Max Magicka vs. Spell Damage - Sorcerers

Xeven

NativeJoe wrote: »

People literally have sets to destroy us ( shield breaker) lol so going magic right now is TERRIBLE. take the 4-8 hit to your max mana and gain 1.6k spell power, more slots for abilities, and just better abilities. ( and in pve , my shields are still over 23.5k which is enough for 99.999% of things.)

I disagree without more proof.

I've compared my max magicka destro resto staff build to Sypher's max spell power destro resto staff build. Our frag tooltips are almost the same yet I have 2.5k more hardened ward (same bastion points) and way more sustain. Neither of us were running toggles. I find that anything you gain from a spell power build is lost the moment you try to make up for your lack of sustain, which spell power gear tends to be missing.

Magicka all the way.

k2blader

Xeven wrote: »

mike.gaziotisb16_ESO wrote: »

So i wouldn't expect many sorcs to be heavily stacked into Hardy or Elemental Defender in the near future.

Why not? These are the next best stars to start working on after bastion for builds that heavily rely on shields.

Are there magicka builds that work without X number of CPs into Bastion? (And what is the number for X?)

As it is, I feel like PvP magicka sorcs are basically forced to go heavy into Bastion, to be effective, even as other classes/builds and their mothers hate on shields in general.

crazmadsci

The best builds do take both Magicka and Spell damage into effect. I merely made the graphs on both to show the difference in growth. Players will typically improve both categories to make a well rounded build.

crazmadsci

zornyan wrote: »

@crazmadsci

So by your calculations, it would be better to stack spell power as opposed to mag magika to obtain max dps out of puncturing sweeps?

Technically you should do both like I just posted. Theoretically you get more Damage from Spell damage growth however there are many spells that are damage based on Magicka Only. Therefore I recommend you to improve both spell damage and Magicka.

Soulac

Xeven wrote: »

Soulac wrote: »

The champion system doesn´t give a damn about mundus, pvp health bonus and buff-food(bug) tho..

crazmadsci wrote: »

Yes there is a maximum of 33% grown in your magicka pool from spending Champion Points. This 33% does take into account gear, attribute, racial passives, set bonuses, mundus, etc. The Percent added from CP is calculated afterwards.

One of you is incorrect about mundus but I don't know who. Or maybe you're both correct and tested different mundus stones.

I mean Health, Magicka, Stamina. The champion Passives don't affect the bonus from Mundusstones increasing these stats.
Champion Passives applies on Reg Mundus tho.

raasdal

Again, thank you all for the feedback in this discussion. On my build i will be focusing on Magicka rather than Spell Power. But as many also note, they do no mutually negate/exclude eachother. But on the decisions between Max Mag / Spell Power (Item Sets primarily) i will go for Max Magicka.

Now that i have the attention of so many experts, i will venture a related question;

What is your opinion on Reduction Cost vs. Regen?

On the Jewelry Enchants, we basically get the choice as Magicka Sorc to do either Spell Damage for more power or Reduction Cost / Regen for Sustain. But what is the better sustain option?

I like to quantify these choices by numbers. Below is my calculation;

---

Assumption 1; When in Combat, i will use a Magicka Ability once every 1.5 seconds

Assumption 2; When out of Combat i will use no Abilities. (Pre-Battle Buff is considered "In Combat" here).

---

I do not have the exact numbers right now, but as i recall, V16 Purple Glyph is app. 150 Regen or 190 Spell Reduction. Please correct me if i am way off here. Then we have to factor in 20% Buff to Regen from Potions during Combat.

Anyways;

With above assumptions, Spell Cost Reduction will give me;

In Combat; 126 Magicka / Second
Out of Combat; 0 Magicka / Second

With above assumptions, Magicka Regen will give me;

In Combat; 90 Magicka / Second (Potion)
Out of Combat; 75 Magicka / Second

---

Am i way off in my calculations and assumptions above?

What do you guys use?

Hexys

I have 'tested' playstyle and playing between Max Magicka and Spell Damage and I think a nice stop-by is starting to get more magicka after you reached a buffed Spell Damage of around 3k-3.2k on your main damage bar.

This is just a feeling, facts may say otherwise!

Xeven

raasdal wrote: »

Anyways;

With above assumptions, Spell Cost Reduction will give me;

In Combat; 126 Magicka / Second
Out of Combat; 0 Magicka / Second

With above assumptions, Magicka Regen will give me;

In Combat; 90 Magicka / Second (Potion)
Out of Combat; 75 Magicka / Second

---

Am i way off in my calculations and assumptions above?

What do you guys use?

Cost reduction works out of combat. You'll be putting up shields and buffing etc. The answer is it depends on how much regen/cost reduction you already have, how much cp you have, how much you're typically casting, your playstyle etc. Ezareth favors regen and I favor cost reduction. I've tried both and I feel most comfortable with cost reduction right now.

Test it. Go grind down a bunch mobs or PvP for a while with each. See which you like best.

tist

I favor builds that get a good combination of magicka and spell damage.. One of the reason's I dislike torug's pact since it's a dead set after 2. In this patch I would go for 3.2k+ spell damage buffed with over 35k max magicka if possible. I was comparing tooltips with someone with 400 more spell damage than me unbuffed and his tooltips were under 1k in damage in comparison.

Yonkit

Get 40k Magicka minimum, with or without Inner Light, 40k magicka + 100 Cp into bastion = 20-24k shield stack.

Just derping around with a sorc on PTS I got 41k magicka, 25k shields, 1.9k regen, 2.4k spell dmg.

