[Build] "The Lightslayer" - Magicka Templar - Battlegrounds Build - HotR Patch

Minno

Lexxypwns wrote: »

paulsimonps wrote: »

Waffennacht wrote: »

CatchMeTrolling wrote: »

I wear riposte and put points into direct damage mitigation, does the two combine well like I thought or?

They combine more poorly. The more effective you make one Mitigation the less effective others become.

Let's say you achieve max armor resistance and have 50% Mitigation, Riposte becomes valued at 7.5% reduction.

Riposte works best with shields, because they have 0 resistance you get the full 15% mitigation from Riposte

Saying they combine more poorly is very misleading. Yes diminishing returns is a thing but if you say they combine poorly cause they lower each other is the same as saying "Blocking is really bad if you have high resistance". Cause if you have 50% mitigation from Armor then Blocking only adds 25% not 50%, but you can flip that. "You should not use armor if you block, cause if you block then your armor is halved". See, very misleading. Its far more giving to compare total mitigation change, and yea comparing just 2 sources like that will show wide differences, but it doesn't make them that bad.

Bad is relative. Riposte gives far less benefit the more forms of other mitigation you stack. At a point of mitigation(haven't mathed it) the increased healing from adding more damage/crit does more for your survivability, not to mention the extra killing power. Therefore, for pvp, I truly believe it is accurate to say riposte is bad on high mitigation builds. There is, after all, an opportunity cost to choose riposte in place of a different 5pc set.

I think it is safe to say, outside of a vacuum, riposte is terrible on high mitigation builds. In a vacuum it can add more mitigation to most builds, but in reality the price isn't worth paying unless it's one of your main mitigation sources.

So then for builds with inherently higher resistances, it's better to stack those raw resists than adding percentage based mitigation?

Or it's, what I imagine, a case by case basis in that I'll have to calculate what the best route and optimize for it?

paulsimonps

Lexxypwns wrote: »

paulsimonps wrote: »

Waffennacht wrote: »

CatchMeTrolling wrote: »

I wear riposte and put points into direct damage mitigation, does the two combine well like I thought or?

They combine more poorly. The more effective you make one Mitigation the less effective others become.

Let's say you achieve max armor resistance and have 50% Mitigation, Riposte becomes valued at 7.5% reduction.

Riposte works best with shields, because they have 0 resistance you get the full 15% mitigation from Riposte

Saying they combine more poorly is very misleading. Yes diminishing returns is a thing but if you say they combine poorly cause they lower each other is the same as saying "Blocking is really bad if you have high resistance". Cause if you have 50% mitigation from Armor then Blocking only adds 25% not 50%, but you can flip that. "You should not use armor if you block, cause if you block then your armor is halved". See, very misleading. Its far more giving to compare total mitigation change, and yea comparing just 2 sources like that will show wide differences, but it doesn't make them that bad.

Bad is relative. Riposte gives far less benefit the more forms of other mitigation you stack. At a point of mitigation(haven't mathed it) the increased healing from adding more damage/crit does more for your survivability, not to mention the extra killing power. Therefore, for pvp, I truly believe it is accurate to say riposte is bad on high mitigation builds. There is, after all, an opportunity cost to choose riposte in place of a different 5pc set.

I think it is safe to say, outside of a vacuum, riposte is terrible on high mitigation builds. In a vacuum it can add more mitigation to most builds, but in reality the price isn't worth paying unless it's one of your main mitigation sources.

Are you using Resistance and mitigation interchangeably in that post? cause you can't do that, it won't make any sense if you do. Cause a high MITIGATION build will be using a lot of sources for mitigation already and determining which of the many sources is bad is tricky. But if you are saying that a high RESISTANCE build would not benefit as much from another type of mitigation source as opposed to increasing its already high RESISTANCE then that is another thing entirely.

Waffennacht

Minno wrote: »

Lexxypwns wrote: »

paulsimonps wrote: »

Waffennacht wrote: »

CatchMeTrolling wrote: »

I wear riposte and put points into direct damage mitigation, does the two combine well like I thought or?

They combine more poorly. The more effective you make one Mitigation the less effective others become.

Let's say you achieve max armor resistance and have 50% Mitigation, Riposte becomes valued at 7.5% reduction.

Riposte works best with shields, because they have 0 resistance you get the full 15% mitigation from Riposte

Saying they combine more poorly is very misleading. Yes diminishing returns is a thing but if you say they combine poorly cause they lower each other is the same as saying "Blocking is really bad if you have high resistance". Cause if you have 50% mitigation from Armor then Blocking only adds 25% not 50%, but you can flip that. "You should not use armor if you block, cause if you block then your armor is halved". See, very misleading. Its far more giving to compare total mitigation change, and yea comparing just 2 sources like that will show wide differences, but it doesn't make them that bad.

Bad is relative. Riposte gives far less benefit the more forms of other mitigation you stack. At a point of mitigation(haven't mathed it) the increased healing from adding more damage/crit does more for your survivability, not to mention the extra killing power. Therefore, for pvp, I truly believe it is accurate to say riposte is bad on high mitigation builds. There is, after all, an opportunity cost to choose riposte in place of a different 5pc set.

I think it is safe to say, outside of a vacuum, riposte is terrible on high mitigation builds. In a vacuum it can add more mitigation to most builds, but in reality the price isn't worth paying unless it's one of your main mitigation sources.

So then for builds with inherently higher resistances, it's better to stack those raw resists than adding percentage based mitigation?

Or it's, what I imagine, a case by case basis in that I'll have to calculate what the best route and optimize for it?

@Minno it's more like, you wanna maximize each source then go to a new source.

