VR14 Item sets

p_tsakirisb16_ESO

Hi,

Does anyone has compiled a list of the VR14 sets that drop at upper Craglorn or any other changes, like VR14 version of Soulshine etc?

Thnx.

Stratti

How do you get to v14 . I'm at 3 after the soul shriven crap

JD2013

Stratti wrote: »

How do you get to v14 . I'm at 3 after the soul shriven crap

You've got a long road ahead of you . . .

LonePirate

Stratti wrote: »

How do you get to v14 . I'm at 3 after the soul shriven crap

On the character creation screen, there is a box in the upper left corner. Open it and choose Craglorn. When your character is created and appears in Tamriel, it will be VR14 with the usual goodies waiting to make your testing a little easier.

p_tsakirisb16_ESO

Guys, stay on topic please.

Kaliki

Someone posted this in another thread.

The destruction mastery set looks like the developers don't know that destro staff abilities scale off of weapon damage. Why spell damage on that set? It might be nice for certain class abilities, but hey, its called destruction mastery.

And the healing necklace as well - spell damage. So only templars will benefit from it, which is fine for me.

It really looks as if the item designers think like healing and staff damage = spell damage. But in fact both would benefit more from weapon damage. Or did they change that?

okraus

No, they did not change that. The problem is that item design in this game is a total mess at the moment. Just to mention one of my favorites: Why putting the "training" trait on VR12 armor set pieces? I do not know about you guys but when i reached VR12 i had all3 armor types at level 50 and this trait is just a complete waste!
If item designers are not able to comprehend the easiest game mechanics how can you expect them to understand complex *cough* stuff like ability scaling from spell and weapon damage.
Btw. i would recommend the ESO unraveled series on youtube to the ZOS employes. Might learn one or another thing about their own game ...

Attorneyatlawl

Kaliki wrote: »

[*img]http://i.imgur.com/Ei79Yl1.jpg[/img]

Someone posted this in another thread.

The destruction mastery set looks like the developers don't know that destro staff abilities scale off of weapon damage. Why spell damage on that set? It might be nice for certain class abilities, but hey, its called destruction mastery.

And the healing necklace as well - spell damage. So only templars will benefit from it, which is fine for me.

It really looks as if the item designers think like healing and staff damage = spell damage. But in fact both would benefit more from weapon damage. Or did they change that?

While I agree that it would, from a player standpoint, be weapon damage to benefit the named skill line more... the truth is they probably want it from a balance perspective to not be a "perfect, end-all be-all" set and thus added a spell damage bonus in one of the slots instead to provide a class skill benefit (which all use magicka still) but not make it too good.

p_tsakirisb16_ESO

Thanks

I see their persistence also adding 175 spell & armour bonuses, which as good as adding 0. Since any Magicka build user who worth his salt, has already enough Spell & Armour penetration to negate more than 3-4000 of those resists.

Attorneyatlawl

p_tsakirisb16_ESO wrote: »

Thanks

I see their persistence also adding 175 spell & armour bonuses, which as good as adding 0. Since any Magicka build user who worth his salt, has already enough Spell & Armour penetration to negate more than 3-4000 of those resists.

That's not how spell penetration or armor penetration work... they are percentages of the target's rating . No, the addons taking arbitrary "focus" numbers do not actually indicate anything, nor is it done additively like impen is. Read the wording, do some testing, and learn the facts .

DuelWieldingCheesyPoofs

Same old s...

aco5712

did they serous just buff destro staff with these sets? After impulse is ruining the game, they buff it even more... Brilliant move...

Xsorus

Attorneyatlawl wrote: »

p_tsakirisb16_ESO wrote: »

Thanks

I see their persistence also adding 175 spell & armour bonuses, which as good as adding 0. Since any Magicka build user who worth his salt, has already enough Spell & Armour penetration to negate more than 3-4000 of those resists.