And the 41k magicka ontop of the spell damage means you still hit just as hard as someone with say, 30k magicka and 3.5k spell dmg,

Ezareth

Xeven wrote: »

raasdal wrote: »

Anyways;

With above assumptions, Spell Cost Reduction will give me;

In Combat; 126 Magicka / Second
Out of Combat; 0 Magicka / Second

With above assumptions, Magicka Regen will give me;

In Combat; 90 Magicka / Second (Potion)
Out of Combat; 75 Magicka / Second

---

Am i way off in my calculations and assumptions above?

What do you guys use?

Cost reduction works out of combat. You'll be putting up shields and buffing etc. The answer is it depends on how much regen/cost reduction you already have, how much cp you have, how much you're typically casting, your playstyle etc. Ezareth favors regen and I favor cost reduction. I've tried both and I feel most comfortable with cost reduction right now.

Test it. Go grind down a bunch mobs or PvP for a while with each. See which you like best.

Actually I favor a combination of both. The choices however are only mutually exclusive on the enchants and when I'm not using spellpower enchants I currently use cost reduction. I broke down the math in a message to another sorc who asked me so I'll post that here.

Cost Reduction = 226 Reduction per spell which is reduced as a *percentage* by your total cost reduction passives (not reduced by champion points). That percentage is reduced by 13.75% (don't ask why it just is haha).

So with 15% cost reduction for wearing 5 light and 5% cost reduction by being a sorc It works out to 187 cost reduction for *every* spell.

With Regen enchants you get a Base 169 increase.

Total magicka increase percentages:

Altmer 9%
Sorc 10%
Light Armor 20%
Major Intellect (Spellpower Pot) 20%
1 Mage ability 2%
Assume 100 points in magicka regen = 25%

9+10+20+20 = 59%
169 Regen *1.59 * 1.25 = 336 Extra regen with a spellpower-pot up, otherwise it is only 294 Regen.

With cost reduction if you're casting once a second it is 38 magicka per two seconds with a tri-pot up, otherwise 80 magicka per two seconds without a tripot up.

I doubt you're casting every single second in PvP so Regen may come out slight;y ahead in most cases. However, when you pressured the most you are casting every second and the cost reduction will come out ahead. All in all the difference is probably a Wash.

Also, consecutive bolt escapes and molag Kena proc remove the diminishing returns effect of cost reduction enchants for the second and third + bolt or any cast (other than ultimate) under a Molag Kena proc.

Xeven

Ezareth wrote: »

I doubt you're casting every single second in PvP so Regen may come out slight;y ahead in most cases. However, when you pressured the most you are casting every second and the cost reduction will come out ahead. All in all the difference is probably a Wash.

It doesnt. My total cost reduction is ~800 per spell. I weave CS so I'm casting something once a second 90% of the time while in combat. It would take ~1600 regen to beat that. I've tried both and regen always falls short right now. Like you and I both just said, it depends on how much you're casting, you can't just math it.

Septimus_Magna

Xeven wrote: »

Ezareth wrote: »

I doubt you're casting every single second in PvP so Regen may come out slight;y ahead in most cases. However, when you pressured the most you are casting every second and the cost reduction will come out ahead. All in all the difference is probably a Wash.

It doesnt. My total cost reduction is ~800 per spell. I weave CS so I'm casting something once a second 90% of the time while in combat. It would take ~1600 regen to beat that. I've tried both and regen always falls short right now. Like you and I both just said, it depends on how much you're casting, you can't just math it.

I did some calculations and testing on this matter with gold v16 magicka cost reduction (203) vs magicka regen enchants (169).

The break even point for my altmer sorc is an average of 7 casts per 10 seconds.
If you cast more go for cost reduction, if you cast less go for magicka regen.

Important to notice that cost reduction stacks negatively and regen stacks positively. so if you stack multiple cost reduction the effectiveness decreases and if you stack mulitple regen the effectiveness increases.

Also the increased cost for bolt escape cannot be reduced so regen is more valuable if you rely on multiple bolt escapes.

The way I see it its useful to have both for good sustain because there will be moments in fight where you spam skills (cost reduction prefered) and moments in which you only cast a skill once every couple seconds (regen prefered).

The fact that regen stacks positively (I got extra 275 regen per 169 enchant) and cost reduction stacks negatively (I got 195 reduced cost per 203 enchant) makes me prefer 1x cost reduction and 2x regen for enchants on my jewelry for pvp. I would always keep at least 1x cost reduction because this increases the effectiveness of the entire regen pool, the skill cost that is reduced never has to be regenerated.

Xeven

Septimus_Magna wrote: »

Xeven wrote: »

Ezareth wrote: »

I doubt you're casting every single second in PvP so Regen may come out slight;y ahead in most cases. However, when you pressured the most you are casting every second and the cost reduction will come out ahead. All in all the difference is probably a Wash.

It doesnt. My total cost reduction is ~800 per spell. I weave CS so I'm casting something once a second 90% of the time while in combat. It would take ~1600 regen to beat that. I've tried both and regen always falls short right now. Like you and I both just said, it depends on how much you're casting, you can't just math it.

I did some calculations and testing on this matter with gold v16 magicka cost reduction (203) vs magicka regen enchants (169).

The break even point for my altmer sorc is an average of 7 casts per 10 seconds.
If you cast more go for cost reduction, if you cast less go for magicka regen.

Important to notice that cost reduction stacks negatively and regen stacks positively. so if you stack multiple cost reduction the effectiveness decreases and if you stack mulitple regen the effectiveness increases.

Also the increased cost for bolt escape cannot be reduced so regen is more valuable if you rely on multiple bolt escapes.

The way I see it its useful to have both for good sustain because there will be moments in fight where you spam skills (cost reduction prefered) and moments in which you only cast a skill once every couple seconds (regen prefered).

The fact that regen stacks positively (I got extra 275 regen per 169 enchant) and cost reduction stacks negatively (I got 195 reduced cost per 203 enchant) makes me prefer 1x cost reduction and 2x regen for enchants on my jewelry for pvp. I would always keep at least 1x cost reduction because this increases the effectiveness of the entire regen pool, the skill cost that is reduced never has to be regenerated.

