Status Proc Chance on Runecarver's Blaze too low?

Vaqual

The set produces "white" numbers, indicating that the damage is treated as single target direct damage, but the status proc chance is far below what I would expect in that case. I only did rudimentary testing and I do not have cmx logs. Is it possible that the wrong proc chance is assigned for the damage type? Or is it the wrong damage type and the correct proc chance? Or is it possible that it inherits the proc chance from the skill it is triggered on?

MashmalloMan

I wouldn't focus on the colour of the numbers, it's usually misleading or incorrect.



I only used 1 aoe dot, ticking once a second, so every 3rd tick is every 3s, I never saw any burning procs overlap.

Burning = 3 ticks over 4s. Since there is 27 ticks of burning, it's fair to assume this is 9 procs.

9 /324 = 0.027

Aka.. 3% which is Single Target DoT proc chance.

Tested CP, it's definitely Single Target + DoT as well for damage scaling purposes.

YandereGirlfriend

It seems odd that it is classed as a DOT tick but it wouldn't be the first time that something like that has happened.

Malprave

I’m not sure if you’re saying this needs a buff or not. I put it on my dragonknight and it works well with no changes to my build. There was a rumor floating around in the ether that it might work on necro. I put it on my necro and built completely around it and could not get it to work well.

I did not inspect the status effect damage closely. I was only looking at the top line number.

MashmalloMan

YandereGirlfriend wrote: »

It seems odd that it is classed as a DOT tick but it wouldn't be the first time that something like that has happened.

Yeah, way of fire is basically the same thing, but is direct single target damage.

I suspect this was done to balance it, creative liberity since it doesn't have a cooldown, if you stack multiple dots, it would end up proccing more often then something like way of fire.

Vaqual

Thanks for testing!

Skullstachio

Welcome to be wrong but on the UESP build editor, the coefficient for runecarvers blaze labels the flame damage as Single target, Direct damage, in spite of being sourced from proccing every 3rd tick of a DoT.
Edit: not counting the burning stat damage from the status effect.

On a more interesting note, runecarver works better on the arcanist with their fatecarver ability since the proc can be ticked every 0.9 seconds. *(each fatecarver hit ticks at a 0.3 second rate after a small delay.)

robpr

Skullstachio wrote: »

On a more interesting note, runecarver works better on the arcanist with their fatecarver ability since the proc can be ticked every 0.9 seconds. *(each fatecarver hit ticks at a 0.3 second rate after a small delay.)

Works fine on Necro too, siphon also ticks every 0.3s and most of the time your only direct damage ability is blastbones. But even with siphon, Runecarver was doing less than Pillar, not sure if its still true now after its dot nerf.

Necrotech_Master

i use runecarver on a dot focused dk build

it definitely works better with faster ticking dots, since its proc is on every 3rd tick

my dk dot build for full dps was running around 8-9 of my 10 skills as dots (excluding ultimates) and runecarver was providing a fairly decent amount of dmg at that point

robpr wrote: »

Skullstachio wrote: »

On a more interesting note, runecarver works better on the arcanist with their fatecarver ability since the proc can be ticked every 0.9 seconds. *(each fatecarver hit ticks at a 0.3 second rate after a small delay.)

Works fine on Necro too, siphon also ticks every 0.3s and most of the time your only direct damage ability is blastbones. But even with siphon, Runecarver was doing less than Pillar, not sure if its still true now after its dot nerf.

the necro tethers were changed several updates ago to tick at 0.6 sec instead of 0.3 sec, but its still better than a majority of other dots

i think the only "dot" that ticks faster than that now is the arcanist beam, which is 0.5 sec ticks (runecarver proc every 1.5 sec, roughly 3 times over a full beam channel)