That's not how spell penetration or armor penetration work... they are percentages of the target's rating . No, the addons taking arbitrary "focus" numbers do not actually indicate anything, nor is it done additively like impen is. Read the wording, do some testing, and learn the facts .

http://tamrielfoundry.com/topic/spell-penetration-testing-in-pvp-first-results/

Pseudonym

Archers Mind is delicious. Wonder if I could combine that with Hawk Eye?

Attorneyatlawl

xsorusb14_ESO wrote: »

Attorneyatlawl wrote: »

p_tsakirisb16_ESO wrote: »

Thanks

I see their persistence also adding 175 spell & armour bonuses, which as good as adding 0. Since any Magicka build user who worth his salt, has already enough Spell & Armour penetration to negate more than 3-4000 of those resists.

That's not how spell penetration or armor penetration work... they are percentages of the target's rating . No, the addons taking arbitrary "focus" numbers do not actually indicate anything, nor is it done additively like impen is. Read the wording, do some testing, and learn the facts .

http://tamrielfoundry.com/topic/spell-penetration-testing-in-pvp-first-results/

I knew someone would trot that out rather than do their own tests as I have , however it's not my job to prove it to you when I already have for myself and friends. Assuming you're an AD or EP player, please carry on and ignore the rest of this post.

In short, it's flawed testing with one ability and no varied large amount of spell resist (both values are very close) and numbers that have errors (anomalies inside of the scaling that are opposite of what they should be) either due to author miscompiling info (throwing the entire test into question) or a bug. Additionally he only tested one magic damage type, did not try any significantly lower or higher spell resistance values, nor individual resistance types. Anyone should know better than to take that at any real value when it's so horribly unscientific.

EDIT 9am: Ah, gotta love the haters of this thing called the "scientific method" that are "lol" flagging this post.

reften

Pseudonym wrote: »

Archers Mind is delicious. Wonder if I could combine that with Hawk Eye?

If it's too good to be true...it probably is.

i.e. Night's Silence and Dark Stalker.

Expect a nerf

Pixysticks

Attorneyatlawl wrote: »

xsorusb14_ESO wrote: »

Attorneyatlawl wrote: »

p_tsakirisb16_ESO wrote: »

Thanks

I see their persistence also adding 175 spell & armour bonuses, which as good as adding 0. Since any Magicka build user who worth his salt, has already enough Spell & Armour penetration to negate more than 3-4000 of those resists.

That's not how spell penetration or armor penetration work... they are percentages of the target's rating . No, the addons taking arbitrary "focus" numbers do not actually indicate anything, nor is it done additively like impen is. Read the wording, do some testing, and learn the facts .

http://tamrielfoundry.com/topic/spell-penetration-testing-in-pvp-first-results/

I knew someone would trot that out rather than do their own tests as I have , however it's not my job to prove it to you when I already have for myself and friends. Assuming you're an AD or EP player, please carry on and ignore the rest of this post.

In short, it's flawed testing with one ability and no varied large amount of spell resist (both values are very close) and numbers that have errors (anomalies inside of the scaling that are opposite of what they should be) either due to author miscompiling info (throwing the entire test into question) or a bug. Additionally he only tested one magic damage type, did not try any significantly lower or higher spell resistance values, nor individual resistance types. Anyone should know better than to take that at any real value when it's so horribly unscientific.

EDIT 9am: Ah, gotta love the haters of this thing called the "scientific method" that are "lol" flagging this post.

Tested yesterday on live and PTS, still erroneously ignoring 100% spell resist, not fixed yet

Edit: And to clarify I tested magic damage, shock, and fire, at 500, 1000, 1800, and 2200 spell resist. All identical results; instead of fixing this bug that ignored 100% spell resistance, they nerfed light armor from 42% base spell penetration to 28%, which is the equivalent of duct taping a leaky roof to stop people from complaining.

Kego

Pseudonym wrote: »

Archers Mind is delicious. Wonder if I could combine that with Hawk Eye?

Even more deadlier if it stacks with Shadow Mundus and Hemorrhage of Assassins passives from Nightblade, that would make a crit. DMG increase of 30% out of stealth and 20% in combat.