Agreed. If I take off one piece of seducer and all three jewelry, my spells cost ~800 more each, so that's on top of CP reduction. I did some further testing as well as PvPing for a while with both. I went and found a mob to enter combat with, then spammed daedric mines until I was OOM. I was able to cast mines ~20 times in cost reduction compared to ~16-17 times in regen jewelery. I'm not saying this is a 100% conclusive test but it is interesting to note.

Out of combat can favor cost reduction because your regen is reduced pretty significantly, but cost reduction is not. Out of combat you're alternating between shields, buffs, speed, and bolt escape, which adds up pretty quickly. I was not aware that cost reduction does not apply to bolt escape fatigue. That sounds really fishy to me, but if that is in fact the case then regen is better in that situation.

I'm not bias though. I will switch from reduction to regen or a combination of both. I need to sit down one of these days and do some more testing. I haven't been able to determine that one is better than the other, and cost reduction should be less effective for me because I wear seducer and split my CP.

Yonkit

I think the whole Cost Reduction Versus Regen depends on your own play-style and preferences, if you're spamming abilities then you're going to want Cost Reduction, if you're build is more designed to slowly peel away at your opponent with DoTs then Max Regen is probably more favorable.

On my Stam DK I use mostly Regen with the only cost reduction I get coming from medium armor passives and CP, because I really only cast 3-4 abilities every couple of seconds, Unstable Flame, burning breath, reverb bash.. Then I'm just kiting my opponent till he drops below 60%, then I move in, reverb bash, heavy attack, puncture, bash, and if needed finish them off with my ultimate, due to this, cost reduction is pretty crap in my play-style cause I'm not always in the heat of battle needing to spam heals or damage abilities.

@Ezareth I don't know if you play like this on your NB as you don't really have access to DoTs on him but from bumping into you on Crassus I'd assume that since you run Sword & Board if you still do, that you play somewhat like this with Cinnamon acting as your pocket healer and slowly taking people down with jabs for you to go in for the kill? Am I right in assuming that or no?

Ezareth

Xeven wrote: »

Ezareth wrote: »

I doubt you're casting every single second in PvP so Regen may come out slight;y ahead in most cases. However, when you pressured the most you are casting every second and the cost reduction will come out ahead. All in all the difference is probably a Wash.

It doesnt. My total cost reduction is ~800 per spell. I weave CS so I'm casting something once a second 90% of the time while in combat. It would take ~1600 regen to beat that. I've tried both and regen always falls short right now. Like you and I both just said, it depends on how much you're casting, you can't just math it.

Total Cost reduction ~800 doesn't really tell you much. Equipping a single ring and looking at your tooltip will tell you exactly how much it benefits you. The same is true of the magick regen enchant. (This is why I have rings and necks enchanted with both, and spell power for that matter). Math can give you an idea but live testing is the best way to determine.

Another thing to consider is the Crystal Frag proc as well which receives even less benefit from cost reduction, while regen is still active.

Septimus_Magna wrote: »

Xeven wrote: »

Ezareth wrote: »

I doubt you're casting every single second in PvP so Regen may come out slight;y ahead in most cases. However, when you pressured the most you are casting every second and the cost reduction will come out ahead. All in all the difference is probably a Wash.

It doesnt. My total cost reduction is ~800 per spell. I weave CS so I'm casting something once a second 90% of the time while in combat. It would take ~1600 regen to beat that. I've tried both and regen always falls short right now. Like you and I both just said, it depends on how much you're casting, you can't just math it.

I did some calculations and testing on this matter with gold v16 magicka cost reduction (203) vs magicka regen enchants (169).

The break even point for my altmer sorc is an average of 7 casts per 10 seconds.
If you cast more go for cost reduction, if you cast less go for magicka regen.

Important to notice that cost reduction stacks negatively and regen stacks positively. so if you stack multiple cost reduction the effectiveness decreases and if you stack mulitple regen the effectiveness increases.

Also the increased cost for bolt escape cannot be reduced so regen is more valuable if you rely on multiple bolt escapes.

The way I see it its useful to have both for good sustain because there will be moments in fight where you spam skills (cost reduction prefered) and moments in which you only cast a skill once every couple seconds (regen prefered).

The fact that regen stacks positively (I got extra 275 regen per 169 enchant) and cost reduction stacks negatively (I got 195 reduced cost per 203 enchant) makes me prefer 1x cost reduction and 2x regen for enchants on my jewelry for pvp. I would always keep at least 1x cost reduction because this increases the effectiveness of the entire regen pool, the skill cost that is reduced never has to be regenerated.

Don't trust tooltips on cost reduction enchants. They actually provide ~226 cost reduction at VR16.

Your understanding of the math on these mechanics is incorrect.

For example, cost reduction enchants actually save you far more on Bolt escape penalty casts than they do at Base. A single Cost Reduction ring of 226 for me reduces my bolt escape by 187. But the second bolt escape it actually reduces by 284.14 compared to not having it. The third bolt escape it saves 382.

So this means that Regen is actually far worse than cost reduction if you plan on bolting often.

I also would say that mixing both is probably not a good idea. If one is better for you, then 3 of that type is best. Mixing them provides no benefit as they are both 100% dedicated to magicka sustain.

Yonkit wrote: »

I think the whole Cost Reduction Versus Regen depends on your own play-style and preferences, if you're spamming abilities then you're going to want Cost Reduction, if you're build is more designed to slowly peel away at your opponent with DoTs then Max Regen is probably more favorable.