For example, let's say you for sure have 30% damage reduction from Major protection (just say you do) and now you wanna decide between Riposte or heartland, well Heartland will provide a real value of 3.5% (the flat 5% becomes 3.5%) and then the player AoE reduction becomes 13% damage reduction - for a total of 16.5% total Reduction (from player AoE) Riposte's real value becomes 10.5% damage reduction.

Therefore the difference in mitigation between Riposte and Heartland becomes 10.5% vs 16.5% (only AoEs but is an example) so even though the wording would suggest a potential difference of 10% it's really 6%.

Especially with the nerfs to sharpened, and the higher total amount possible, to prevent the most damage, probably using armor resistance is the way to go first, - if available.

Minno

Waffennacht wrote: »

Minno wrote: »

Lexxypwns wrote: »

paulsimonps wrote: »

Waffennacht wrote: »

CatchMeTrolling wrote: »

I wear riposte and put points into direct damage mitigation, does the two combine well like I thought or?

They combine more poorly. The more effective you make one Mitigation the less effective others become.

Let's say you achieve max armor resistance and have 50% Mitigation, Riposte becomes valued at 7.5% reduction.

Riposte works best with shields, because they have 0 resistance you get the full 15% mitigation from Riposte

Saying they combine more poorly is very misleading. Yes diminishing returns is a thing but if you say they combine poorly cause they lower each other is the same as saying "Blocking is really bad if you have high resistance". Cause if you have 50% mitigation from Armor then Blocking only adds 25% not 50%, but you can flip that. "You should not use armor if you block, cause if you block then your armor is halved". See, very misleading. Its far more giving to compare total mitigation change, and yea comparing just 2 sources like that will show wide differences, but it doesn't make them that bad.

Bad is relative. Riposte gives far less benefit the more forms of other mitigation you stack. At a point of mitigation(haven't mathed it) the increased healing from adding more damage/crit does more for your survivability, not to mention the extra killing power. Therefore, for pvp, I truly believe it is accurate to say riposte is bad on high mitigation builds. There is, after all, an opportunity cost to choose riposte in place of a different 5pc set.

I think it is safe to say, outside of a vacuum, riposte is terrible on high mitigation builds. In a vacuum it can add more mitigation to most builds, but in reality the price isn't worth paying unless it's one of your main mitigation sources.

So then for builds with inherently higher resistances, it's better to stack those raw resists than adding percentage based mitigation?

Or it's, what I imagine, a case by case basis in that I'll have to calculate what the best route and optimize for it?

@Minno it's more like, you wanna maximize each source then go to a new source.

For example, let's say you for sure have 30% damage reduction from Major protection (just say you do) and now you wanna decide between Riposte or heartland, well Heartland will provide a real value of 3.5% (the flat 5% becomes 3.5%) and then the player AoE reduction becomes 13% damage reduction - for a total of 16.5% total Reduction (from player AoE) Riposte's real value becomes 10.5% damage reduction.

Therefore the difference in mitigation between Riposte and Heartland becomes 10.5% vs 16.5% (only AoEs but is an example) so even though the wording would suggest a potential difference of 10% it's really 6%.

Especially with the nerfs to sharpened, and the higher total amount possible, to prevent the most damage, probably using armor resistance is the way to go first, - if available.

That makes sense. And confirms my current understanding how best to optimize defense for PvP.

Another question, which is the equation used to determine the diminishing returns? I assume it's under Paul's mitigation thread?

paulsimonps

Minno wrote: »

Waffennacht wrote: »

Minno wrote: »

Lexxypwns wrote: »

paulsimonps wrote: »

Waffennacht wrote: »

CatchMeTrolling wrote: »

I wear riposte and put points into direct damage mitigation, does the two combine well like I thought or?

They combine more poorly. The more effective you make one Mitigation the less effective others become.

Let's say you achieve max armor resistance and have 50% Mitigation, Riposte becomes valued at 7.5% reduction.

Riposte works best with shields, because they have 0 resistance you get the full 15% mitigation from Riposte

Saying they combine more poorly is very misleading. Yes diminishing returns is a thing but if you say they combine poorly cause they lower each other is the same as saying "Blocking is really bad if you have high resistance". Cause if you have 50% mitigation from Armor then Blocking only adds 25% not 50%, but you can flip that. "You should not use armor if you block, cause if you block then your armor is halved". See, very misleading. Its far more giving to compare total mitigation change, and yea comparing just 2 sources like that will show wide differences, but it doesn't make them that bad.

Bad is relative. Riposte gives far less benefit the more forms of other mitigation you stack. At a point of mitigation(haven't mathed it) the increased healing from adding more damage/crit does more for your survivability, not to mention the extra killing power. Therefore, for pvp, I truly believe it is accurate to say riposte is bad on high mitigation builds. There is, after all, an opportunity cost to choose riposte in place of a different 5pc set.

I think it is safe to say, outside of a vacuum, riposte is terrible on high mitigation builds. In a vacuum it can add more mitigation to most builds, but in reality the price isn't worth paying unless it's one of your main mitigation sources.

So then for builds with inherently higher resistances, it's better to stack those raw resists than adding percentage based mitigation?

Or it's, what I imagine, a case by case basis in that I'll have to calculate what the best route and optimize for it?

@Minno it's more like, you wanna maximize each source then go to a new source.

For example, let's say you for sure have 30% damage reduction from Major protection (just say you do) and now you wanna decide between Riposte or heartland, well Heartland will provide a real value of 3.5% (the flat 5% becomes 3.5%) and then the player AoE reduction becomes 13% damage reduction - for a total of 16.5% total Reduction (from player AoE) Riposte's real value becomes 10.5% damage reduction.