Xsorus

Pixysticks wrote: »

Attorneyatlawl wrote: »

xsorusb14_ESO wrote: »

Attorneyatlawl wrote: »

p_tsakirisb16_ESO wrote: »

Thanks

I see their persistence also adding 175 spell & armour bonuses, which as good as adding 0. Since any Magicka build user who worth his salt, has already enough Spell & Armour penetration to negate more than 3-4000 of those resists.

That's not how spell penetration or armor penetration work... they are percentages of the target's rating . No, the addons taking arbitrary "focus" numbers do not actually indicate anything, nor is it done additively like impen is. Read the wording, do some testing, and learn the facts .

http://tamrielfoundry.com/topic/spell-penetration-testing-in-pvp-first-results/

I knew someone would trot that out rather than do their own tests as I have , however it's not my job to prove it to you when I already have for myself and friends. Assuming you're an AD or EP player, please carry on and ignore the rest of this post.

In short, it's flawed testing with one ability and no varied large amount of spell resist (both values are very close) and numbers that have errors (anomalies inside of the scaling that are opposite of what they should be) either due to author miscompiling info (throwing the entire test into question) or a bug. Additionally he only tested one magic damage type, did not try any significantly lower or higher spell resistance values, nor individual resistance types. Anyone should know better than to take that at any real value when it's so horribly unscientific.

EDIT 9am: Ah, gotta love the haters of this thing called the "scientific method" that are "lol" flagging this post.

Tested yesterday on live and PTS, still erroneously ignoring 100% spell resist, not fixed yet

Edit: And to clarify I tested magic damage, shock, and fire, at 500, 1000, 1800, and 2200 spell resist. All identical results; instead of fixing this bug that ignored 100% spell resistance, they nerfed light armor from 42% base spell penetration to 28%, which is the equivalent of duct taping a leaky roof to stop people from complaining.

2 people getting 2 different results. Wonder who is right heh

Pixysticks

xsorusb14_ESO wrote: »

Pixysticks wrote: »

Attorneyatlawl wrote: »

xsorusb14_ESO wrote: »

Attorneyatlawl wrote: »

p_tsakirisb16_ESO wrote: »

Thanks

I see their persistence also adding 175 spell & armour bonuses, which as good as adding 0. Since any Magicka build user who worth his salt, has already enough Spell & Armour penetration to negate more than 3-4000 of those resists.

That's not how spell penetration or armor penetration work... they are percentages of the target's rating . No, the addons taking arbitrary "focus" numbers do not actually indicate anything, nor is it done additively like impen is. Read the wording, do some testing, and learn the facts .

http://tamrielfoundry.com/topic/spell-penetration-testing-in-pvp-first-results/

I knew someone would trot that out rather than do their own tests as I have , however it's not my job to prove it to you when I already have for myself and friends. Assuming you're an AD or EP player, please carry on and ignore the rest of this post.

In short, it's flawed testing with one ability and no varied large amount of spell resist (both values are very close) and numbers that have errors (anomalies inside of the scaling that are opposite of what they should be) either due to author miscompiling info (throwing the entire test into question) or a bug. Additionally he only tested one magic damage type, did not try any significantly lower or higher spell resistance values, nor individual resistance types. Anyone should know better than to take that at any real value when it's so horribly unscientific.

EDIT 9am: Ah, gotta love the haters of this thing called the "scientific method" that are "lol" flagging this post.

Tested yesterday on live and PTS, still erroneously ignoring 100% spell resist, not fixed yet

Edit: And to clarify I tested magic damage, shock, and fire, at 500, 1000, 1800, and 2200 spell resist. All identical results; instead of fixing this bug that ignored 100% spell resistance, they nerfed light armor from 42% base spell penetration to 28%, which is the equivalent of duct taping a leaky roof to stop people from complaining.

2 people getting 2 different results. Wonder who is right heh

Nah. There's a lot of people that got the same results. The guy who commented didn't even do any testing, he was just being argumentative with the one guy who had posted his findings. I just commented in that I tested this myself the other day on both servers, and it is 100% ignoring resistance still.

kkampaseb17_ESO

So much for the addition of the new trait if people can get 100% spell penetration just because they use Sharpened on their weapon.

