Magica / Stam Cost Reduction NERF ?

Suntzu1414

Recently (today). I enchanted jewlry with Magica Cost Reduction (VR5) -- this is for my alt.

The Tool Tip states -- Reduces spell cost by 179
The Actual Reduction - Reduces spell cost by 110

I've noticed this across all my jewlry.
Is this NEW? stealth NERF..

Appreciate your comments.
ST

LameoveR

Have noticed that too.


Removing 1 ring:

Tooltip shows 135. Actual is 100.

Emma_Overload

There is something really weird going on with spell cost reduction glyphs! A couple days ago, I upgraded the enchantment on a necklace from white to purple... and NOTHING changed! The spell costs are the same before and after the purple glyph. A couple weeks ago, I upgraded a similar piece of jewelry from white to GOLD, and my spell costs actually went UP!

ZoS, how is this even possible?! Why are we wasting money on Kutas and Rekutas? Is this a bug, or a secret nerf?

.

Suntzu1414

Emma_Eunjung wrote: »

There is something really weird going on with spell cost reduction glyphs! A couple days ago, I upgraded the enchantment on a necklace from white to purple... and NOTHING changed! The spell costs are the same before and after the purple glyph. A couple weeks ago, I upgraded a similar piece of jewelry from white to GOLD, and my spell costs actually went UP!

ZoS, how is this even possible?! Why are we wasting money on Kutas and Rekutas? Is this a bug, or a secret nerf?

.

@ZOS_GaryA

Would you please take a look at this.

thank you
ST

Emma_Overload

Something I want to make clear: this is NOT about the normal "diminishing returns" that have always existed with Spell Cost Reductions glyphs due to their interaction with percentage based reductions like the light armor passive. This is a BUG that has only existed since the 2.0 update and after.

It's normal for glyphs to deliver slightly less reduction than stated in the tooltip. It's definitely NOT normal for the glyph to deliver no increased reduction at all in comparison to a glyph of lesser quality!

Fyrakin

This subject may be a little bit confusing, because there is no clear statement how skill costs are defined. As far as my own experience goes (back from early beta), skill costs are not flat numbers, but rather percentage of the pool.
So, if there is something that reduces the cost, the cost will indeed go down, but by how much exactly is a compleate mystery to me. Champion system skill cost reduction alters that percentage (there I see consistent reduction), but jewelry indicates flat cost reduction which makes a difference in a way no one can understand (this part goes back to early days of ESO).

Morvul

there is two different issues here:

a) since 2.0, there seems to be no difference between purple and gold quality spellcost reduction glyphs.
They have different tooltip values, but their effect on spell cost is identical.

b) the value of spell cost reduction glyphs is substracted from a spells cost bevor the percentage based reduction boni are applied. In essence, this means that the value of your spellcost reduction glyphs is reduced by your percentage based spellcost reduction. (this is not new, has always been calcualted that way)

I believe that the OP is observing a case of option b)

Xupacabra

The more glyphs you use the less is the reduction aplied by each.

Suntzu1414

thank you everyone for chiming in...
this was great!!


Kill Well
ST

Circuitous

It's important to remember that there are other things that also reduce costs, like the light armor and champion passives. Depending on the order the enchantments are applied (in the engine's math), the actual reduction will be lower.

I can't explain the gold enchantment thing, though. Any proof of it?

Suntzu1414

yeah. that doesn't make much sense either.
I'll check tomorrow as well ...

They really need to fix the tool tip.
TO WYSIWYG (what you see is what you get)...


Kill Well
ST

LameoveR

oh, well. maybe it is working as instended?

Attorneyatlawl

All cost reductions other than the champion point passives are subject to a hidden 0.87x multiplier automatically applied by the game. The champ ones are WYSIWYG, or in other words, they do what they say.

Suntzu1414

thank you.

I do agree there should be "some modification".
But, I have a tool tip that reads: --

Cost Reduction 173 points
My Actual CR: 110 points


This value is 64% of the orginal...
The tool tip should at least give "some" indication.

--This is a little much, eh?
ST

C0pp3rhead

Wait, @Attorneyatlawl ... Why the 87% effectiveness? What prompted them to put that wonky coefficient into the final cost reduction formula?

Attorneyatlawl

C0pp3rhead wrote: »

Wait, @Attorneyatlawl ... Why the 87% effectiveness? What prompted them to put that wonky coefficient into the final cost reduction formula?

As someone who's not a ZOS person... beats me.