Therefore the difference in mitigation between Riposte and Heartland becomes 10.5% vs 16.5% (only AoEs but is an example) so even though the wording would suggest a potential difference of 10% it's really 6%.

Especially with the nerfs to sharpened, and the higher total amount possible, to prevent the most damage, probably using armor resistance is the way to go first, - if available.

That makes sense. And confirms my current understanding how best to optimize defense for PvP.

Another question, which is the equation used to determine the diminishing returns? I assume it's under Paul's mitigation thread?

Yea, its all in my thread. Basically what you want to consider is Defense vs Offense. You want to survive but you can't put too much into it or you will not be able to kill anyone. Btw my formula includes how to calculate it with vampire as well as damage shields.

Waffennacht

paulsimonps wrote: »

Minno wrote: »

Waffennacht wrote: »

Minno wrote: »

Lexxypwns wrote: »

paulsimonps wrote: »

Waffennacht wrote: »

CatchMeTrolling wrote: »

I wear riposte and put points into direct damage mitigation, does the two combine well like I thought or?

They combine more poorly. The more effective you make one Mitigation the less effective others become.

Let's say you achieve max armor resistance and have 50% Mitigation, Riposte becomes valued at 7.5% reduction.

Riposte works best with shields, because they have 0 resistance you get the full 15% mitigation from Riposte

Saying they combine more poorly is very misleading. Yes diminishing returns is a thing but if you say they combine poorly cause they lower each other is the same as saying "Blocking is really bad if you have high resistance". Cause if you have 50% mitigation from Armor then Blocking only adds 25% not 50%, but you can flip that. "You should not use armor if you block, cause if you block then your armor is halved". See, very misleading. Its far more giving to compare total mitigation change, and yea comparing just 2 sources like that will show wide differences, but it doesn't make them that bad.

Bad is relative. Riposte gives far less benefit the more forms of other mitigation you stack. At a point of mitigation(haven't mathed it) the increased healing from adding more damage/crit does more for your survivability, not to mention the extra killing power. Therefore, for pvp, I truly believe it is accurate to say riposte is bad on high mitigation builds. There is, after all, an opportunity cost to choose riposte in place of a different 5pc set.

I think it is safe to say, outside of a vacuum, riposte is terrible on high mitigation builds. In a vacuum it can add more mitigation to most builds, but in reality the price isn't worth paying unless it's one of your main mitigation sources.

So then for builds with inherently higher resistances, it's better to stack those raw resists than adding percentage based mitigation?

Or it's, what I imagine, a case by case basis in that I'll have to calculate what the best route and optimize for it?

@Minno it's more like, you wanna maximize each source then go to a new source.

For example, let's say you for sure have 30% damage reduction from Major protection (just say you do) and now you wanna decide between Riposte or heartland, well Heartland will provide a real value of 3.5% (the flat 5% becomes 3.5%) and then the player AoE reduction becomes 13% damage reduction - for a total of 16.5% total Reduction (from player AoE) Riposte's real value becomes 10.5% damage reduction.

Therefore the difference in mitigation between Riposte and Heartland becomes 10.5% vs 16.5% (only AoEs but is an example) so even though the wording would suggest a potential difference of 10% it's really 6%.

Especially with the nerfs to sharpened, and the higher total amount possible, to prevent the most damage, probably using armor resistance is the way to go first, - if available.

That makes sense. And confirms my current understanding how best to optimize defense for PvP.

Another question, which is the equation used to determine the diminishing returns? I assume it's under Paul's mitigation thread?

Yea, its all in my thread. Basically what you want to consider is Defense vs Offense. You want to survive but you can't put too much into it or you will not be able to kill anyone. Btw my formula includes how to calculate it with vampire as well as damage shields.

Yeapers, I'm always hitting up his thread to double check stuff. What's really cool too is that @paulsimonps actually did calculations for my build

Minno

paulsimonps wrote: »

Minno wrote: »

Waffennacht wrote: »

Minno wrote: »

Lexxypwns wrote: »

paulsimonps wrote: »

Waffennacht wrote: »

CatchMeTrolling wrote: »

I wear riposte and put points into direct damage mitigation, does the two combine well like I thought or?

They combine more poorly. The more effective you make one Mitigation the less effective others become.

Let's say you achieve max armor resistance and have 50% Mitigation, Riposte becomes valued at 7.5% reduction.

Riposte works best with shields, because they have 0 resistance you get the full 15% mitigation from Riposte

Saying they combine more poorly is very misleading. Yes diminishing returns is a thing but if you say they combine poorly cause they lower each other is the same as saying "Blocking is really bad if you have high resistance". Cause if you have 50% mitigation from Armor then Blocking only adds 25% not 50%, but you can flip that. "You should not use armor if you block, cause if you block then your armor is halved". See, very misleading. Its far more giving to compare total mitigation change, and yea comparing just 2 sources like that will show wide differences, but it doesn't make them that bad.

Bad is relative. Riposte gives far less benefit the more forms of other mitigation you stack. At a point of mitigation(haven't mathed it) the increased healing from adding more damage/crit does more for your survivability, not to mention the extra killing power. Therefore, for pvp, I truly believe it is accurate to say riposte is bad on high mitigation builds. There is, after all, an opportunity cost to choose riposte in place of a different 5pc set.

I think it is safe to say, outside of a vacuum, riposte is terrible on high mitigation builds. In a vacuum it can add more mitigation to most builds, but in reality the price isn't worth paying unless it's one of your main mitigation sources.

So then for builds with inherently higher resistances, it's better to stack those raw resists than adding percentage based mitigation?

