You really had to create a whole new thread for this after posting the same thing in the discussion thread with the official reply explaining that this is exactly intended?

Reported for spamming.

stay technical if you are capable. move your flame to the flaming thread.

NerfEverything wrote: »

You really had to create a whole new thread for this after posting the same thing in the discussion thread with the official reply explaining that this is exactly intended?

Reported for spamming.

Yes, because its OBVIOUS this spell is not working correctly yet ZoS is telling us it is. But in the overall picture of things it probably doesnt matter because most the time I cast it in pvp im so LAGGED OUT my position doesnt even change, or changes 5 seconds later.

SilverWF wrote: »

crislevin wrote: »

ZOS, come in and tell me this is "intended".

They are already said this.

All cost increasers and decreasers calculated as a percents from base value

So, let the base value = X
Cost increaser I = X*0.5 or 50%
Cost decreaser 1 D1 = X*0.2 or 20%
Cost decreaser 2 D2 = X*0.1 or 10%

Calculate all:
Final cost equals to Y = X + I - D1 - D2
or
Y = X + X*0.5 - X*0.2 - X*0.1
or
Y = X * (1 + 0.5 - 0.2 - 0.1)
or
Y = X * 1.2

If X = 380, then Y = 380*1.2 = 456

Agree, this is [snip], but...

yeah, it seems they completely forgot the "percentage" cost reduction thing from all the tooltips of the passives.

rather, they took a shortcut to just use the value previously calculated when the magicka cost was not increased.

this bug basically makes tooltip descriptions of cost reduction passives completely false.

and I see after a day, still no ZoS rep show up to go over math with us. I wonder why?

[Moderator Edit: Edited quote from moderated post.]

@crislevin‌

It's not a bug, it's not a shortcut, you just still aren't fully understanding how it works.

All % cost reductions/increases are netted and applied at once.

For example, lets say you have -21% from light armour, -5% from Unholy Knowledge, -10% from Expert Mage, -3% from seducer, -8% from Wormcult.

The total cost reduction/increase is netted to be:
100%-21%-5%-10%-3%-8% = 53%
and your bolt escape (which is actually base cost 392, not 358) would end up costing you 208.

The second time you cast it your total cost reduction/increase is netted to be:
100%-21%-5%-10%-3%-8%+50% = 103%
and your bolt escape will cost 404.

*IF* they applied the cost modifiers mutliplicatively then your total cost reduction for the first would have been:
.79*.95*.9*.97*.92 = 60%
and your bolt escape would cost 235 magicka

the second time you cast it the cost would be:
.79*.95*.9*.97*.92*1.5= 90%
and your bolt escape would cost 353


TL;DR - The +50% modifier to the BASE cost is applied in *EXACTLY THE SAME WAY* as any of your -X% modifers to the BASE cost are.

It's not wrong, it's not a shortcut, it's not bad math, it's just how the game works and how it works in every other way, examples:

You're a Vampire and take +50% damage from Fire Spells, you cast Annulment that reduces all Spell Damage by 50%. Net modifier is 100%+50%-50% = 100%, NOT 100% *1.5*0.5 = 75%

You're a Nightblade and you activate Siphoning Strikes losing 22% Weapon Damage, you activate momentum gaining +10% Weapon Damage. Net modifier is 100%-22%+10% = 88%, NOT 100% *0.78*1.1 = 86%

You have 25% Mitigation from Spell resistance, you have 25% mitigation from Shock Resistance. Net modifier to Shock Spells is 100%-25%-25% = 50%, NOT 100%*.75*.75=56%

You have 10% more damage from Cycle of Life Passive, 11% more damage from Combat Prayer, in your own battle standard +20% damage and an opponents Nova -30% damage. Net modifer to damage dealt is 100%+10%+11%+20%-30% = 111%, NOT 100%*1.1*1.11*1.2*0.7=103%

Do you see how it is done? It's uniform, across the board if multiple modifiers are applied to a value in the same step they apply all static modifers (like -20 Magicka Cost Rings), then they net all % modifers (like -3% Magicka Cost from Seducer) into 1 total modifier and apply that net modifer .

I know you're upset about the changes to BE and I know many people disagree with the amount of the increase but the system *is* applying the 50% increase correctly. If you don't like the fact it's 50% then that's a whole different kettle of fish.

Mystborn wrote: »

@crislevin‌

It's not a bug, it's not a shortcut, you just still aren't fully understanding how it works.

All % cost reductions/increases are netted and applied at once.

For example, lets say you have -21% from light armour, -5% from Unholy Knowledge, -10% from Expert Mage, -3% from seducer, -8% from Wormcult.

The total cost reduction/increase is netted to be:
100%-21%-5%-10%-3%-8% = 53%
and your bolt escape (which is actually base cost 392, not 358) would end up costing you 208.