On my Stam DK I use mostly Regen with the only cost reduction I get coming from medium armor passives and CP, because I really only cast 3-4 abilities every couple of seconds, Unstable Flame, burning breath, reverb bash.. Then I'm just kiting my opponent till he drops below 60%, then I move in, reverb bash, heavy attack, puncture, bash, and if needed finish them off with my ultimate, due to this, cost reduction is pretty crap in my play-style cause I'm not always in the heat of battle needing to spam heals or damage abilities.

@Ezareth I don't know if you play like this on your NB as you don't really have access to DoTs on him but from bumping into you on Crassus I'd assume that since you run Sword & Board if you still do, that you play somewhat like this with Cinnamon acting as your pocket healer and slowly taking people down with jabs for you to go in for the kill? Am I right in assuming that or no?

@Yonkit

Stamina can't be confused with Magicka. The equation is far different because stamina cost reduction enchants affect all staminabilitys *as well as* Break Free, Dodge Roll, and Bash.. It is a far more difficult equation when dealing with Stamina.

On my NB I keep my enemies snared and maimed and identify the priority target and then go to town on bursting them down. I also spend 90% of my magicka fear bombing for both the AoE CC and keeping my defenses up (since I dont use SA).

Xeven

Ezareth wrote: »

Total Cost reduction ~800 doesn't really tell you much. Equipping a single ring and looking at your tooltip will tell you exactly how much it benefits you. The same is true of the magick regen enchant.

With respect because I value your input, but do you take me for an idiot?

3 jewelery enchants and seducer provide something like 850 (I dont remember the exact number but its a bit over 800) reduction on lightning form. It's like ~600 IIRC with just jewelery on top of seducer. This is also on top of ~33 CP spent in cost reduction. Even with a bunch of pre-existing cost reduction, more is still very competitive. Especially when you consider you're not sacrificing any regen by wearing seducer.

This means I can eat food, which is a whole other argument.

I'm also a programmer so I can do some pretty fancy calculations with the LUA API. I know exactly what my average cast time in a duel is (right up around 1 second), and I know exactly what my out of combat regen is etc.

Regen benefits more from CP and down time (while in combat mind you). I get that, but that does not mean it is usually better. Not by a long shot. In fact I would say reduction is usually better for ranged builds because you're always in range, which means you should be using up every GCD, no excuses.

Ezareth

Xeven wrote: »

Ezareth wrote: »

Total Cost reduction ~800 doesn't really tell you much. Equipping a single ring and looking at your tooltip will tell you exactly how much it benefits you. The same is true of the magick regen enchant.

With respect because I value your input, but do you take me for an idiot?

3 jewelery enchants and seducer provide something like 850 (I dont remember the exact number but its a bit over 800) reduction on lightning form. It's like ~600 IIRC with just jewelery on top of seducer. This is also on top of ~33 CP spent in cost reduction. Even with a bunch of pre-existing cost reduction, more is still very competitive. Especially when you consider you're not sacrificing any regen by wearing seducer.

This means I can eat food, which is a whole other argument.

I'm also a programmer so I can do some pretty fancy calculations with the LUA API. I know exactly what my average cast time in a duel is (right up around 1 second), and I know exactly what my out of combat regen is etc.

Regen benefits more from CP and down time (while in combat mind you). I get that, but that does not mean it is usually better. Not by a long shot. In fact I would say reduction is usually better for ranged builds because you're always in range, which means you should be using up every GCD, no excuses.

Never said I took you for an idiot (you really need to stop being so touchy on the forums) but an ~800 cost reduction number is so unspecific as to be useless for a comparison scenario since the number itself is not static unless you're comparing a single ability. Seducer itself is much less powerful in most scenarios this patch (for many reasons) but the set itself combines base Magicka regen with Cost reduction itself so it is not the best set for a min/max setup. For example, by going with Seducer with a triple cost-reduction enchant setup you're actually lowering the effectiveness of your cost reduction enchants by 6.9%.

The reason 800 tells me nothing is because Seducer, Sorc Passive and Light armor passive provide one form of cost reduction, Jewelry enchants provide another form of cost reduction, and champion points provide a third type of cost reduction and they all behave *very* differently. Your reduction on Healing ward for example will be far different than your reduction to Mage's wrath.

To state the obvious, cost reduction provides a static reduction to *all* spells, where Seducer and Champion passives provide a percentage reduction.

In your scenario with seducer (and I'm assuming at least 5 light) you're going to need to be casting close to every second just to break even with magick regen.

Xeven

Ezareth wrote: »

Xeven wrote: »

Ezareth wrote: »

Total Cost reduction ~800 doesn't really tell you much. Equipping a single ring and looking at your tooltip will tell you exactly how much it benefits you. The same is true of the magick regen enchant.

With respect because I value your input, but do you take me for an idiot?

3 jewelery enchants and seducer provide something like 850 (I dont remember the exact number but its a bit over 800) reduction on lightning form. It's like ~600 IIRC with just jewelery on top of seducer. This is also on top of ~33 CP spent in cost reduction. Even with a bunch of pre-existing cost reduction, more is still very competitive. Especially when you consider you're not sacrificing any regen by wearing seducer.

This means I can eat food, which is a whole other argument.

I'm also a programmer so I can do some pretty fancy calculations with the LUA API. I know exactly what my average cast time in a duel is (right up around 1 second), and I know exactly what my out of combat regen is etc.

Regen benefits more from CP and down time (while in combat mind you). I get that, but that does not mean it is usually better. Not by a long shot. In fact I would say reduction is usually better for ranged builds because you're always in range, which means you should be using up every GCD, no excuses.

Never said I took you for an idiot (you really need to stop being so touchy on the forums) but an ~800 cost reduction number is so unspecific as to be useless for a comparison scenario since the number itself is not static unless you're comparing a single ability. Seducer itself is much less powerful in most scenarios this patch (for many reasons) but the set itself combines base Magicka regen with Cost reduction itself so it is not the best set for a min/max setup. For example, by going with Seducer with a triple cost-reduction enchant setup you're actually lowering the effectiveness of your cost reduction enchants by 6.9%.