Or it's, what I imagine, a case by case basis in that I'll have to calculate what the best route and optimize for it?

@Minno it's more like, you wanna maximize each source then go to a new source.

For example, let's say you for sure have 30% damage reduction from Major protection (just say you do) and now you wanna decide between Riposte or heartland, well Heartland will provide a real value of 3.5% (the flat 5% becomes 3.5%) and then the player AoE reduction becomes 13% damage reduction - for a total of 16.5% total Reduction (from player AoE) Riposte's real value becomes 10.5% damage reduction.

Therefore the difference in mitigation between Riposte and Heartland becomes 10.5% vs 16.5% (only AoEs but is an example) so even though the wording would suggest a potential difference of 10% it's really 6%.

Especially with the nerfs to sharpened, and the higher total amount possible, to prevent the most damage, probably using armor resistance is the way to go first, - if available.

That makes sense. And confirms my current understanding how best to optimize defense for PvP.

Another question, which is the equation used to determine the diminishing returns? I assume it's under Paul's mitigation thread?

Yea, its all in my thread. Basically what you want to consider is Defense vs Offense. You want to survive but you can't put too much into it or you will not be able to kill anyone. Btw my formula includes how to calculate it with vampire as well as damage shields.

Oh yes! Ok time to do some math.

Lexxypwns

Minno wrote: »

Lexxypwns wrote: »

paulsimonps wrote: »

Waffennacht wrote: »

CatchMeTrolling wrote: »

I wear riposte and put points into direct damage mitigation, does the two combine well like I thought or?

They combine more poorly. The more effective you make one Mitigation the less effective others become.

Let's say you achieve max armor resistance and have 50% Mitigation, Riposte becomes valued at 7.5% reduction.

Riposte works best with shields, because they have 0 resistance you get the full 15% mitigation from Riposte

Saying they combine more poorly is very misleading. Yes diminishing returns is a thing but if you say they combine poorly cause they lower each other is the same as saying "Blocking is really bad if you have high resistance". Cause if you have 50% mitigation from Armor then Blocking only adds 25% not 50%, but you can flip that. "You should not use armor if you block, cause if you block then your armor is halved". See, very misleading. Its far more giving to compare total mitigation change, and yea comparing just 2 sources like that will show wide differences, but it doesn't make them that bad.

Bad is relative. Riposte gives far less benefit the more forms of other mitigation you stack. At a point of mitigation(haven't mathed it) the increased healing from adding more damage/crit does more for your survivability, not to mention the extra killing power. Therefore, for pvp, I truly believe it is accurate to say riposte is bad on high mitigation builds. There is, after all, an opportunity cost to choose riposte in place of a different 5pc set.

I think it is safe to say, outside of a vacuum, riposte is terrible on high mitigation builds. In a vacuum it can add more mitigation to most builds, but in reality the price isn't worth paying unless it's one of your main mitigation sources.

So then for builds with inherently higher resistances, it's better to stack those raw resists than adding percentage based mitigation?

Or it's, what I imagine, a case by case basis in that I'll have to calculate what the best route and optimize for it?

It's case by case imo. For example, I play light armor mageblade in riposte/trans/skoria. My physical/spell resistances offer a negligible contribution to my overall mitigation. I'm primarily gaining mitigation from Ironclad, thick skin, riposte, timed blocking, and 3800 crit resist.

On this build, I've determined that as a back bar set there is nothing that will provide more for the build than riposte. Particularly in no CP where all my mitigation is riposte, trans+impen, and blocking big hits.

A light armor mDK running Impreg and sturdy for "permablock" won't benefit from riposte in the same way.

paulsimonps wrote: »

Lexxypwns wrote: »

paulsimonps wrote: »

Waffennacht wrote: »

CatchMeTrolling wrote: »

I wear riposte and put points into direct damage mitigation, does the two combine well like I thought or?

They combine more poorly. The more effective you make one Mitigation the less effective others become.

Let's say you achieve max armor resistance and have 50% Mitigation, Riposte becomes valued at 7.5% reduction.

Riposte works best with shields, because they have 0 resistance you get the full 15% mitigation from Riposte

Saying they combine more poorly is very misleading. Yes diminishing returns is a thing but if you say they combine poorly cause they lower each other is the same as saying "Blocking is really bad if you have high resistance". Cause if you have 50% mitigation from Armor then Blocking only adds 25% not 50%, but you can flip that. "You should not use armor if you block, cause if you block then your armor is halved". See, very misleading. Its far more giving to compare total mitigation change, and yea comparing just 2 sources like that will show wide differences, but it doesn't make them that bad.

Bad is relative. Riposte gives far less benefit the more forms of other mitigation you stack. At a point of mitigation(haven't mathed it) the increased healing from adding more damage/crit does more for your survivability, not to mention the extra killing power. Therefore, for pvp, I truly believe it is accurate to say riposte is bad on high mitigation builds. There is, after all, an opportunity cost to choose riposte in place of a different 5pc set.

I think it is safe to say, outside of a vacuum, riposte is terrible on high mitigation builds. In a vacuum it can add more mitigation to most builds, but in reality the price isn't worth paying unless it's one of your main mitigation sources.

Are you using Resistance and mitigation interchangeably in that post? cause you can't do that, it won't make any sense if you do. Cause a high MITIGATION build will be using a lot of sources for mitigation already and determining which of the many sources is bad is tricky. But if you are saying that a high RESISTANCE build would not benefit as much from another type of mitigation source as opposed to increasing its already high RESISTANCE then that is another thing entirely.

