Maintenance for the week of March 30:
• [COMPLETE] ESO Store and Account System for maintenance – April 1, 1:00PM EDT (17:00 UTC) - 5:00PM EDT (21:00 UTC)
• [COMPLETE] ESO Store and Account System for maintenance – April 1, 1:00PM EDT (17:00 UTC) - 5:00PM EDT (21:00 UTC)
Even more nerfs
-
LeagueTroll✭✭✭✭✭1.khajit crit dmg instead of crit chance is a huge nerf, crit chance has a lot synergy to things like crit surge, templar or nightblade passives. And i think crit dmg stack linearly instead of multiplicative since homestead.
2. nord is still crap, really zos2 -
Pevey✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭My guess is that the 20% increase in stats from CP is now additive instead of multiplicative, so something ZoS positions as a buff is really a nerf to many builds.
5 -
seventyfive✭✭✭LeagueTroll wrote: »1.khajit crit dmg instead of crit chance is a huge nerf, crit chance has a lot synergy to things like crit surge, templar or nightblade passives. And i think crit dmg stack linearly instead of multiplicative since homestead.
2. nord is still crap, really zos
Actually nord is no longer crap, coming from someone who does play a nord. (Before you claim otherwise.) Sure it's not the best but it's decent.Edited by seventyfive on 25 February 2019 15:464 -
Itzmichi✭✭✭✭✭LeagueTroll wrote: »1.khajit crit dmg instead of crit chance is a huge nerf, crit chance has a lot synergy to things like crit surge, templar or nightblade passives. And i think crit dmg stack linearly instead of multiplicative since homestead.
2. nord is still crap, really zos
1. Was already that way last pts.
2. Don't agree.Here, have a chill pill 💊!6 -
Skwor✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭Uhmmm seems Kajhit fared pretty well, not sure I would be complainingEdited by Skwor on 25 February 2019 15:565 -
likecats✭✭✭✭✭Nords are pretty good this patch.
The ult gen is nice, and so are the resistances.
3.9k resists ~= 6% reduction in worst case, 12% reduction in best case.
Most people will get around 9% reduction.
The old passive, provided like 4% effective reduction on most builds, even though it said 6% due to how resistances are calculated.
Therefore, pretty nice buff.
The health stuff got nerfed a little if you compare with old passives, but all races got those nerfs.Edited by likecats on 25 February 2019 15:594 -
Starlock✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Well, if you roll around with a magical cat like I do, it really isn't a "nerf" to gain crit damage for magicka attacks instead of a (relatively) useless weapon crit chance...1 -
LeagueTroll✭✭✭✭✭Tommy_The_Gun wrote: »
what? bosmer is more than fine. movespeed + pen is good, only snipe spam build is nerfed with bosmer change.3 -
Tasear✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭LeagueTroll wrote: »1.khajit crit dmg instead of crit chance is a huge nerf, crit chance has a lot synergy to things like crit surge, templar or nightblade passives. And i think crit dmg stack linearly instead of multiplicative since homestead.
2. nord is still crap, really zos
Nord will be very popular4 -
LeagueTroll✭✭✭✭✭Nords are pretty good this patch.
The ult gen is nice, and so are the resistances.
3.9k resists ~= 6% reduction in worst case, 12% reduction in best case.
Most people will get around 9% reduction.
The old passive, provided like 4% effective reduction on most builds, even though it said 6% due to how resistances are calculated.
Therefore, pretty nice buff.
The health stuff got nerfed a little if you compare with old passives, but all races got those nerfs.
4k res is not 12%, it is like 7%, 6%->7% is as minimal as buff goes.0 -
Seraphayel✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭with argonian nerf adjust, what race can someone recommend me for mag pvp? altmer or breton. I don't like either, i would still go with argonian, but i don't want to be hindered by the race
.
Argonian for PvP is still a top pick. And before a race "hinders" you in PvP performance will come first.PS5EUAldmeri Dominion- Khajiit Arcanist -3 -
likecats✭✭✭✭✭LeagueTroll wrote: »Nords are pretty good this patch.