The reason 800 tells me nothing is because Seducer, Sorc Passive and Light armor passive provide one form of cost reduction, Jewelry enchants provide another form of cost reduction, and champion points provide a third type of cost reduction and they all behave *very* differently. Your reduction on Healing ward for example will be far different than your reduction to Mage's wrath.

To state the obvious, cost reduction provides a static reduction to *all* spells, where Seducer and Champion passives provide a percentage reduction.

In your scenario with seducer (and I'm assuming at least 5 light) you're going to need to be casting close to every second just to break even with magick regen.

First of all 6.9% is almost irrelevant on 225. It becomes 209.

Lets just talk about rings and necklace for a moment. To simplify the argument, and to clarify it, because most people just want to know what to put on their freekin' jewelry, and quite frankly I think you complicate a simple question with mostly irrelevant math. 600 (actual) flat cost reduction from reduction jewelery. If you're casting every second (and if you're any good, you are - you are an exception however because your whole build revolves around overload - nobody else does that) you need to come up with 1200 regen to beat it (notice I didn't say to break even, there are a few break frees, and even less when running unstoppable pots). 3 regen gives you 507 tooltip.

Math me how that becomes even remotely close to 1200. You'll need like a 250% total bonus. I'd love to hear how you're coming up with that.

Better yet get off the spreadsheet and actually test it. The difference is huge. Like 6 more high cost spells on a bar of magicka while in combat. Out of combat it always wins by an absurd amount.

Joy_Division

raasdal wrote: »

Again, thank you all for the feedback in this discussion. On my build i will be focusing on Magicka rather than Spell Power. But as many also note, they do no mutually negate/exclude eachother. But on the decisions between Max Mag / Spell Power (Item Sets primarily) i will go for Max Magicka.

Now that i have the attention of so many experts, i will venture a related question;

What is your opinion on Reduction Cost vs. Regen?

On the Jewelry Enchants, we basically get the choice as Magicka Sorc to do either Spell Damage for more power or Reduction Cost / Regen for Sustain. But what is the better sustain option?

I like to quantify these choices by numbers. Below is my calculation;

---

Assumption 1; When in Combat, i will use a Magicka Ability once every 1.5 seconds

Assumption 2; When out of Combat i will use no Abilities. (Pre-Battle Buff is considered "In Combat" here).

---

I do not have the exact numbers right now, but as i recall, V16 Purple Glyph is app. 150 Regen or 190 Spell Reduction. Please correct me if i am way off here. Then we have to factor in 20% Buff to Regen from Potions during Combat.

Anyways;

With above assumptions, Spell Cost Reduction will give me;

In Combat; 126 Magicka / Second
Out of Combat; 0 Magicka / Second

With above assumptions, Magicka Regen will give me;

In Combat; 90 Magicka / Second (Potion)
Out of Combat; 75 Magicka / Second

---

Am i way off in my calculations and assumptions above?

What do you guys use?

Just an FYI: vet 16 stuff (and only 16) scales with gold enchants much better than anything before in this game. ZoS really wants you to grind out all those mats and TV stones to make that pricey VR16 gear.

As far as reduction Vs. regen, in this patch it is a debate so ZoS got it right (in 1.6 it was reduction all the way). I personally value regeneration as there are other things in the game that positively modify the enchants that you put on your jewelry, whereas cost reduction enchants are subject to diminishing returns when other reductions are present.

It is still pretty close though. In the end, for PvP anyway, I find that CC breaking, knowing how to burst enemies, and maintaining your shields will decide who wins and loses more than these interesting theory-crafting exercises.

Ezareth

Xeven wrote: »

Ezareth wrote: »

Xeven wrote: »

Ezareth wrote: »

Total Cost reduction ~800 doesn't really tell you much. Equipping a single ring and looking at your tooltip will tell you exactly how much it benefits you. The same is true of the magick regen enchant.

With respect because I value your input, but do you take me for an idiot?

3 jewelery enchants and seducer provide something like 850 (I dont remember the exact number but its a bit over 800) reduction on lightning form. It's like ~600 IIRC with just jewelery on top of seducer. This is also on top of ~33 CP spent in cost reduction. Even with a bunch of pre-existing cost reduction, more is still very competitive. Especially when you consider you're not sacrificing any regen by wearing seducer.

This means I can eat food, which is a whole other argument.

I'm also a programmer so I can do some pretty fancy calculations with the LUA API. I know exactly what my average cast time in a duel is (right up around 1 second), and I know exactly what my out of combat regen is etc.

Regen benefits more from CP and down time (while in combat mind you). I get that, but that does not mean it is usually better. Not by a long shot. In fact I would say reduction is usually better for ranged builds because you're always in range, which means you should be using up every GCD, no excuses.

Never said I took you for an idiot (you really need to stop being so touchy on the forums) but an ~800 cost reduction number is so unspecific as to be useless for a comparison scenario since the number itself is not static unless you're comparing a single ability. Seducer itself is much less powerful in most scenarios this patch (for many reasons) but the set itself combines base Magicka regen with Cost reduction itself so it is not the best set for a min/max setup. For example, by going with Seducer with a triple cost-reduction enchant setup you're actually lowering the effectiveness of your cost reduction enchants by 6.9%.

The reason 800 tells me nothing is because Seducer, Sorc Passive and Light armor passive provide one form of cost reduction, Jewelry enchants provide another form of cost reduction, and champion points provide a third type of cost reduction and they all behave *very* differently. Your reduction on Healing ward for example will be far different than your reduction to Mage's wrath.

To state the obvious, cost reduction provides a static reduction to *all* spells, where Seducer and Champion passives provide a percentage reduction.