I'm not using them interchangeably, they're just both true. On a high resistance or mitigation build, the opportunity cost to add riposte is likely too high to provide good value relative to other sets, since it's likely you have already sacrificed damage or sustain to get said mitigation or resistances.

And since minor maim is one of the weakest and most plentiful forms of non-cp percentage based mitigation it's only logic that MOST builds with either high resistances or mitigation, you're likely to benefit more from something else.

Furthermore, builds with a decent bastion allotment will see more benefit from riposte than builds without. This still does not make stacking bastion some OP option, just gives a bit more opportunity to invest into that star when running riposte.

Minno

Lexxypwns wrote: »

Minno wrote: »

Lexxypwns wrote: »

paulsimonps wrote: »

Waffennacht wrote: »

CatchMeTrolling wrote: »

I wear riposte and put points into direct damage mitigation, does the two combine well like I thought or?

They combine more poorly. The more effective you make one Mitigation the less effective others become.

Let's say you achieve max armor resistance and have 50% Mitigation, Riposte becomes valued at 7.5% reduction.

Riposte works best with shields, because they have 0 resistance you get the full 15% mitigation from Riposte

Saying they combine more poorly is very misleading. Yes diminishing returns is a thing but if you say they combine poorly cause they lower each other is the same as saying "Blocking is really bad if you have high resistance". Cause if you have 50% mitigation from Armor then Blocking only adds 25% not 50%, but you can flip that. "You should not use armor if you block, cause if you block then your armor is halved". See, very misleading. Its far more giving to compare total mitigation change, and yea comparing just 2 sources like that will show wide differences, but it doesn't make them that bad.

Bad is relative. Riposte gives far less benefit the more forms of other mitigation you stack. At a point of mitigation(haven't mathed it) the increased healing from adding more damage/crit does more for your survivability, not to mention the extra killing power. Therefore, for pvp, I truly believe it is accurate to say riposte is bad on high mitigation builds. There is, after all, an opportunity cost to choose riposte in place of a different 5pc set.

I think it is safe to say, outside of a vacuum, riposte is terrible on high mitigation builds. In a vacuum it can add more mitigation to most builds, but in reality the price isn't worth paying unless it's one of your main mitigation sources.

So then for builds with inherently higher resistances, it's better to stack those raw resists than adding percentage based mitigation?

Or it's, what I imagine, a case by case basis in that I'll have to calculate what the best route and optimize for it?

It's case by case imo. For example, I play light armor mageblade in riposte/trans/skoria. My physical/spell resistances offer a negligible contribution to my overall mitigation. I'm primarily gaining mitigation from Ironclad, thick skin, riposte, timed blocking, and 3800 crit resist.

On this build, I've determined that as a back bar set there is nothing that will provide more for the build than riposte. Particularly in no CP where all my mitigation is riposte, trans+impen, and blocking big hits.

A light armor mDK running Impreg and sturdy for "permablock" won't benefit from riposte in the same way.

paulsimonps wrote: »

Lexxypwns wrote: »

paulsimonps wrote: »

Waffennacht wrote: »

CatchMeTrolling wrote: »

I wear riposte and put points into direct damage mitigation, does the two combine well like I thought or?

They combine more poorly. The more effective you make one Mitigation the less effective others become.

Let's say you achieve max armor resistance and have 50% Mitigation, Riposte becomes valued at 7.5% reduction.

Riposte works best with shields, because they have 0 resistance you get the full 15% mitigation from Riposte

Saying they combine more poorly is very misleading. Yes diminishing returns is a thing but if you say they combine poorly cause they lower each other is the same as saying "Blocking is really bad if you have high resistance". Cause if you have 50% mitigation from Armor then Blocking only adds 25% not 50%, but you can flip that. "You should not use armor if you block, cause if you block then your armor is halved". See, very misleading. Its far more giving to compare total mitigation change, and yea comparing just 2 sources like that will show wide differences, but it doesn't make them that bad.

Bad is relative. Riposte gives far less benefit the more forms of other mitigation you stack. At a point of mitigation(haven't mathed it) the increased healing from adding more damage/crit does more for your survivability, not to mention the extra killing power. Therefore, for pvp, I truly believe it is accurate to say riposte is bad on high mitigation builds. There is, after all, an opportunity cost to choose riposte in place of a different 5pc set.

I think it is safe to say, outside of a vacuum, riposte is terrible on high mitigation builds. In a vacuum it can add more mitigation to most builds, but in reality the price isn't worth paying unless it's one of your main mitigation sources.

Are you using Resistance and mitigation interchangeably in that post? cause you can't do that, it won't make any sense if you do. Cause a high MITIGATION build will be using a lot of sources for mitigation already and determining which of the many sources is bad is tricky. But if you are saying that a high RESISTANCE build would not benefit as much from another type of mitigation source as opposed to increasing its already high RESISTANCE then that is another thing entirely.

I'm not using them interchangeably, they're just both true. On a high resistance or mitigation build, the opportunity cost to add riposte is likely too high to provide good value relative to other sets, since it's likely you have already sacrificed damage or sustain to get said mitigation or resistances.

And since minor maim is one of the weakest and most plentiful forms of non-cp percentage based mitigation it's only logic that MOST builds with either high resistances or mitigation, you're likely to benefit more from something else.

Furthermore, builds with a decent bastion allotment will see more benefit from riposte than builds without. This still does not make stacking bastion some OP option, just gives a bit more opportunity to invest into that star when running riposte.

Thanks. For my build I've been looking at adding resists to offset LA's physical DMG weakness and since I'm a Breton Templar in LA it felt weird adding elemental defender if I had high spell resists already. I think I got a few set combos, just trying to reduce what I can without removing consistency in dmg/defense.("trim the fat, stack the protein" mentality).