The ult gen is nice, and so are the resistances.
3.9k resists ~= 6% reduction in worst case, 12% reduction in best case.
Most people will get around 9% reduction.
The old passive, provided like 4% effective reduction on most builds, even though it said 6% due to how resistances are calculated.
Therefore, pretty nice buff.
The health stuff got nerfed a little if you compare with old passives, but all races got those nerfs.
4k res is not 12%, it is like 7%, 6%->7% is as minimal as buff goes.
I said best case, it's almost 12%. (after I did calculations it's about 11%)
The new resistances are additive, which means in worst case they are 6%, and in best case almost 12%.
The old ones were multiplicative and were accounted for after resistances applied.
Suppose you have 26400 (40%) resistance.
And you take 100 damage.
Damage with base resistance:
100 * (1 - 0.4) = 60
Damage taken with old passive:
100 * (1 - 0.4) * (1 - 0.06) = 57.6
Effective reduction from old passive:
1- (57.6/60) = 0.04 (4%)
Damage taken with new passive:
Your resistances are now 30400 (46%).
100 * (1 - 0.46) = 54
Effective reduction from new passive:
1 - (54/60) = 0.1 (10%)
So as you can see, that with the old passive if you had 26400 resistances, you would negate only 4% damage, whereas with the new passive you negate 10% of the damage. A x2.5 increase. If you had higher resistances at like 29000 (before nord passive), you would probably get 11% damage reduction.
Much bigger than 6% and 7% as you stated.
For most medium builds, the new passive will provide about x2 effective dmg reduction compared to the old one.
For heavy, it would be about x2.5 increase.Edited by likecats on 25 February 2019 17:022 -
T3hasiangod✭✭✭✭✭LeagueTroll wrote: »Nords are pretty good this patch.
The ult gen is nice, and so are the resistances.
3.9k resists ~= 6% reduction in worst case, 12% reduction in best case.
Most people will get around 9% reduction.
The old passive, provided like 4% effective reduction on most builds, even though it said 6% due to how resistances are calculated.
Therefore, pretty nice buff.
The health stuff got nerfed a little if you compare with old passives, but all races got those nerfs.
4k res is not 12%, it is like 7%, 6%->7% is as minimal as buff goes.
I said best case, it's almost 12%. (after I did calculations it's about 11%)
The new resistances are additive, which means in worst case they are 6%, and in best case almost 12%.
The old ones were multiplicative and were accounted for after resistances applied.
Suppose you have 26400 (40%) resistance.
And you take 100 damage.
Damage with base resistance:
100 * (1 - 0.4) = 60
Damage taken with old passive:
100 * (1 - 0.4) * (1 - 0.06) = 57.6
Effective reduction from old passive:
1- (57.6/60) = 0.04 (4%)
Damage taken with new passive:
Your resistances are now 30400 (46%).
100 * (1 - 0.46) = 54
Effective reduction from new passive:
1 - (54/60) = 0.1 (10%)
So as you can see, that with the old passive if you had 26400 resistances, you would negate only 4% damage, whereas with the new passive you negate 10% of the damage. If you had higher resistances at like 29000, you would probably get 11% damage reduction.
Much bigger than 6% and 7% as you stated.
Your math is correct, but your interpretation is incorrect.
Your total reduction from resistances, like LeagueTroll mentioned, is increased by 3960/660 = 6 percent.
Your relative increase is 10 percent higher, based on your example. Your absolute increase is still only 6 percent.Edited by T3hasiangod on 25 February 2019 17:012 -
Castagere✭✭✭✭✭
✭At least you see changes mine are the same as before the patch. Nothing has changed at all. Just the passive info on the passives in the skills list.0 -
likecats✭✭✭✭✭T3hasiangod wrote: »LeagueTroll wrote: »Nords are pretty good this patch.
The ult gen is nice, and so are the resistances.
3.9k resists ~= 6% reduction in worst case, 12% reduction in best case.