In your scenario with seducer (and I'm assuming at least 5 light) you're going to need to be casting close to every second just to break even with magick regen.

First of all 6.9% is almost irrelevant on 225. It becomes 209.

Lets just talk about rings and necklace for a moment. To simplify the argument, and to clarify it, because most people just want to know what to put on their freekin' jewelry, and quite frankly I think you complicate a simple question with mostly irrelevant math. 600 (actual) flat cost reduction from reduction jewelery. If you're casting every second (and if you're any good, you are - you are an exception however because your whole build revolves around overload - nobody else does that) you need to come up with 1200 regen to beat it (notice I didn't say to break even, there are a few break frees, and even less when running unstoppable pots). 3 regen gives you 507 tooltip.

Math me how that becomes even remotely close to 1200. You'll need like a 250% total bonus. I'd love to hear how you're coming up with that.

Better yet get off the spreadsheet and actually test it. The difference is huge. Like 6 more high cost spells on a bar of magicka while in combat. Out of combat it always wins by an absurd amount.

I don't think you understood the totality of what I was saying. If you're wearing Seducer your enchants aren't 209, they're 171 cost reduction per enchant in 5 pieces of light, if you're wearing 7 pieces of light it's 160 per enchant. Stacking Cost reduction reduces the effectiveness of Cost reduction enchants.

For the record I don't work out of "spreadsheets". I do all of my testing on live and PTS every patch. I live and breathe this *** which is why my "spreadsheets" are exact every single time and why I share my knowledge freely so people like you and the OP don't have to spend hours testing. My math isn't "irrelevant", thats why I craft very powerful builds because I understand exactly how everything works before I start building it and just don't throw a bunch of stuff together thinking it is a superior build when my assumptions are flawed.

Secondly, you're not counting Crystal fragments. If you're casting Crystal fragments every 4-5 seconds then cost reduction effectiveness is reduced to 74 to 62 (in 7 light) on those casts.

Now back to my math on Regen. You don't need 1200 Regen. In best case of 1 cast per second *you* would need 171*3*2= 1026 Magicka regen if you wear 7 light you would need 160*3*2= 960 Regen.

Now if we factor in the fact that every 5th cast on average is going to be a crystal fragment then during those times your savings are actually going to be 372-444. So your average Magicka regen equivalent with triple cost reduction using Seducer in 5 light will be 910 or in 7 light it will be 842 if you're casting every single second perfectly.

Now calculate the magicka regen enchants

169*3 = 507 Magicka regen.
Altmer/Breton 9%
Sorc 10%
Light Armor 20%-28%
Major Intellect 20%
Support abilities slotted 10%
Vampire 10%
Restoring Twilight
Slotted Mages guild abilities 2%
Arcanist Passive 25% on top of everything

Now my solutions are obvious made for players in the 300CP+ range. If you don't have this many CPs then you will probably find cost reduction a far better solution. If you don't have 100 points into Arcanist you're just doing it wrong (especially with seducer!)

507 magicka regen is multiplied by 73.75- 123.75% making it 881(5 Light, No vampire, support/mages guild abilities) to 1134 Magicka regen(1 support/1 mages guild and 1 vampire ability slotted along with restoring twilight).

I'll assume the worst case of 5 light so those 3 enchants give you 881 magicka regen. The worst cast scenario(for magicka regen) already has it equivalent to cost reduction of casting 100% of the time every 1 second (which is impossible) at 910.

This is why if you're wearing 5 piece seducer you should be using magicka regen and *exactly* why "irrelevant" math matters. Everything isn't as it seems at first glance.

If you're wearing 7 piece light or have any additional magicka regen multiplier then magicka regen becomes far better than Cost reduction.

And yes in my case I use a ton of Power overload. I also use defensive posture, occasionally a dodge roll and we all need to break free every 8-10 seconds so all those GCDs that aren't consuming magicka benefit magicka regen compared to cost reduction, except I'm not wearing seducer (and I'm also running Triple Spellpower enchants so the entire debate is irrelevant to me).

Xeven

169*3 = 507 Magicka regen.
Altmer 10%
Sorc 9%
Light Armor 20%
Major Intellect 20%

I'll even give you 2% with meteor. That's 61% before CP = 816.3. Now lets add 25% CP. That's 1020.4. Still short of 1200 (1600 with Seducer - See my edit below), but close enough to even the score because ~downtime~, however...

You're assuming 300 CP (I have right at 300), and 100 into regen. That means you have nothing into breakfree/roll dodge reduction or anything else. This is extremely relevant because opportunity cost, especially for a sorc.

Vampire
Restoring Twilight
Support abilities

Irrelevant in mine and most every sorc build. Grasping at straws.

There is a point where regen wins, and a point where reduction wins. I am not at the point where regen wins and neither are most players, per ZOS CP average.

EDIT:
Ez I understand that seducer reduces reduction enchants. I tried to make this just about jewelry, but if you want to include seducer in this debate, then cost reduction becomes over 800 in which case you need ~1600 regen to beat it (more if you include 2 and 4 piece bonuses!). If you're going to include the diminishing returns that seducer implies, then you need to include the cost reduction that it provides as well. You acknowledged that but you left it out of the comparison. If you want to replace it with something like willows path that's a valid argument, but then you need to add the 2 and 4 piece bonuses from seducer in this context.

TLDR
CP opportunity cost.
Biased math is biased.
They're both pretty good. Regen not so much with low CP.

Ezareth

Xeven wrote: »

169*3 = 507 Magicka regen.
Altmer 10%
Sorc 9%
Light Armor 20%
Major Intellect 20%

I'll even give you 2% with meteor. That's 61% before CP = 816.3. Now lets add 25% CP. That's 1020.4. Still short of 1200.

