Magicka and Stamina reduction cost glyphs: bugged or still in game softcaps/diminishing returns?

Helluin

I run some proper tests on this matter with both stamina and magicka builds.

The magicka and the stamina glyphs to reduce the cost of the skills, usable on jewelry, are not providing what written as reduction.
I used legendary VR14 glyphs so the ammount reduced should be 200.
This is the setup I used:

Class: Nightblade
Race: Bosmer
Magicka build: 7/7 Light Armor, Seducer 5/5 so an additional 8% reduction
Stamina build: 7/7 Medium Armor, no set bonus to reduce costs
Active passive skills for reduction cost: Controlled Fury 2/2 (Dual Wield), Ranger 2/2 (Bow), Evocation 3/3 (Light Armor), Wind Walker 2/2 (Medium Armor)
Champion system: no points used on The Tower
Glyphs: I tested both magicka and stamina reduction glyphs on both builds
Bars: no skills to reduce costs further (no Mages guild skills slotted)


Instead of 200 as reduction, I had the following values.

Magicka build:

• Class skills using magicka: 158 reduction
• Class skills using stamina: 213 reduction
• Destruction staff skills: 158 reduction

Stamina build:

• Class skills using magicka: 212-213 reduction
• Class skills using stamina: 173 reduction
• Bow and Dual Wield skills: 136 reduction

As you can see, the reduction of 200 is never applied while using these glyphs.

According to me there is a bug related to the skills that reduce cost.
As magicka build infact the value 158 was always the same because the only passive reductions are from Evocation and the bonus of Seducer.
Probably testing this on a Breton with Magicka Mastery or/and using Mages guild skills with the passive Mage Adept, the values are different and the reduction is lower than 158. Every other skill to reduce further the costs or the stars in The Tower to reduce costs imho could give always lower values to these glyphs.
As stamina build the difference between stamina class skills and weapon skills should be because of the weapon passive skills that reduce further costs.

It seems then that there is a bug or there is a softcap in place.
Also the values higher than 200 are quite strange.

trimsic_ESO

I've seen diminishing returns in many attributes of the game, not only the cost reduction one. I'm gathering numbers to have facts.

aco5712

block cost also has a "softcap" built into it. With blocking costing about 2k without any form of block cost reduction i dont think have diminishing returns on such a thing is a good idea lol

Sharee

It is probably due to how cost reductions are applied. Example: 1000 stam cost ability, 100 cost reduction glyph, 25% cost reduction from armor.

Without glyph:
1000 stamina cost - 25% cost reduction from armor = 750 cost

With glyph:
1000 stamina cost -100 reduction from enchant = 900 cost; then
25% reduction from armor = 675 cost.

---

What you see: without glyph my cost is 750, with glyph(100 reduction) its 675, should be 650, glyph bugged?(it only reduced cost by 75, not 100)?

No, just glyph reduction was applied before armor reduction.

Merlin13KAGL

Helluin wrote: »

The magicka and the stamina glyphs to reduce the cost of the skills, usable on jewelry, are not providing what written as reduction.

Magicka build: 7/7 Light Armor, Seducer 5/5 so an additional 8% reduction
...
Glyphs: I tested both magicka and stamina reduction glyphs on both builds

@Helluin, above is the reason for your dilemma.

Reduction enchants come straight off the top before the Seducer and passive % reductions take place.

So your cost is:

(Full skill cost - Flat jewelry reduction) * (100 - percentage reduction)

For instance, with no Light Armor passives, you are essentially getting an 8% (Seducer) reduction in your reduction, as well.

Your 200 reduction jewelry then becomes a 184 reduction jewelry. The LA passives reduce this even further, that's why you are not seeing the differences you expect.

Remove all your gear, look at your skill cost.

Then, add your jewelry and look at your skill cost again.

You'll see the enchants working (albeit behind the scenes) as intended.

Helluin

@Sharee , @Merlin13KAGL thank you very much for the explanation, it makes sense.

I still don't understand instead the reductions with a value higher than 200.
There was no percentage reduction in place for those.

Merlin13KAGL

Windwalker gives you Reduces cost of stamina abilities by per piece of Medium Armor equipped. You may have another reduction(s) taking place elsewhere that I don't see. Under bow, guessing you have Ranger Passive: Reduces the Stamina cost of Bow abilities by 10%.

Seducer does nothing for stamina abilities. Dark magic has Unholy knowledge passive: Reduces ability Magicka and Stamina costs by 3%.

Individual class skill lines sometimes have reduction passives, as well.

The only way to truly see these in action (and determine each contributing factor) is to do a full respec and add things one at a time (passives) while adding and removing gear.

Last thing to bear in mind, sometimes the tooltip value does not update immediately. You may have to Alt out and bring the menu back up, or in some cases, even relog for the values to update.