Attorneyatlawl

Pixysticks wrote: »

xsorusb14_ESO wrote: »

Pixysticks wrote: »

Attorneyatlawl wrote: »

xsorusb14_ESO wrote: »

Attorneyatlawl wrote: »

p_tsakirisb16_ESO wrote: »

Thanks

I see their persistence also adding 175 spell & armour bonuses, which as good as adding 0. Since any Magicka build user who worth his salt, has already enough Spell & Armour penetration to negate more than 3-4000 of those resists.

That's not how spell penetration or armor penetration work... they are percentages of the target's rating . No, the addons taking arbitrary "focus" numbers do not actually indicate anything, nor is it done additively like impen is. Read the wording, do some testing, and learn the facts .

http://tamrielfoundry.com/topic/spell-penetration-testing-in-pvp-first-results/

I knew someone would trot that out rather than do their own tests as I have , however it's not my job to prove it to you when I already have for myself and friends. Assuming you're an AD or EP player, please carry on and ignore the rest of this post.

In short, it's flawed testing with one ability and no varied large amount of spell resist (both values are very close) and numbers that have errors (anomalies inside of the scaling that are opposite of what they should be) either due to author miscompiling info (throwing the entire test into question) or a bug. Additionally he only tested one magic damage type, did not try any significantly lower or higher spell resistance values, nor individual resistance types. Anyone should know better than to take that at any real value when it's so horribly unscientific.

EDIT 9am: Ah, gotta love the haters of this thing called the "scientific method" that are "lol" flagging this post.

Tested yesterday on live and PTS, still erroneously ignoring 100% spell resist, not fixed yet

Edit: And to clarify I tested magic damage, shock, and fire, at 500, 1000, 1800, and 2200 spell resist. All identical results; instead of fixing this bug that ignored 100% spell resistance, they nerfed light armor from 42% base spell penetration to 28%, which is the equivalent of duct taping a leaky roof to stop people from complaining.

2 people getting 2 different results. Wonder who is right heh

Nah. There's a lot of people that got the same results. The guy who commented didn't even do any testing, he was just being argumentative with the one guy who had posted his findings. I just commented in that I tested this myself the other day on both servers, and it is 100% ignoring resistance still.

That's a cool story and all, except you clearly didn't do any controlled or complete testing at all and are just haphazardly fudging #'s or you'd know that the penetration doesn't work how you describe . Sharpened trait is completely broken but resistances and penetration ratings from passives otherwise work exactly as expected, not as you describe whatsoever. Here's my testing thread, where's yours? http://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/discussion/131271/definitive-spell-resist-penetration-sharpened-trait-results-thread

[Snip] This testing is fresh from the v1.4.2 PTS to confirm my older testing since you claimed to have done it on the PTS .

[Moderator Note: Edited per our rules on Flaming]

Attorneyatlawl

xsorusb14_ESO wrote: »

2 people getting 2 different results. Wonder who is right heh

See my above post.

Spangla

MASSIVE LOL! - That set! do they not realise destro staff is way op and way over used already.

Seriously who comes up with this?

p_tsakirisb16_ESO

Spangla wrote: »

MASSIVE LOL! - That set! do they not realise destro staff is way op and way over used already.

Seriously who comes up with this?

ZoS....... -_-

But at least they move things around. If it was Mythic and DAOC we would be still on release version with the next update due next April.

Xsorus

Attorneyatlawl wrote: »

Pixysticks wrote: »

xsorusb14_ESO wrote: »

Pixysticks wrote: »

Attorneyatlawl wrote: »

xsorusb14_ESO wrote: »

Attorneyatlawl wrote: »

p_tsakirisb16_ESO wrote: »

Thanks

I see their persistence also adding 175 spell & armour bonuses, which as good as adding 0. Since any Magicka build user who worth his salt, has already enough Spell & Armour penetration to negate more than 3-4000 of those resists.

