as a percentage, then the true benefit is as if the digits to the right of the decimal point were 0s. For example, whether you see 12.08% or 12.31% as the supposed benefit, the real benefit is 12%.
It so happens that the Simple Questions/Simple Answers thread has some recent discussion as to what these numbers mean. For example, a 12% damage increase will almost never really increase your damage by as much as 12%.
 This reply was modified 5 days, 1 hour ago by Latin. Reason: merged OP with the Simple Question thread

Bierdeife said on December 8, 2017 :
1.) Is it normal that by default Magicka Recovery is higher than Health Recovery?
3.) Does Tumbling also reduce the costs of Roll Dodge while fatigued?
2.) Is it true that Champion Points just count by full percentage?
4.) How much Critial Resistance is 1%?Can someone help with these general questions, please?
1. Yes, the baseline magicka recovery at c160 is 514, while the baseline health recovery at c160 is 309. Note that the recovery are in per2seconds unit, i.e. they tick once every 2 seconds.
2. Yes, the percentage values are truncated to the nearest integer.
3. Yes, Tumbling also reduces the cost while dodge fatigued.
4. Every 250 critical resistance reduces the enemy critical modifier by 0.035; this means that 1% reduction is approximately 71.43 critical resistance.

FrancisCrawford said on December 8, 2017 :
I’ll answer one here — yes, if a champion point investment gives a benefit that is expressed as a percentage, then the true benefit is as if the digits to the right of the decimal point were 0s. For example, whether you see 12.08% or 12.31% as the supposed benefit, the real benefit is 12%.
Latin said on December 9, 2017 :
2. Yes, the percentage values are truncated to the nearest integer.
Does this mean 12,51%, 12,68% or 12,99% is still 12% or does it count like 13%?

Bierdeife said on December 9, 2017 :
FrancisCrawford said on December 8, 2017 :
I’ll answer one here — yes, if a champion point investment gives a benefit that is expressed as a percentage, then the true benefit is as if the digits to the right of the decimal point were 0s. For example, whether you see 12.08% or 12.31% as the supposed benefit, the real benefit is 12%.
Latin said on December 9, 2017 :
2. Yes, the percentage values are truncated to the nearest integer.
Does this mean 12,51%, 12,68% or 12,99% is still 12% or does it count like 13%?
Those still count as 12. It only jumps to 13 when the whole number is 13.00 or higher.

Bierdeife said on December 9, 2017 :
FrancisCrawford said on December 8, 2017 :
I’ll answer one here — yes, if a champion point investment gives a benefit that is expressed as a percentage, then the true benefit is as if the digits to the right of the decimal point were 0s. For example, whether you see 12.08% or 12.31% as the supposed benefit, the real benefit is 12%.
Latin said on December 9, 2017 :
2. Yes, the percentage values are truncated to the nearest integer.
Does this mean 12,51%, 12,68% or 12,99% is still 12% or does it count like 13%?
The former, unfortunately, unless there’s been a recent change I’m not aware of. I.e., I think @Latin had a little typo in what he wrote — but he is much, much more knowledgeable on these details than I am, so ultimately what he says is gospel.

FrancisCrawford said on December 9, 2017 :
I think @Latin had a little typo in what he wrote
You mean to truncate to the nearest integer?
Truncating to the nearest integer is different from rounding to the nearest.
Truncating 12.51 for example, means 12, as you remove the fractional parts completely; rounding 12.51 on the other hand, is 13.
Apologies for any confusion caused.

Sorry, maybe I don’t understood it clearly, because my english isn’t the best.
Can we say finally that the following is completely correct?
awein2319 said on December 9, 2017 :
It only jumps to 13 when the whole number is 13.00 or higher.

Bierdeife said on December 10, 2017 :
Sorry, maybe I don’t understood it clearly, because my english isn’t the best.
Can we say finally that the following is completely correct?
awein2319 said on December 9, 2017 :
It only jumps to 13 when the whole number is 13.00 or higher.
Correct.
Equivalently:
 Any digits to the right of the decimal point should be disregarded.
 Any digits to the right of the decimal point can be replaced by zeros.
Reply To "Simple Questions – Simple Answers Thread IX"
You are not currently logged in. You must log in before replying to this topic.