You're assuming 300 CP (I have right at 300), and 100 into regen. That means you have nothing into breakfree/roll dodge reduction or anything else. This is extremely relevant because opportunity cost, especially for a sorc.

Vampire
Restoring Twilight
Support abilities

Irrelevant in mine and most every sorc build. Grasping at straws.

I think it's good that we had this conversation. There is a point where regen wins, and a point where reduction wins. I am not at the point where regen wins and neither are most players, per ZOS CP average.

EDIT:
Ez I understand that seducer reduces reduction enchants. I tried to make this just about jewelry, but if you want to include seducer in this debate, then cost reduction becomes over 800 in which case you need ~1600 regen to beat it (more if you include 2 and 4 piece bonuses!). If you're going to include the diminishing returns that seducer implies, then you need to include the cost reduction that it provides as well. Why are you leaving that out? If you want to replace it with something like willows path that's a valid argument, but then you need to add the 2 and 4 piece bonuses from seducer in this context.

I made my comparison at worst case scenario for Magicka regen meaning you were only wearing 5 light and Seducers. I showed the other potential magicka regen bonuses for the sake of anyone reading this who may be interested in which enchant they should be using, that's not grasping at straws lol because my comparisons showed the worst case scenario for magicka regen (with Seducers).

If you're not wearing Seducers then its roughly balanced between cost reduction and magicka regen. I made my entire argument around *your* build because you said you were using seducers and cost reduction enchants. This is solely about which enchants are best for *you*.

You've lost me on the 1200 or 1600 regen. Where are you getting those numbers? I think there is a major flaw in your reasoning somewhere. If you want to compare 5 piece sets along with enchants, seducers doesn't come close to being as good as Willows path but that's a whole other discussion.

So my point is, if you're wearing seducers 5 pc, then you're crazy to be using cost reduction over magicka regen enchants (unless you're using some crackpot build that doesn't have 5 light armor in which case seducers is great for that and cost reduction as well) over magicka regen bonuses. Seducers comes with 2 pieces of magicka regen already so it only makes sense to try to maximize your magicka regen to get the most benefit possible from it.

Xeven

Ezareth wrote: »

This is solely about which enchants are best for *you*.

It's not though Ez, I have 100 green CP. I'm not spending them all on regen! Most people don't have that luxury.

Xeven

You've lost me on the 1200 or 1600 regen. Where are you getting those numbers? I think there is a major flaw in your reasoning somewhere. If you want to compare 5 piece sets along with enchants, seducers doesn't come close to being as good as Willows path but that's a whole other discussion.

1200 is 600 cost reduction converted to regen, granted with a slight cost reduction bias, because I am ranged with unstoppable magicka pots, I have very little breakfree/targeting down time. This is backed up by an addon I wrote to measure casts per second. Slightly less than 1 *while in combat*. In fact lets just call it 1.8 casts per tick of regen. That puts it at 1080 equivalent regen which still beats 1020 (without a 100 CP investment and 100% potion up time! hey now, that's somethin!).

1600 is 800 reduction with seducer and reduction jewelry. This is also on the low end because I'm going off memory and assuming 7 light. If you want to include seducer's effect on enchants, then you also have to include it's effect on total cost reduction. Seducer is left over v14 gear and I havent decided what I want to replace it with yet, but I agree that it's not as good as it's was before CP, and I wish I had never said anything about it. All of my jewelry enchant testing was without the 5 piece bonus because I knew it reduced them. (But still increases overall cost reduction significantly, and it's still a solid choice for a 4pc.)

You can actually test it in combat! Pull a mob, spam a spell. You will get several more of that spell before you are OOM with reduction (In my case with my CP). Pull one that CCs you if you like. The results are usually similar. I did not use a pot before I tested regen however, which is significant and noted.

Ezareth

Xeven wrote: »

Ezareth wrote: »

This is solely about which enchants are best for *you*.

It's not though Ez, I have 100 green CP. I'm not spending them all on regen! Most people don't have that luxury.

Mathematically, you should be. That's all I can really say about it.

Xeven wrote: »

You've lost me on the 1200 or 1600 regen. Where are you getting those numbers? I think there is a major flaw in your reasoning somewhere. If you want to compare 5 piece sets along with enchants, seducers doesn't come close to being as good as Willows path but that's a whole other discussion.

1200 is 600 cost reduction converted to regen, granted with a slight cost reduction bias, because I am ranged with unstoppable magicka pots, I have very little breakfree/targeting down time. This is backed up by an addon I wrote to measure casts per second. Slightly less than 1 *while in combat*. In fact lets just call it 1.8 casts per tick of regen. That puts it at 1080 equivalent regen which still beats 1020 (without a 100 CP investment and 100% potion up time! hey now, that's somethin!).

1600 is 800 reduction with seducer and reduction jewelry. This is also on the low end because I'm going off memory and assuming 7 light. If you want to include seducer's effect on enchants, then you also have to include it's effect on total cost reduction. Seducer is left over v14 gear and I havent decided what I want to replace it with yet, but I agree that it's not as good as it's was before CP, and I wish I had never said anything about it. All of my jewelry enchant testing was without the 5 piece bonus because I knew it reduced them. (But still increases overall cost reduction significantly, and it's still a solid choice for a 4pc.)

You can actually test it in combat! Pull a mob, spam a spell. You will get several more of that spell before you are OOM with reduction (In my case with my CP). Pull one that CCs you if you like. The results are usually similar. I did not use a pot before I tested regen however, which is significant and noted.

I don't know how I can explain it any easier to you man. The numbers I gave are accurate. Yours don't make any sense. You don't receive 600 cost reduction (From enchants) plain and simple. The extra reduction provided by seducers is irrelevant except for the fact that it makes your cost reduction enchants less effective. When you do a scientific study you isolate and eliminate all the variables but one and then you do your test.