Helluin

When I had this reduction (Class skills using stamina: 213 reduction) I had 7/7 light armor and a destruction staff, there was nothing to reduce the stamina cost amongst passive skills and skills.
Yes, I had Wind Walker but it's based on the number of MA pieces equipped.
I simply just used a stamina reduction glyph on a necklace.
Because of this reason it's strange that the reduction was 213 and not 200.

madangrypally

I jumped on PTS to test it also: Here are my results:

Jewelry Enchants: These say they reduce cost by 200 but I was seeing a 213

7/7 Light Armor Evocation 3/3 Passive: This list 21% magicka cost reduction but was only seeing 18.59%.

All source of cost reduction I tested from various sources were off. I tested these by themselves with no other passives/gear and with combinations of multiple reductions. The values were off. Below is small sample.

This should be the forumla used to calculate the abilities cost:
(Base Cost - Cost Reduction Enchants) (1 - Cost Reduction Percent)

The issue is that the Cost Reduction Enchants and Cost Reduction Percent do not add up to there listed value. If taking there tested value then the above formula works.

Testing done with no passives/champion points and vendor bought plain gear. Created new template for this test.
Class: Nightblade
Race: Bosmer

Magicka Reduction Test:
Ability Tested: Teleport Strike
Base Magicka Cost: 3591 Magicka

Test 1:
Added 1 Jewelry Enchants for 200 Magicka Reduction:
New Cost: 3378 Magicka

This is a 213 Magicka Cost reduction when the Jewelry Enchant only has 200 listed.
=========================

Test 2
Added 2 more Jewelry Enchants. Total reduced magicka cost 600.
New Cost: 2954 Magicka

This is a 637 Magicka Cost reduction when the Jewelry Enchants should equal 600. With rounding it seems each Jewlery enchant is adding ~213-214
=========================

Test 3:
Removed Jewelry Enchants and add 7/7 Light Armor (bought from vendor so no set bonuses).
Confirmed base cost is still: 3591 Magicka.

Added Evocation 3/3 for 21% Cost reduction.
New Cost: 2930 Magicka

This is a reduction of 661 Magicka which is not 21% of 3591. (Only getting a ~18.59% reduction).
=========================

Test 4:
Added 3 Jewelry Enchants for total of 600 Magicka Cost reduction.
New Cost: 2411 Magicka

If using the above values: (Base Cost - Cost Reduction Enchants) (1 - Cost Reduction Percent) it would equal very close to 2411 Magicka if rounding is taken into consideration.
=========================

Tested various other cost reduction.
Controlled Fury: This added ~17.5% instead of the 20% stated.


Did some more testing but they were similar to the above.

angelyn

This is what I found when I used a level 7 enchanter alt at the crafting station:

Max Health Enchants scaled on a 1:5 Ratio
Max Magicka/Stamina scaled on a 1:6 Ratio
All recovery enchants scaled on a 1:3 Ratio
Reduce cost enchants scaled up on a 1:8/9 Ratio
Spell Resistance/Armour glyphs scaled on a 1:6 Ratio
X resistance Glyphs (eg Fire Resistance) scaled on a 1:2 Ratio
Spell/Weapon Damage Glyphs increased on a 1:2 Ratio
General Damage enchants for weapons varied between 1:3 and 1:10 Ratio
My orig thread is here, where I've also done comparisons on basic attributes,armour and mobs

Helluin

Yep, I would have posted it there since your topic is more complete and precise but I found it just one hour ago.

According to what we tested, then the best gain with reduction cost glyphs is without any passive, so the highest reduction is on stamina for a magicka build and vice versa.
The diminishing returns in the Champion System and this are the only good things/hopes I found so far for hybrid builds.

XEVENEX

madangrypally wrote: »

I jumped on PTS to test it also: Here are my results:

Jewelry Enchants: These say they reduce cost by 200 but I was seeing a 213

7/7 Light Armor Evocation 3/3 Passive: This list 21% magicka cost reduction but was only seeing 18.59%.

All source of cost reduction I tested from various sources were off. I tested these by themselves with no other passives/gear and with combinations of multiple reductions. The values were off. Below is small sample.

This should be the forumla used to calculate the abilities cost:
(Base Cost - Cost Reduction Enchants) (1 - Cost Reduction Percent)

The issue is that the Cost Reduction Enchants and Cost Reduction Percent do not add up to there listed value. If taking there tested value then the above formula works.