Lexxypwns

Minno wrote: »

Lexxypwns wrote: »

Minno wrote: »

Lexxypwns wrote: »

paulsimonps wrote: »

Waffennacht wrote: »

CatchMeTrolling wrote: »

I wear riposte and put points into direct damage mitigation, does the two combine well like I thought or?

They combine more poorly. The more effective you make one Mitigation the less effective others become.

Let's say you achieve max armor resistance and have 50% Mitigation, Riposte becomes valued at 7.5% reduction.

Riposte works best with shields, because they have 0 resistance you get the full 15% mitigation from Riposte

Saying they combine more poorly is very misleading. Yes diminishing returns is a thing but if you say they combine poorly cause they lower each other is the same as saying "Blocking is really bad if you have high resistance". Cause if you have 50% mitigation from Armor then Blocking only adds 25% not 50%, but you can flip that. "You should not use armor if you block, cause if you block then your armor is halved". See, very misleading. Its far more giving to compare total mitigation change, and yea comparing just 2 sources like that will show wide differences, but it doesn't make them that bad.

Bad is relative. Riposte gives far less benefit the more forms of other mitigation you stack. At a point of mitigation(haven't mathed it) the increased healing from adding more damage/crit does more for your survivability, not to mention the extra killing power. Therefore, for pvp, I truly believe it is accurate to say riposte is bad on high mitigation builds. There is, after all, an opportunity cost to choose riposte in place of a different 5pc set.

I think it is safe to say, outside of a vacuum, riposte is terrible on high mitigation builds. In a vacuum it can add more mitigation to most builds, but in reality the price isn't worth paying unless it's one of your main mitigation sources.

So then for builds with inherently higher resistances, it's better to stack those raw resists than adding percentage based mitigation?

Or it's, what I imagine, a case by case basis in that I'll have to calculate what the best route and optimize for it?

It's case by case imo. For example, I play light armor mageblade in riposte/trans/skoria. My physical/spell resistances offer a negligible contribution to my overall mitigation. I'm primarily gaining mitigation from Ironclad, thick skin, riposte, timed blocking, and 3800 crit resist.

On this build, I've determined that as a back bar set there is nothing that will provide more for the build than riposte. Particularly in no CP where all my mitigation is riposte, trans+impen, and blocking big hits.

A light armor mDK running Impreg and sturdy for "permablock" won't benefit from riposte in the same way.

paulsimonps wrote: »

Lexxypwns wrote: »

paulsimonps wrote: »

Waffennacht wrote: »

CatchMeTrolling wrote: »

I wear riposte and put points into direct damage mitigation, does the two combine well like I thought or?

They combine more poorly. The more effective you make one Mitigation the less effective others become.

Let's say you achieve max armor resistance and have 50% Mitigation, Riposte becomes valued at 7.5% reduction.

Riposte works best with shields, because they have 0 resistance you get the full 15% mitigation from Riposte

Saying they combine more poorly is very misleading. Yes diminishing returns is a thing but if you say they combine poorly cause they lower each other is the same as saying "Blocking is really bad if you have high resistance". Cause if you have 50% mitigation from Armor then Blocking only adds 25% not 50%, but you can flip that. "You should not use armor if you block, cause if you block then your armor is halved". See, very misleading. Its far more giving to compare total mitigation change, and yea comparing just 2 sources like that will show wide differences, but it doesn't make them that bad.

Bad is relative. Riposte gives far less benefit the more forms of other mitigation you stack. At a point of mitigation(haven't mathed it) the increased healing from adding more damage/crit does more for your survivability, not to mention the extra killing power. Therefore, for pvp, I truly believe it is accurate to say riposte is bad on high mitigation builds. There is, after all, an opportunity cost to choose riposte in place of a different 5pc set.

I think it is safe to say, outside of a vacuum, riposte is terrible on high mitigation builds. In a vacuum it can add more mitigation to most builds, but in reality the price isn't worth paying unless it's one of your main mitigation sources.

Are you using Resistance and mitigation interchangeably in that post? cause you can't do that, it won't make any sense if you do. Cause a high MITIGATION build will be using a lot of sources for mitigation already and determining which of the many sources is bad is tricky. But if you are saying that a high RESISTANCE build would not benefit as much from another type of mitigation source as opposed to increasing its already high RESISTANCE then that is another thing entirely.

I'm not using them interchangeably, they're just both true. On a high resistance or mitigation build, the opportunity cost to add riposte is likely too high to provide good value relative to other sets, since it's likely you have already sacrificed damage or sustain to get said mitigation or resistances.

And since minor maim is one of the weakest and most plentiful forms of non-cp percentage based mitigation it's only logic that MOST builds with either high resistances or mitigation, you're likely to benefit more from something else.

Furthermore, builds with a decent bastion allotment will see more benefit from riposte than builds without. This still does not make stacking bastion some OP option, just gives a bit more opportunity to invest into that star when running riposte.

Thanks. For my build I've been looking at adding resists to offset LA's physical DMG weakness and since I'm a Breton Templar in LA it felt weird adding elemental defender if I had high spell resists already. I think I got a few set combos, just trying to reduce what I can without removing consistency in dmg/defense.("trim the fat, stack the protein" mentality).

Even as a light armor build there is a certain amount of total mitigation+resists you want to achieve! Thankfully light armor passives are vastly superior to heavy, providing both more sustain and more damage. 5pc light armor bring more damage to a magika build than any damage set in the game will give.