That's not how spell penetration or armor penetration work... they are percentages of the target's rating . No, the addons taking arbitrary "focus" numbers do not actually indicate anything, nor is it done additively like impen is. Read the wording, do some testing, and learn the facts .

http://tamrielfoundry.com/topic/spell-penetration-testing-in-pvp-first-results/

I knew someone would trot that out rather than do their own tests as I have , however it's not my job to prove it to you when I already have for myself and friends. Assuming you're an AD or EP player, please carry on and ignore the rest of this post.

In short, it's flawed testing with one ability and no varied large amount of spell resist (both values are very close) and numbers that have errors (anomalies inside of the scaling that are opposite of what they should be) either due to author miscompiling info (throwing the entire test into question) or a bug. Additionally he only tested one magic damage type, did not try any significantly lower or higher spell resistance values, nor individual resistance types. Anyone should know better than to take that at any real value when it's so horribly unscientific.

EDIT 9am: Ah, gotta love the haters of this thing called the "scientific method" that are "lol" flagging this post.

Tested yesterday on live and PTS, still erroneously ignoring 100% spell resist, not fixed yet

Edit: And to clarify I tested magic damage, shock, and fire, at 500, 1000, 1800, and 2200 spell resist. All identical results; instead of fixing this bug that ignored 100% spell resistance, they nerfed light armor from 42% base spell penetration to 28%, which is the equivalent of duct taping a leaky roof to stop people from complaining.

2 people getting 2 different results. Wonder who is right heh

Nah. There's a lot of people that got the same results. The guy who commented didn't even do any testing, he was just being argumentative with the one guy who had posted his findings. I just commented in that I tested this myself the other day on both servers, and it is 100% ignoring resistance still.

That's a cool story and all, except you clearly didn't do any controlled or complete testing at all and are just haphazardly fudging #'s or you'd know that the penetration doesn't work how you describe . Sharpened trait is completely broken but resistances and penetration ratings from passives otherwise work exactly as expected, not as you describe whatsoever. Here's my testing thread, where's yours? http://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/discussion/131271/definitive-spell-resist-penetration-sharpened-trait-results-thread

[Snip] This testing is fresh from the v1.4.2 PTS to confirm my older testing since you claimed to have done it on the PTS .

[Moderator Note: Edited quote to match moderated version]

Ummm...He basically said what your tests showed...that Sharpened Trait ignores 100% of resist with certain setups.

So yea...

Pixysticks

Attorneyatlawl wrote: »

Pixysticks wrote: »

xsorusb14_ESO wrote: »

Pixysticks wrote: »

Attorneyatlawl wrote: »

xsorusb14_ESO wrote: »

Attorneyatlawl wrote: »

p_tsakirisb16_ESO wrote: »

Thanks

I see their persistence also adding 175 spell & armour bonuses, which as good as adding 0. Since any Magicka build user who worth his salt, has already enough Spell & Armour penetration to negate more than 3-4000 of those resists.

That's not how spell penetration or armor penetration work... they are percentages of the target's rating . No, the addons taking arbitrary "focus" numbers do not actually indicate anything, nor is it done additively like impen is. Read the wording, do some testing, and learn the facts .

http://tamrielfoundry.com/topic/spell-penetration-testing-in-pvp-first-results/

I knew someone would trot that out rather than do their own tests as I have , however it's not my job to prove it to you when I already have for myself and friends. Assuming you're an AD or EP player, please carry on and ignore the rest of this post.

In short, it's flawed testing with one ability and no varied large amount of spell resist (both values are very close) and numbers that have errors (anomalies inside of the scaling that are opposite of what they should be) either due to author miscompiling info (throwing the entire test into question) or a bug. Additionally he only tested one magic damage type, did not try any significantly lower or higher spell resistance values, nor individual resistance types. Anyone should know better than to take that at any real value when it's so horribly unscientific.

EDIT 9am: Ah, gotta love the haters of this thing called the "scientific method" that are "lol" flagging this post.