The second time you cast it your total cost reduction/increase is netted to be:
100%-21%-5%-10%-3%-8%+50% = 103%
and your bolt escape will cost 404.

*IF* they applied the cost modifiers mutliplicatively then your total cost reduction for the first would have been:
.79*.95*.9*.97*.92 = 60%
and your bolt escape would cost 235 magicka

the second time you cast it the cost would be:
.79*.95*.9*.97*.92*1.5= 90%
and your bolt escape would cost 353


TL;DR - The +50% modifier to the BASE cost is applied in *EXACTLY THE SAME WAY* as any of your -X% modifers to the BASE cost are.

It's not wrong, it's not a shortcut, it's not bad math, it's just how the game works and how it works in every other way, examples:

You're a Vampire and take +50% damage from Fire Spells, you cast Annulment that reduces all Spell Damage by 50%. Net modifier is 100%+50%-50% = 100%, NOT 100% *1.5*0.5 = 75%

You're a Nightblade and you activate Siphoning Strikes losing 22% Weapon Damage, you activate momentum gaining +10% Weapon Damage. Net modifier is 100%-22%+10% = 88%, NOT 100% *0.78*1.1 = 86%

You have 25% Mitigation from Spell resistance, you have 25% mitigation from Shock Resistance. Net modifier to Shock Spells is 100%-25%-25% = 50%, NOT 100%*.75*.75=56%

You have 10% more damage from Cycle of Life Passive, 11% more damage from Combat Prayer, in your own battle standard +20% damage and an opponents Nova -30% damage. Net modifer to damage dealt is 100%+10%+11%+20%-30% = 111%, NOT 100%*1.1*1.11*1.2*0.7=103%

Do you see how it is done? It's uniform, across the board if multiple modifiers are applied to a value in the same step they apply all static modifers (like -20 Magicka Cost Rings), then they net all % modifers (like -3% Magicka Cost from Seducer) into 1 total modifier and apply that net modifer .

I know you're upset about the changes to BE and I know many people disagree with the amount of the increase but the system *is* applying the 50% increase correctly. If you don't like the fact it's 50% then that's a whole different kettle of fish.

Well done. However.. Since this thread will be short lived.. He will yet again open a new one regarding BE, but probably gap closers this time.

crislevin wrote: »

Liquid_Time wrote: »

Mystborn wrote: »

@crislevin‌

It's not a bug, it's not a shortcut, you just still aren't fully understanding how it works.

All % cost reductions/increases are netted and applied at once.

For example, lets say you have -21% from light armour, -5% from Unholy Knowledge, -10% from Expert Mage, -3% from seducer, -8% from Wormcult.

The total cost reduction/increase is netted to be:
100%-21%-5%-10%-3%-8% = 53%
and your bolt escape (which is actually base cost 392, not 358) would end up costing you 208.

The second time you cast it your total cost reduction/increase is netted to be:
100%-21%-5%-10%-3%-8%+50% = 103%
and your bolt escape will cost 404.

*IF* they applied the cost modifiers mutliplicatively then your total cost reduction for the first would have been:
.79*.95*.9*.97*.92 = 60%
and your bolt escape would cost 235 magicka

the second time you cast it the cost would be:
.79*.95*.9*.97*.92*1.5= 90%
and your bolt escape would cost 353


TL;DR - The +50% modifier to the BASE cost is applied in *EXACTLY THE SAME WAY* as any of your -X% modifers to the BASE cost are.

It's not wrong, it's not a shortcut, it's not bad math, it's just how the game works and how it works in every other way, examples:

You're a Vampire and take +50% damage from Fire Spells, you cast Annulment that reduces all Spell Damage by 50%. Net modifier is 100%+50%-50% = 100%, NOT 100% *1.5*0.5 = 75%

You're a Nightblade and you activate Siphoning Strikes losing 22% Weapon Damage, you activate momentum gaining +10% Weapon Damage. Net modifier is 100%-22%+10% = 88%, NOT 100% *0.78*1.1 = 86%

You have 25% Mitigation from Spell resistance, you have 25% mitigation from Shock Resistance. Net modifier to Shock Spells is 100%-25%-25% = 50%, NOT 100%*.75*.75=56%

You have 10% more damage from Cycle of Life Passive, 11% more damage from Combat Prayer, in your own battle standard +20% damage and an opponents Nova -30% damage. Net modifer to damage dealt is 100%+10%+11%+20%-30% = 111%, NOT 100%*1.1*1.11*1.2*0.7=103%

Do you see how it is done? It's uniform, across the board if multiple modifiers are applied to a value in the same step they apply all static modifers (like -20 Magicka Cost Rings), then they net all % modifers (like -3% Magicka Cost from Seducer) into 1 total modifier and apply that net modifer .

I know you're upset about the changes to BE and I know many people disagree with the amount of the increase but the system *is* applying the 50% increase correctly. If you don't like the fact it's 50% then that's a whole different kettle of fish.