Most people will get around 9% reduction.
The old passive, provided like 4% effective reduction on most builds, even though it said 6% due to how resistances are calculated.
Therefore, pretty nice buff.
The health stuff got nerfed a little if you compare with old passives, but all races got those nerfs.
4k res is not 12%, it is like 7%, 6%->7% is as minimal as buff goes.
I said best case, it's almost 12%. (after I did calculations it's about 11%)
The new resistances are additive, which means in worst case they are 6%, and in best case almost 12%.
The old ones were multiplicative and were accounted for after resistances applied.
Suppose you have 26400 (40%) resistance.
And you take 100 damage.
Damage with base resistance:
100 * (1 - 0.4) = 60
Damage taken with old passive:
100 * (1 - 0.4) * (1 - 0.06) = 57.6
Effective reduction from old passive:
1- (57.6/60) = 0.04 (4%)
Damage taken with new passive:
Your resistances are now 30400 (46%).
100 * (1 - 0.46) = 54
Effective reduction from new passive:
1 - (54/60) = 0.1 (10%)
So as you can see, that with the old passive if you had 26400 resistances, you would negate only 4% damage, whereas with the new passive you negate 10% of the damage. If you had higher resistances at like 29000, you would probably get 11% damage reduction.
Much bigger than 6% and 7% as you stated.
Your math is correct, but your interpretation is incorrect.
Your total reduction from resistances, like LeagueTroll mentioned, is increased by 3960/660 = 6 percent.
Your relative increase is 10 percent higher, based on your example. Your absolute increase is still only 6 percent.
My interpretation is consistent, whereas his was inconsistent. I am comparing relative for both, whereas he was comparing relative for the old one and the absolute for the new one.
Basically he compared the old passives best cast scenario against the new passive's worst case scenario.
Compared to the old passive the new one is much better. (x2 for most builds).Edited by likecats on 25 February 2019 17:090 -
LeagueTroll✭✭✭✭✭T3hasiangod wrote: »LeagueTroll wrote: »Nords are pretty good this patch.
The ult gen is nice, and so are the resistances.
3.9k resists ~= 6% reduction in worst case, 12% reduction in best case.
Most people will get around 9% reduction.
The old passive, provided like 4% effective reduction on most builds, even though it said 6% due to how resistances are calculated.
Therefore, pretty nice buff.
The health stuff got nerfed a little if you compare with old passives, but all races got those nerfs.
4k res is not 12%, it is like 7%, 6%->7% is as minimal as buff goes.
I said best case, it's almost 12%. (after I did calculations it's about 11%)
The new resistances are additive, which means in worst case they are 6%, and in best case almost 12%.
The old ones were multiplicative and were accounted for after resistances applied.
Suppose you have 26400 (40%) resistance.
And you take 100 damage.
Damage with base resistance:
100 * (1 - 0.4) = 60
Damage taken with old passive:
100 * (1 - 0.4) * (1 - 0.06) = 57.6
Effective reduction from old passive:
1- (57.6/60) = 0.04 (4%)
Damage taken with new passive:
Your resistances are now 30400 (46%).
100 * (1 - 0.46) = 54
Effective reduction from new passive:
1 - (54/60) = 0.1 (10%)
So as you can see, that with the old passive if you had 26400 resistances, you would negate only 4% damage, whereas with the new passive you negate 10% of the damage. If you had higher resistances at like 29000, you would probably get 11% damage reduction.
Much bigger than 6% and 7% as you stated.
Your math is correct, but your interpretation is incorrect.
Your total reduction from resistances, like LeagueTroll mentioned, is increased by 3960/660 = 6 percent.
Your relative increase is 10 percent higher, based on your example. Your absolute increase is still only 6 percent.
My interpretation is consistent, whereas his was inconsistent. I am comparing relative for both, whereas he was comparing relative for the old one and the absolute for the new one.
Basically he compared the old passives best cast scenario against the new passive's worst case scenario.