This means we are often wise to run one or two defensive utility sets to reintroduce survivability into our build. The strength of riposte is that in builds where it is one of the primary sources of mitigation you see a nice benefit from the 5pc, even only as a back bar set, and get nice 2-4 bonuses. Health and recovery are both very valuable on light armor builds and spell damage is a no brained.

The weakness of riposte is that you can get minor maim applied to opponents rather efficiently with varying uptimes. All of these sources present in a battle reduces the benefit you see from riposte in direct correlation to the uptime otherwise available without riposte.

It really shines in small battles, organized groups, and BGs. In chaotic keep fights you will often be fighting people who have maim applied and that reduces the value of riposte harshly, imo.

Lexxypwns

@paulsimonps

If you know wether aoe caps affect the mitigation offered by riposte we could easily determine its value in guild group gameplay.

Minno

Lexxypwns wrote: »

Minno wrote: »

Lexxypwns wrote: »

Minno wrote: »

Lexxypwns wrote: »

paulsimonps wrote: »

Waffennacht wrote: »

CatchMeTrolling wrote: »

I wear riposte and put points into direct damage mitigation, does the two combine well like I thought or?

They combine more poorly. The more effective you make one Mitigation the less effective others become.

Let's say you achieve max armor resistance and have 50% Mitigation, Riposte becomes valued at 7.5% reduction.

Riposte works best with shields, because they have 0 resistance you get the full 15% mitigation from Riposte

Saying they combine more poorly is very misleading. Yes diminishing returns is a thing but if you say they combine poorly cause they lower each other is the same as saying "Blocking is really bad if you have high resistance". Cause if you have 50% mitigation from Armor then Blocking only adds 25% not 50%, but you can flip that. "You should not use armor if you block, cause if you block then your armor is halved". See, very misleading. Its far more giving to compare total mitigation change, and yea comparing just 2 sources like that will show wide differences, but it doesn't make them that bad.

Bad is relative. Riposte gives far less benefit the more forms of other mitigation you stack. At a point of mitigation(haven't mathed it) the increased healing from adding more damage/crit does more for your survivability, not to mention the extra killing power. Therefore, for pvp, I truly believe it is accurate to say riposte is bad on high mitigation builds. There is, after all, an opportunity cost to choose riposte in place of a different 5pc set.

I think it is safe to say, outside of a vacuum, riposte is terrible on high mitigation builds. In a vacuum it can add more mitigation to most builds, but in reality the price isn't worth paying unless it's one of your main mitigation sources.

So then for builds with inherently higher resistances, it's better to stack those raw resists than adding percentage based mitigation?

Or it's, what I imagine, a case by case basis in that I'll have to calculate what the best route and optimize for it?

It's case by case imo. For example, I play light armor mageblade in riposte/trans/skoria. My physical/spell resistances offer a negligible contribution to my overall mitigation. I'm primarily gaining mitigation from Ironclad, thick skin, riposte, timed blocking, and 3800 crit resist.

On this build, I've determined that as a back bar set there is nothing that will provide more for the build than riposte. Particularly in no CP where all my mitigation is riposte, trans+impen, and blocking big hits.

A light armor mDK running Impreg and sturdy for "permablock" won't benefit from riposte in the same way.

paulsimonps wrote: »

Lexxypwns wrote: »

paulsimonps wrote: »

Waffennacht wrote: »

CatchMeTrolling wrote: »

I wear riposte and put points into direct damage mitigation, does the two combine well like I thought or?

They combine more poorly. The more effective you make one Mitigation the less effective others become.

Let's say you achieve max armor resistance and have 50% Mitigation, Riposte becomes valued at 7.5% reduction.

Riposte works best with shields, because they have 0 resistance you get the full 15% mitigation from Riposte

Saying they combine more poorly is very misleading. Yes diminishing returns is a thing but if you say they combine poorly cause they lower each other is the same as saying "Blocking is really bad if you have high resistance". Cause if you have 50% mitigation from Armor then Blocking only adds 25% not 50%, but you can flip that. "You should not use armor if you block, cause if you block then your armor is halved". See, very misleading. Its far more giving to compare total mitigation change, and yea comparing just 2 sources like that will show wide differences, but it doesn't make them that bad.

Bad is relative. Riposte gives far less benefit the more forms of other mitigation you stack. At a point of mitigation(haven't mathed it) the increased healing from adding more damage/crit does more for your survivability, not to mention the extra killing power. Therefore, for pvp, I truly believe it is accurate to say riposte is bad on high mitigation builds. There is, after all, an opportunity cost to choose riposte in place of a different 5pc set.

I think it is safe to say, outside of a vacuum, riposte is terrible on high mitigation builds. In a vacuum it can add more mitigation to most builds, but in reality the price isn't worth paying unless it's one of your main mitigation sources.

Are you using Resistance and mitigation interchangeably in that post? cause you can't do that, it won't make any sense if you do. Cause a high MITIGATION build will be using a lot of sources for mitigation already and determining which of the many sources is bad is tricky. But if you are saying that a high RESISTANCE build would not benefit as much from another type of mitigation source as opposed to increasing its already high RESISTANCE then that is another thing entirely.

I'm not using them interchangeably, they're just both true. On a high resistance or mitigation build, the opportunity cost to add riposte is likely too high to provide good value relative to other sets, since it's likely you have already sacrificed damage or sustain to get said mitigation or resistances.

And since minor maim is one of the weakest and most plentiful forms of non-cp percentage based mitigation it's only logic that MOST builds with either high resistances or mitigation, you're likely to benefit more from something else.

Furthermore, builds with a decent bastion allotment will see more benefit from riposte than builds without. This still does not make stacking bastion some OP option, just gives a bit more opportunity to invest into that star when running riposte.