Well done. However.. Since this thread will be short lived.. He will yet again open a new one regarding BE, but probably gap closers this time.

you are really something, if you are not capable of putting out technical response, please, stay away, I am not interested in your name-calling crap.

My intentions are to agree with the guy I quoted which provided you your "technical" response. There is nothing further to add other then that I agree with what he presented.

If what I said regarding your future intentions bothered you, then I will avoid saying such things later in this discussion as well.

Regarding my name-calling? Nope. Not sure I called anyone anything that would fall into that category.

I am happy to participate further in your discussion and I have no problem with meeting your request of keeping this conversation "technical". However I do ask what are the type of "technical" responses you are looking for?

Can you please answer that, so I can add value to this discussion and at the same time meet your weird demands?

Thanks-

Grendel3232 wrote: »

Any bonuses you have that grant a reduction to Magicka cost--such as Evocation--also reduce the 50% increase to Bolt Escape.

I think this wording might be what is causing confusion. I am not a math person so I'm going to make a lame example but hopefully it will clarify the problem.

When I first read this it sounded like the second BE got a double reduction. Let's say your BE costs 150 (I'm totally making up these numbers) and you have a reduction of 20. The first time you cast it the spell costs 130 then the second time it costs 150-20 + 75-20 so you actually got a minus 40 for the second casting.

I don't think this is what they had in mind. I think they were just saying the first time is cost minus reduction and the second time is cost plus increase minus reduction.

If everyone already knows this then sorry. I'm pretty new to this stuff.

this is what Mystborn said in his equations, we do all understand that. I am just hoping ZoS rep can come here and explain what he/she means by that quote you have there.

btw, its not really "double reduction", the jewels reduction is one time deal, because it says "reduce cost by xxx".

the problem I have is with passive reduction, since it supposedly reduce cost by "yyy%". Obviously, what you and Mystborn explained is that this yyy% is calculated using the base cost of magicka BEFORE 50% increase, this is not consistent with what the rep said, and you quoted.

wait, let me double check that

EDIT:

now I found another problem.

I have two rings with with -16 and -15 RSC, when I put them on, BE cost 242 for initial cast. when I take them off, BE costs 263 for initial cast.

Why are they not reducing cost by 31?

Mystborn wrote: »

crislevin wrote: »

wait, let me double check that

Double check what...

can you answer the question above?

Sure, so somehow you have 33% cost reduction (which doesn't make sense unless you were only wearing 6/7 light armour). I assume you get 5% from unholy knowledge and 10% from expert mage then 18% from 6/7 light armour I guess.

With no rings:
BE1 costs 392 * 67% = 263
BE2 costs 392 * 117% = 459 (196 increase)

With -31 SCR on rings:
BE1 costs (392-31) * 67% = 361 * 67% = 242
BE2 costs (392-31) * 117% = 361 * 117% = 422 (180 increase)

Make sense?

Well you see how without the rings your second cast of BE cost you 196 more?(+50% of the base cost)

Then with the -31 rings your second cast only cost you 180 more? that's because the it costs you 50% more then (Base cost -31), so the increase is 50% of Base Cost LESS 50% of 31 (16).

I know not all sorcs are 7/7 light, but they should be (j/k)

what are you 5/7 + seducer? that makes more sense than 6/7 I suppose!

Mystborn wrote: »

Well you see how without the rings your second cast of BE cost you 196 more?(+50% of the base cost)

Then with the -31 rings your second cast only cost you 180 more? that's because the it costs you 50% more then (Base cost -31), so the increase is 50% of Base Cost LESS 50% of 31 (16).

I know not all sorcs are 7/7 light, but they should be (j/k)

what are you 5/7 + seducer? that makes more sense than 6/7 I suppose!

im only v6, not yet at the stage of priming equipment yet

anyway, see my above Q, so Jewelry RSC is contributing to reduction of the 50% increase. But how about passives as rep stated?

Mystborn wrote: »

Like I said, it's not a super clear and explicit response. It's certainly not as in depth as the half dozen replies I've made filled with math trying to explain how it works. Due to it's ambiguity it could be interpreted multiple ways - one way would be to say that the -21% reduction you get from evocation will reduce the 50% increase in cost from +50% to +29% (50-21=29). I know how you read it and I don't blame you or anyone for expecting it to work the way you did and then being upset when it didn't. But I feel like right now you understand how the whole cost reduction thing works and you see that it's working consistently with the way their game works as a whole so there doesn't seem to be anything gained from bashing the Mod who made that post. What do you want them to say? "Sorry I should have been clearer"? Jess and Gina and all the community management people have a very difficult job being the liasons between us, the community, and the devs while working within the confines and restrictions that management allows them. I think they do a great job and raking them over the coals when they are trying to help because they didn't answer as explicitly as they could just seems not cool.

Well said