Compared to the old passive the new one is much better. (x2 for most builds).
6 percent is the worst case for the new passive, if you have 0 resistances.
Most heavy builds can easily pull 22k+ resistances. I demonstrated that if you have about 26400 resistance on your build before patch, you would basically be getting x2.5 more out of the same passive after the patch.
it doesn't matter what res you at, let's say with no passive you at x% reduction, under old you get (x+6)%, under new you get (x+7)%, this is assuming not exceeding the cap.0 -
likecats✭✭✭✭✭LeagueTroll wrote: »T3hasiangod wrote: »LeagueTroll wrote: »Nords are pretty good this patch.
The ult gen is nice, and so are the resistances.
3.9k resists ~= 6% reduction in worst case, 12% reduction in best case.
Most people will get around 9% reduction.
The old passive, provided like 4% effective reduction on most builds, even though it said 6% due to how resistances are calculated.
Therefore, pretty nice buff.
The health stuff got nerfed a little if you compare with old passives, but all races got those nerfs.
4k res is not 12%, it is like 7%, 6%->7% is as minimal as buff goes.
I said best case, it's almost 12%. (after I did calculations it's about 11%)
The new resistances are additive, which means in worst case they are 6%, and in best case almost 12%.
The old ones were multiplicative and were accounted for after resistances applied.
Suppose you have 26400 (40%) resistance.
And you take 100 damage.
Damage with base resistance:
100 * (1 - 0.4) = 60
Damage taken with old passive:
100 * (1 - 0.4) * (1 - 0.06) = 57.6
Effective reduction from old passive:
1- (57.6/60) = 0.04 (4%)
Damage taken with new passive:
Your resistances are now 30400 (46%).
100 * (1 - 0.46) = 54
Effective reduction from new passive:
1 - (54/60) = 0.1 (10%)
So as you can see, that with the old passive if you had 26400 resistances, you would negate only 4% damage, whereas with the new passive you negate 10% of the damage. If you had higher resistances at like 29000, you would probably get 11% damage reduction.
Much bigger than 6% and 7% as you stated.
Your math is correct, but your interpretation is incorrect.
Your total reduction from resistances, like LeagueTroll mentioned, is increased by 3960/660 = 6 percent.
Your relative increase is 10 percent higher, based on your example. Your absolute increase is still only 6 percent.
My interpretation is consistent, whereas his was inconsistent. I am comparing relative for both, whereas he was comparing relative for the old one and the absolute for the new one.
Basically he compared the old passives best cast scenario against the new passive's worst case scenario.
Compared to the old passive the new one is much better. (x2 for most builds).
6 percent is the worst case for the new passive, if you have 0 resistances.
Most heavy builds can easily pull 22k+ resistances. I demonstrated that if you have about 26400 resistance on your build before patch, you would basically be getting x2.5 more out of the same passive after the patch.
it doesn't matter what res you at, let's say with no passive you at x% reduction, under old you get (x+6)%, under new you get (x+7)%, this is assuming not exceeding the cap.
No, the old one was multiplicative and the new one is additive. That was the entire point I illustrated in the previous post.
You should see how resistances are actually calculated before posting.
In practical terms, if your toon has 26k resistances before the patch, your passive basically got buffed x2.5 after the patch.
Edited by likecats on 25 February 2019 17:183 -
Steelshiv✭✭✭✭with argonian nerf adjust, what race can someone recommend me for mag pvp? altmer or breton. I don't like either, i would still go with argonian, but i don't want to be hindered by the race
.
Id suggest either Breton or Altmer depending on how you play.
Breton is good for longer fights due to the passive mag Regen bonus, decrease in skill cost, and mag resistance which is doubled if you are inflicted with a status effect.
Altmer is slightly better for quick burst dps due to the spell damage increase; however, for longer fights you'll have to weave heavy attacks (while heavy attacking you get a reduction to damage taken) with class skills more to Regen Stamina or Magicka.