Do this for me. Equip all your gear with your cost reduction enchants. Look at the cost of any of your spells on tooltip. Unequip your jewelry and look at it again. Then double that and there is your MP2 equivalent required at 1 second per cast.

I'm trying to help you here but it's like you're not listening to me. I'm about to give up and just let you go on doing what you're doing which may be best at this point.

Xeven

Ezareth wrote: »

I don't know how I can explain it any easier to you man. The numbers I gave are accurate. Yours don't make any sense. You don't receive 600 cost reduction (From enchants) plain and simple. The extra reduction provided by seducers is irrelevant except for the fact that it makes your cost reduction enchants less effective. When you do a scientific study you isolate and eliminate all the variables but one and then you do your test.

Do this for me. Equip all your gear with your cost reduction enchants. Look at the cost of any of your spells on tooltip. Unequip your jewelry and look at it again. Then double that and there is your MP2 equivalent required at 1 second per cast.

I am home now and I can actually check. I'm getting 584 reduction from 3 enchants in 5 light, no seducer, exactly. At 0.9 casts per second that's equal to 1,051 regen. Follow?

Now here is 3 regen enchants:

169*3 = 507 Magicka regen.
Altmer 10%
Sorc 9%
Light Armor 20%
Major Intellect 20%
Meteor 2%

That's 1020 with 100 CP into regen which I don't have, and with 100% pot uptime!

1,051>1020... Not only does it win if youre casting at least 0.9 times a second, it wins indisputably with less than 300 CP, it wins with no potions, it wins with no racial passives. If you lack any one of those three things, there is not even an argument anymore. I don't know how else to tell you that either. It takes at least 300 CP, racial passives, and 100% potion uptime to be competitive with cost reduction on your jewelry, AND there is an opportunity cost associated with that. See tumbling or anything else in the thief constellation.

I'm trying to help you here but it's like you're not listening to me. I'm about to give up and just let you go on doing what you're doing which may be best at this point.

You are the one who isn't listening.

Ezareth

Xeven wrote: »

Ezareth wrote: »

I don't know how I can explain it any easier to you man. The numbers I gave are accurate. Yours don't make any sense. You don't receive 600 cost reduction (From enchants) plain and simple. The extra reduction provided by seducers is irrelevant except for the fact that it makes your cost reduction enchants less effective. When you do a scientific study you isolate and eliminate all the variables but one and then you do your test.

Do this for me. Equip all your gear with your cost reduction enchants. Look at the cost of any of your spells on tooltip. Unequip your jewelry and look at it again. Then double that and there is your MP2 equivalent required at 1 second per cast.

I am home now and I can actually check. I'm getting 584 reduction from 3 enchants in 5 light, no seducer, exactly. At 0.9 casts per second that's equal to 1,051 regen. Follow?

Now here is 3 regen enchants:

169*3 = 507 Magicka regen.
Altmer 10%
Sorc 9%
Light Armor 20%
Major Intellect 20%
Meteor 2%

That's 1020 with 100 CP into regen which I don't have, and with 100% pot uptime!

1,051>1020... Not only does it win if youre casting at least 0.9 times a second, it wins indisputably with less than 300 CP, it wins with no potions, it wins with no racial passives. If you lack any one of those three things, there is not even an argument anymore. I don't know how else to tell you that either. It takes at least 300 CP, racial passives, and 100% potion uptime to be competitive with cost reduction on your jewelry, AND there is an opportunity cost associated with that. See tumbling or anything else in the thief constellation.

I'm trying to help you here but it's like you're not listening to me. I'm about to give up and just let you go on doing what you're doing which may be best at this point.

You are the one who isn't listening.

I've already established that Cost reduction enchants are superior or a wash when you're not running 5 pc seducer, you're not explaining anything that I already haven't said.

This whole conversation started with your comment that my statement was somehow incorrect.

Xeven wrote: »

Ezareth wrote: »

I doubt you're casting every single second in PvP so Regen may come out slight;y ahead in most cases. However, when you pressured the most you are casting every second and the cost reduction will come out ahead. All in all the difference is probably a Wash.

It doesnt. My total cost reduction is ~800 per spell. I weave CS so I'm casting something once a second 90% of the time while in combat. It would take ~1600 regen to beat that. I've tried both and regen always falls short right now. Like you and I both just said, it depends on how much you're casting, you can't just math it.

Your ~800 Cost reduction number is with seducer. All comparisons thus in your scenario have made between cost reduction and magicka regen enchants (the variable in question) while wearing seducer. I've provided all of the numbers under that scenario. Remember the 6.9% that was "Almost Irrelevant"?

I think we've covered all that needs to be said and I have no desire to continue this pointless back and forth with you.

twistedmonk

very interesting...

so what should I use again?

Xeven

I've asked you to forget about seducer several times in this conversation.

Lets just talk about rings and necklace for a moment.

I wish I had never said anything about it

Ez I understand that seducer reduces reduction enchants. I tried to make this just about jewelry, but if you want to include seducer in this debate, then cost reduction becomes over 800 in which case you need ~1600 regen to beat it

Since you seem to have your Seducer goggles on...

Even if we ignore seducer's bonus and only look at it's effect on jewelry cost reduction, you still need 300 cp (with no other thief stars), 100% potion uptime, and Altmer to come out ahead.

I've already established that Cost reduction enchants are superior

No you didn't you only muddied the water and confused people. People who have to ask which is better on jewelry likely don't have 300+ cp, likely don't have 100% major intellect uptime, are highly likely to not have any racial regen passives at all, and most certainly do not understand that all of this is required before jewelry regen even starts to become competitive.

In almost all cases reduction is better for these people, but you somehow felt the need to enlighten me with this seducer mumbojumbo. I've known since I started playing in 1.5 when sorc sucked ass and couldn't even refresh hardened ward.