Tested yesterday on live and PTS, still erroneously ignoring 100% spell resist, not fixed yet

Edit: And to clarify I tested magic damage, shock, and fire, at 500, 1000, 1800, and 2200 spell resist. All identical results; instead of fixing this bug that ignored 100% spell resistance, they nerfed light armor from 42% base spell penetration to 28%, which is the equivalent of duct taping a leaky roof to stop people from complaining.

2 people getting 2 different results. Wonder who is right heh

Nah. There's a lot of people that got the same results. The guy who commented didn't even do any testing, he was just being argumentative with the one guy who had posted his findings. I just commented in that I tested this myself the other day on both servers, and it is 100% ignoring resistance still.

That's a cool story and all, except you clearly didn't do any controlled or complete testing at all and are just haphazardly fudging #'s or you'd know that the penetration doesn't work how you describe . Sharpened trait is completely broken but resistances and penetration ratings from passives otherwise work exactly as expected, not as you describe whatsoever. Here's my testing thread, where's yours? http://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/discussion/131271/definitive-spell-resist-penetration-sharpened-trait-results-thread

[Snip] This testing is fresh from the v1.4.2 PTS to confirm my older testing since you claimed to have done it on the PTS .

[Moderator Note: Edited quote to match moderated version]

We came to this conclusion a few weeks ago and submitted many bug reports about it. [Snip]

[Moderator Note: Edited per our rules on Flaming]

Attorneyatlawl

xsorusb14_ESO wrote: »

Attorneyatlawl wrote: »

Pixysticks wrote: »

xsorusb14_ESO wrote: »

Pixysticks wrote: »

Attorneyatlawl wrote: »

xsorusb14_ESO wrote: »

Attorneyatlawl wrote: »

p_tsakirisb16_ESO wrote: »

Thanks

I see their persistence also adding 175 spell & armour bonuses, which as good as adding 0. Since any Magicka build user who worth his salt, has already enough Spell & Armour penetration to negate more than 3-4000 of those resists.

That's not how spell penetration or armor penetration work... they are percentages of the target's rating . No, the addons taking arbitrary "focus" numbers do not actually indicate anything, nor is it done additively like impen is. Read the wording, do some testing, and learn the facts .

http://tamrielfoundry.com/topic/spell-penetration-testing-in-pvp-first-results/

I knew someone would trot that out rather than do their own tests as I have , however it's not my job to prove it to you when I already have for myself and friends. Assuming you're an AD or EP player, please carry on and ignore the rest of this post.

In short, it's flawed testing with one ability and no varied large amount of spell resist (both values are very close) and numbers that have errors (anomalies inside of the scaling that are opposite of what they should be) either due to author miscompiling info (throwing the entire test into question) or a bug. Additionally he only tested one magic damage type, did not try any significantly lower or higher spell resistance values, nor individual resistance types. Anyone should know better than to take that at any real value when it's so horribly unscientific.

EDIT 9am: Ah, gotta love the haters of this thing called the "scientific method" that are "lol" flagging this post.

Tested yesterday on live and PTS, still erroneously ignoring 100% spell resist, not fixed yet

Edit: And to clarify I tested magic damage, shock, and fire, at 500, 1000, 1800, and 2200 spell resist. All identical results; instead of fixing this bug that ignored 100% spell resistance, they nerfed light armor from 42% base spell penetration to 28%, which is the equivalent of duct taping a leaky roof to stop people from complaining.

2 people getting 2 different results. Wonder who is right heh

Nah. There's a lot of people that got the same results. The guy who commented didn't even do any testing, he was just being argumentative with the one guy who had posted his findings. I just commented in that I tested this myself the other day on both servers, and it is 100% ignoring resistance still.

That's a cool story and all, except you clearly didn't do any controlled or complete testing at all and are just haphazardly fudging #'s or you'd know that the penetration doesn't work how you describe . Sharpened trait is completely broken but resistances and penetration ratings from passives otherwise work exactly as expected, not as you describe whatsoever. Here's my testing thread, where's yours? http://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/discussion/131271/definitive-spell-resist-penetration-sharpened-trait-results-thread

[Snip] This testing is fresh from the v1.4.2 PTS to confirm my older testing since you claimed to have done it on the PTS .