Personally, I'm going to stay a magsorc altmer for a week to see how it plays. I'm inclined to switch to Breton due to the resistances, passive mag regen, and reduction in mag ability cost; but I do weave heavy attacks a lot to Regen my resources as an Altmer so I'm going to see how that works out.
The suggestions are based only on racials though and don't take into account gear and enchantments. Hope this helps!
Addendum: if you really like being argonian then stick with it! Some of the racial passives are actually universally useful and who knows what tweaks ZoS will make in the next month.Edited by Steelshiv on 25 February 2019 17:210 -
LeagueTroll✭✭✭✭✭LeagueTroll wrote: »T3hasiangod wrote: »LeagueTroll wrote: »Nords are pretty good this patch.
The ult gen is nice, and so are the resistances.
3.9k resists ~= 6% reduction in worst case, 12% reduction in best case.
Most people will get around 9% reduction.
The old passive, provided like 4% effective reduction on most builds, even though it said 6% due to how resistances are calculated.
Therefore, pretty nice buff.
The health stuff got nerfed a little if you compare with old passives, but all races got those nerfs.
4k res is not 12%, it is like 7%, 6%->7% is as minimal as buff goes.
I said best case, it's almost 12%. (after I did calculations it's about 11%)
The new resistances are additive, which means in worst case they are 6%, and in best case almost 12%.
The old ones were multiplicative and were accounted for after resistances applied.
Suppose you have 26400 (40%) resistance.
And you take 100 damage.
Damage with base resistance:
100 * (1 - 0.4) = 60
Damage taken with old passive:
100 * (1 - 0.4) * (1 - 0.06) = 57.6
Effective reduction from old passive:
1- (57.6/60) = 0.04 (4%)
Damage taken with new passive:
Your resistances are now 30400 (46%).
100 * (1 - 0.46) = 54
Effective reduction from new passive:
1 - (54/60) = 0.1 (10%)
So as you can see, that with the old passive if you had 26400 resistances, you would negate only 4% damage, whereas with the new passive you negate 10% of the damage. If you had higher resistances at like 29000, you would probably get 11% damage reduction.
Much bigger than 6% and 7% as you stated.
Your math is correct, but your interpretation is incorrect.
Your total reduction from resistances, like LeagueTroll mentioned, is increased by 3960/660 = 6 percent.
Your relative increase is 10 percent higher, based on your example. Your absolute increase is still only 6 percent.
My interpretation is consistent, whereas his was inconsistent. I am comparing relative for both, whereas he was comparing relative for the old one and the absolute for the new one.
Basically he compared the old passives best cast scenario against the new passive's worst case scenario.
Compared to the old passive the new one is much better. (x2 for most builds).
6 percent is the worst case for the new passive, if you have 0 resistances.
Most heavy builds can easily pull 22k+ resistances. I demonstrated that if you have about 26400 resistance on your build before patch, you would basically be getting x2.5 more out of the same passive after the patch.
it doesn't matter what res you at, let's say with no passive you at x% reduction, under old you get (x+6)%, under new you get (x+7)%, this is assuming not exceeding the cap.
No, the old one was multiplicative and the new one is additive. That was the entire point I illustrated in the previous post.
You should see how resistances are actually calculated before posting.
In practical terms, if your toon has 26k resistances before the patch, your passive basically got buffed x2.5 after the patch.
oh w8, the old one was that bad?
0 -
likecats✭✭✭✭✭LeagueTroll wrote: »LeagueTroll wrote: »T3hasiangod wrote: »LeagueTroll wrote: »Nords are pretty good this patch.
The ult gen is nice, and so are the resistances.
3.9k resists ~= 6% reduction in worst case, 12% reduction in best case.
Most people will get around 9% reduction.
The old passive, provided like 4% effective reduction on most builds, even though it said 6% due to how resistances are calculated.
Therefore, pretty nice buff.
The health stuff got nerfed a little if you compare with old passives, but all races got those nerfs.
4k res is not 12%, it is like 7%, 6%->7% is as minimal as buff goes.