Testing done with no passives/champion points and vendor bought plain gear. Created new template for this test.
Class: Nightblade
Race: Bosmer

Magicka Reduction Test:
Ability Tested: Teleport Strike
Base Magicka Cost: 3591 Magicka

Test 1:
Added 1 Jewelry Enchants for 200 Magicka Reduction:
New Cost: 3378 Magicka

This is a 213 Magicka Cost reduction when the Jewelry Enchant only has 200 listed.
=========================

Test 2
Added 2 more Jewelry Enchants. Total reduced magicka cost 600.
New Cost: 2954 Magicka

This is a 637 Magicka Cost reduction when the Jewelry Enchants should equal 600. With rounding it seems each Jewlery enchant is adding ~213-214%
=========================

Test 3:
Removed Jewelry Enchants and add 7/7 Light Armor (bought from vendor so no set bonuses).
Confirmed base cost is still: 3591 Magicka.

Added Evocation 3/3 for 21% Cost reduction.
New Cost: 2930 Magicka

This is a reduction of 661 Magicka which is not 21% of 3591. (Only getting a ~18.59% reduction).
=========================

Test 4:
Added 3 Jewelry Enchants for total of 600 Magicka Cost reduction.
New Cost: 2411 Magicka

If using the above values: (Base Cost - Cost Reduction Enchants) (1 - Cost Reduction Percent) it would equal very close to 2411 Magicka if rounding is taken into consideration.
=========================

Tested various other cost reduction.
Controlled Fury: This added ~17.5% instead of the 20% stated.


Did some more testing but they were similar to the above.

Did you /bug this?

angelyn

Helluin wrote: »

Yep, I would have posted it there since your topic is more complete and precise but I found it just one hour ago.

@Helluin Don't worry -stuff like that doesn't get to me, I say the more the merrier!

Merlin13KAGL

angelyn wrote: »

This is what I found when I used a level 7 enchanter alt at the crafting station:

@angelyn‌ , while I get that you're proud of your work and posting this everywhere, it has absolutely nothing to do with the OP's question.

angelyn

Merlin13KAGL wrote: »

angelyn wrote: »

This is what I found when I used a level 7 enchanter alt at the crafting station:

@angelyn‌ , while I get that you're proud of your work and posting this everywhere, it has absolutely nothing to do with the OP's question.

I posted it just in case OP was expecting enchant glyphs to provide same levels of effect that they do in live. Since the discussion is about how enchant glyphs are working in PTS I thought my comment may be relevant. However, some people might not think it relevant. People who think my comment wasn't relevant have the same right to an opinion that I have-thinking my comment was relevant. Free Speech

Merlin13KAGL

He's commenting on the fact that the tooltip says one thing, but the actual reduction is another. Not the change from live to 1.6 coversion.

angelyn

Merlin13KAGL wrote: »

He's commenting on the fact that the tooltip says one thing, but the actual reduction is another. Not the change from live to 1.6 coversion.

@Helluin my apologies if I've posted something irrelevant on your thread. I presumed that when you commented on mine, discussing enchants ratios and mentioning your thread, that this was an invitation to come here and participate in the discussion.

Helluin

angelyn wrote: »

Merlin13KAGL wrote: »

He's commenting on the fact that the tooltip says one thing, but the actual reduction is another. Not the change from live to 1.6 coversion.

@Helluin my apologies if I've posted something irrelevant on your thread. I presumed that when you commented on mine, discussing enchants ratios and mentioning your thread, that this was an invitation to come here and participate in the discussion.

I posted in your thread to provide some additional info for your tests.
Imho infact there are some variables you should consider in your interesting tests: what I posted here it was commented and carefully explained by others (thanks again).
So you are more than welcome.

But for this, I don't care about who starts a thread.
Every post (critiques and constructive posts, not flaming and whining ones) from every player is very important and a great contribution for players and for devs.
Imho this is a good approach and we are all posting and reading here for a simple reason: understand, make better and improve a game we like.

angelyn

Helluin wrote: »

angelyn wrote: »

I posted in your thread to provide some additional info for your tests.
Imho infact there are some variables you should consider in your interesting tests: what I posted here it was commented and carefully explained by others (thanks again).
So you are more than welcome.

But for this, I don't care about who starts a thread.
Every post (critiques and constructive posts, not flaming and whining ones) from every player is very important and a great contribution for players and for devs.
Imho this is a good approach and we are all posting and reading here for a simple reason: understand, make better and improve a game we like.

Agree 100% with you Helluin-which is why I said you raised a very valid point on my thread:)I think we are all in the same boat really- we are doing these tests in order to gain knowledge ,understand in order to provide constructive feedback. I don't care who starts a thread etc, and as you say all posts are at least posted in a well-meaning way if they are obviously not trolling/flaming etc..

I will continue to read this thread as it has already given me something to think about in my testing. Feel free to post more stuff you discover on my thread,without worrying if it may not be relevant - I won't bite anyone's head off as that's not my style