[Moderator Note: Edited quote to match moderated version]

Ummm...He basically said what your tests showed...that Sharpened Trait ignores 100% of resist with certain setups.

So yea...

Perhaps I misread his post but saying ", they nerfed light armor from 42% base spell penetration to 28%, which is the equivalent of duct taping a leaky roof to stop people from complaining." appears to me he was saying that spell resistance doesn't work at all, which is not consistent with my tests.

Nala_

Attorneyatlawl wrote: »

xsorusb14_ESO wrote: »

Attorneyatlawl wrote: »

Pixysticks wrote: »

xsorusb14_ESO wrote: »

Pixysticks wrote: »

Attorneyatlawl wrote: »

xsorusb14_ESO wrote: »

Attorneyatlawl wrote: »

p_tsakirisb16_ESO wrote: »

Thanks

I see their persistence also adding 175 spell & armour bonuses, which as good as adding 0. Since any Magicka build user who worth his salt, has already enough Spell & Armour penetration to negate more than 3-4000 of those resists.

That's not how spell penetration or armor penetration work... they are percentages of the target's rating . No, the addons taking arbitrary "focus" numbers do not actually indicate anything, nor is it done additively like impen is. Read the wording, do some testing, and learn the facts .

http://tamrielfoundry.com/topic/spell-penetration-testing-in-pvp-first-results/

I knew someone would trot that out rather than do their own tests as I have , however it's not my job to prove it to you when I already have for myself and friends. Assuming you're an AD or EP player, please carry on and ignore the rest of this post.

In short, it's flawed testing with one ability and no varied large amount of spell resist (both values are very close) and numbers that have errors (anomalies inside of the scaling that are opposite of what they should be) either due to author miscompiling info (throwing the entire test into question) or a bug. Additionally he only tested one magic damage type, did not try any significantly lower or higher spell resistance values, nor individual resistance types. Anyone should know better than to take that at any real value when it's so horribly unscientific.

EDIT 9am: Ah, gotta love the haters of this thing called the "scientific method" that are "lol" flagging this post.

Tested yesterday on live and PTS, still erroneously ignoring 100% spell resist, not fixed yet

Edit: And to clarify I tested magic damage, shock, and fire, at 500, 1000, 1800, and 2200 spell resist. All identical results; instead of fixing this bug that ignored 100% spell resistance, they nerfed light armor from 42% base spell penetration to 28%, which is the equivalent of duct taping a leaky roof to stop people from complaining.

2 people getting 2 different results. Wonder who is right heh

Nah. There's a lot of people that got the same results. The guy who commented didn't even do any testing, he was just being argumentative with the one guy who had posted his findings. I just commented in that I tested this myself the other day on both servers, and it is 100% ignoring resistance still.

That's a cool story and all, except you clearly didn't do any controlled or complete testing at all and are just haphazardly fudging #'s or you'd know that the penetration doesn't work how you describe . Sharpened trait is completely broken but resistances and penetration ratings from passives otherwise work exactly as expected, not as you describe whatsoever. Here's my testing thread, where's yours? http://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/discussion/131271/definitive-spell-resist-penetration-sharpened-trait-results-thread

[Snip] This testing is fresh from the v1.4.2 PTS to confirm my older testing since you claimed to have done it on the PTS .

[Moderator Note: Edited quote to match moderated version]

Ummm...He basically said what your tests showed...that Sharpened Trait ignores 100% of resist with certain setups.

So yea...