I said best case, it's almost 12%. (after I did calculations it's about 11%)
The new resistances are additive, which means in worst case they are 6%, and in best case almost 12%.
The old ones were multiplicative and were accounted for after resistances applied.
Suppose you have 26400 (40%) resistance.
And you take 100 damage.
Damage with base resistance:
100 * (1 - 0.4) = 60
Damage taken with old passive:
100 * (1 - 0.4) * (1 - 0.06) = 57.6
Effective reduction from old passive:
1- (57.6/60) = 0.04 (4%)
Damage taken with new passive:
Your resistances are now 30400 (46%).
100 * (1 - 0.46) = 54
Effective reduction from new passive:
1 - (54/60) = 0.1 (10%)
So as you can see, that with the old passive if you had 26400 resistances, you would negate only 4% damage, whereas with the new passive you negate 10% of the damage. If you had higher resistances at like 29000, you would probably get 11% damage reduction.
Much bigger than 6% and 7% as you stated.
Your math is correct, but your interpretation is incorrect.
Your total reduction from resistances, like LeagueTroll mentioned, is increased by 3960/660 = 6 percent.
Your relative increase is 10 percent higher, based on your example. Your absolute increase is still only 6 percent.
My interpretation is consistent, whereas his was inconsistent. I am comparing relative for both, whereas he was comparing relative for the old one and the absolute for the new one.
Basically he compared the old passives best cast scenario against the new passive's worst case scenario.
Compared to the old passive the new one is much better. (x2 for most builds).
6 percent is the worst case for the new passive, if you have 0 resistances.
Most heavy builds can easily pull 22k+ resistances. I demonstrated that if you have about 26400 resistance on your build before patch, you would basically be getting x2.5 more out of the same passive after the patch.
it doesn't matter what res you at, let's say with no passive you at x% reduction, under old you get (x+6)%, under new you get (x+7)%, this is assuming not exceeding the cap.
No, the old one was multiplicative and the new one is additive. That was the entire point I illustrated in the previous post.
You should see how resistances are actually calculated before posting.
In practical terms, if your toon has 26k resistances before the patch, your passive basically got buffed x2.5 after the patch.
oh w8, the old one was that bad?
It is no secret that the old nord was considered one of the worst races.
The new nord is said to be best for PVE tanking, and is also very competitive for PVP.0 -
LiquidPony✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭LeagueTroll wrote: »1.khajit crit dmg instead of crit chance is a huge nerf, crit chance has a lot synergy to things like crit surge, templar or nightblade passives. And i think crit dmg stack linearly instead of multiplicative since homestead.
2. nord is still crap, really zos
It was not a "huge nerf" for Khajiit. It is a minor nerf for some builds and a minor buff for others. That aside, Khajiit are buffed across the board from what we had in Wolfhunter because you also got +max health/stam/magicka and regen.
Critical damage has always stacked additively. The only exception was Major Force, which used to be 30% multiplicative on top of your other crit damage buffs, but the rest of the crit damage buffs were additive.0 -
Sergykid✭✭✭✭✭
✭
[...]with argonian nerf adjust, what race can someone recommend me for mag pvp? altmer or breton. I don't like either, i would still go with argonian, but i don't want to be hindered by the race
.
Addendum: if you really like being argonian then stick with it! Some of the racial passives are actually universally useful and who knows what tweaks ZoS will make in the next month.
i want to play argonian because i like it more, i hate elves. But that's just cosmetic reasons. I spent more than 2 hours only analyzing and comparing the races, and can't decide.
that 1k hp can be easily compensated with a glyph. The 6% healing done is compensated by altmer's spell damage which also boosts healing. The stats boost that potions provide is roughly equal to 100 recovery in each stat. And disease resistance ... yea it's good but giving up half spell damage from altmer can use diseased resistance glyph on a jewel, which disease damage is also rare.
also altmer has that 5% defense while channeling, and magplar has 3 channeling spells (counting the SA ult)-PC EU- / battlegrounds on my youtube0