Perhaps I misread his post but saying ", they nerfed light armor from 42% base spell penetration to 28%, which is the equivalent of duct taping a leaky roof to stop people from complaining." appears to me he was saying that spell resistance doesn't work at all, which is not consistent with my tests.

as in instead of fixing the bug with sharpened, they nerfed light armor because everyone kept complaining about light armor being overpowered and giving them so much damage (in other words to appease the masses by making 95% of the people using light armor do less damage but not actually fixing the real problem of the 5% ignoring it completely with sharpened)

he posted a thread about it a while ago

Pixysticks

It doesn't matter there's no point arguing about stuff like this. The devs have known about the bug with sharpened giving 100% spell pen, they just haven't figured out how to fix it. The more tests people do and numbers they show it will hopefully bring them closer to finding the problem in their code.

Xsorus

Attorneyatlawl wrote: »

xsorusb14_ESO wrote: »

Attorneyatlawl wrote: »

Pixysticks wrote: »

xsorusb14_ESO wrote: »

Pixysticks wrote: »

Attorneyatlawl wrote: »

xsorusb14_ESO wrote: »

Attorneyatlawl wrote: »

p_tsakirisb16_ESO wrote: »

Thanks

I see their persistence also adding 175 spell & armour bonuses, which as good as adding 0. Since any Magicka build user who worth his salt, has already enough Spell & Armour penetration to negate more than 3-4000 of those resists.

That's not how spell penetration or armor penetration work... they are percentages of the target's rating . No, the addons taking arbitrary "focus" numbers do not actually indicate anything, nor is it done additively like impen is. Read the wording, do some testing, and learn the facts .

http://tamrielfoundry.com/topic/spell-penetration-testing-in-pvp-first-results/

I knew someone would trot that out rather than do their own tests as I have , however it's not my job to prove it to you when I already have for myself and friends. Assuming you're an AD or EP player, please carry on and ignore the rest of this post.

In short, it's flawed testing with one ability and no varied large amount of spell resist (both values are very close) and numbers that have errors (anomalies inside of the scaling that are opposite of what they should be) either due to author miscompiling info (throwing the entire test into question) or a bug. Additionally he only tested one magic damage type, did not try any significantly lower or higher spell resistance values, nor individual resistance types. Anyone should know better than to take that at any real value when it's so horribly unscientific.

EDIT 9am: Ah, gotta love the haters of this thing called the "scientific method" that are "lol" flagging this post.

Tested yesterday on live and PTS, still erroneously ignoring 100% spell resist, not fixed yet

Edit: And to clarify I tested magic damage, shock, and fire, at 500, 1000, 1800, and 2200 spell resist. All identical results; instead of fixing this bug that ignored 100% spell resistance, they nerfed light armor from 42% base spell penetration to 28%, which is the equivalent of duct taping a leaky roof to stop people from complaining.

2 people getting 2 different results. Wonder who is right heh

Nah. There's a lot of people that got the same results. The guy who commented didn't even do any testing, he was just being argumentative with the one guy who had posted his findings. I just commented in that I tested this myself the other day on both servers, and it is 100% ignoring resistance still.

That's a cool story and all, except you clearly didn't do any controlled or complete testing at all and are just haphazardly fudging #'s or you'd know that the penetration doesn't work how you describe . Sharpened trait is completely broken but resistances and penetration ratings from passives otherwise work exactly as expected, not as you describe whatsoever. Here's my testing thread, where's yours? http://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/discussion/131271/definitive-spell-resist-penetration-sharpened-trait-results-thread

[Snip] This testing is fresh from the v1.4.2 PTS to confirm my older testing since you claimed to have done it on the PTS .

[Moderator Note: Edited quote to match moderated version]

Ummm...He basically said what your tests showed...that Sharpened Trait ignores 100% of resist with certain setups.

So yea...

Perhaps I misread his post but saying ", they nerfed light armor from 42% base spell penetration to 28%, which is the equivalent of duct taping a leaky roof to stop people from complaining." appears to me he was saying that spell resistance doesn't work at all, which is not consistent with my tests.

You didn't misread, you just left out part of the sentence

"instead of fixing this bug that ignored 100% spell resistance, they nerfed light armor from 42% base spell penetration to 28%, which is the equivalent of duct taping a leaky roof to stop people from complaining. "