Thanks. For my build I've been looking at adding resists to offset LA's physical DMG weakness and since I'm a Breton Templar in LA it felt weird adding elemental defender if I had high spell resists already. I think I got a few set combos, just trying to reduce what I can without removing consistency in dmg/defense.("trim the fat, stack the protein" mentality).

Even as a light armor build there is a certain amount of total mitigation+resists you want to achieve! Thankfully light armor passives are vastly superior to heavy, providing both more sustain and more damage. 5pc light armor bring more damage to a magika build than any damage set in the game will give.

This means we are often wise to run one or two defensive utility sets to reintroduce survivability into our build. The strength of riposte is that in builds where it is one of the primary sources of mitigation you see a nice benefit from the 5pc, even only as a back bar set, and get nice 2-4 bonuses. Health and recovery are both very valuable on light armor builds and spell damage is a no brained.

The weakness of riposte is that you can get minor maim applied to opponents rather efficiently with varying uptimes. All of these sources present in a battle reduces the benefit you see from riposte in direct correlation to the uptime otherwise available without riposte.

It really shines in small battles, organized groups, and BGs. In chaotic keep fights you will often be fighting people who have maim applied and that reduces the value of riposte harshly, imo.

I obhor inconsistency. And that last comment is a reason to avoid reposte.

And the first comment is exactly what I'm thinking for my build.

Thanks!

paulsimonps

Lexxypwns wrote: »

@paulsimonps

If you know wether aoe caps affect the mitigation offered by riposte we could easily determine its value in guild group gameplay.

You know I have never actually thought about the AoE Cap. But considering how it works I would assume it works in such a way that it lowers the base damage and the mitigation calculation stays the same. And of course the lower the base damage the less points of damage each % of mitigation removes. Usually don't have enough people helping me to actually test this but I would assume its as I said as simple as it lowering the base damage, which is what maim does, and minor and major maim are both multiplicative, would assume its the same with the AoE Cap damage reduction.

Lexxypwns

paulsimonps wrote: »

Lexxypwns wrote: »

@paulsimonps

If you know wether aoe caps affect the mitigation offered by riposte we could easily determine its value in guild group gameplay.

You know I have never actually thought about the AoE Cap. But considering how it works I would assume it works in such a way that it lowers the base damage and the mitigation calculation stays the same. And of course the lower the base damage the less points of damage each % of mitigation removes. Usually don't have enough people helping me to actually test this but I would assume its as I said as simple as it lowering the base damage, which is what maim does, and minor and major maim are both multiplicative, would assume its the same with the AoE Cap damage reduction.

So if you're receiving battle spirit, 25% mitigation from aoe cap, and have any decent resists or other mitigation then riposte will perform poorly. In a plague doctor 35k hp large scale guild meta you'll see more benefit relative to running more traditional, old meta, group comps with riposte but wether that benefit is worth having people wear it is up to the raid lead. I'm guessing it can't possibly be worth giving up other sets for until you're 16+ in group size. At that point the increased mitigation from aoe caps and the increased group healing will likely render the benefit irrelevant, especially considering fear provides minor maim for a short time and engagements are often burst and disengage.

paulsimonps

Lexxypwns wrote: »

paulsimonps wrote: »

Lexxypwns wrote: »

@paulsimonps

If you know wether aoe caps affect the mitigation offered by riposte we could easily determine its value in guild group gameplay.

You know I have never actually thought about the AoE Cap. But considering how it works I would assume it works in such a way that it lowers the base damage and the mitigation calculation stays the same. And of course the lower the base damage the less points of damage each % of mitigation removes. Usually don't have enough people helping me to actually test this but I would assume its as I said as simple as it lowering the base damage, which is what maim does, and minor and major maim are both multiplicative, would assume its the same with the AoE Cap damage reduction.

So if you're receiving battle spirit, 25% mitigation from aoe cap, and have any decent resists or other mitigation then riposte will perform poorly. In a plague doctor 35k hp large scale guild meta you'll see more benefit relative to running more traditional, old meta, group comps with riposte but wether that benefit is worth having people wear it is up to the raid lead. I'm guessing it can't possibly be worth giving up other sets for until you're 16+ in group size. At that point the increased mitigation from aoe caps and the increased group healing will likely render the benefit irrelevant, especially considering fear provides minor maim for a short time and engagements are often burst and disengage.

A few weeks back there was a lot of threads wanting to nerf Riposte, and in those thread I brought up the fact that Minor Maim is a very widely used Debuff that has a lot of common sources, like Fear, Choking Talons, Shades, Heroic Slash(yes its used by some Tank PvP set ups.), Frost(Lots of that from Warden Tanks) and Shadowrend(gaining popularity in BG's). Fear and Talons are the absolute most common ones, NBs and DKs both use them A LOT. So in large teams you might see that happen quite a bit. And obviously riposte does not need a nerf.

Lexxypwns

paulsimonps wrote: »

Lexxypwns wrote: »

paulsimonps wrote: »

Lexxypwns wrote: »

@paulsimonps

If you know wether aoe caps affect the mitigation offered by riposte we could easily determine its value in guild group gameplay.

You know I have never actually thought about the AoE Cap. But considering how it works I would assume it works in such a way that it lowers the base damage and the mitigation calculation stays the same. And of course the lower the base damage the less points of damage each % of mitigation removes. Usually don't have enough people helping me to actually test this but I would assume its as I said as simple as it lowering the base damage, which is what maim does, and minor and major maim are both multiplicative, would assume its the same with the AoE Cap damage reduction.

So if you're receiving battle spirit, 25% mitigation from aoe cap, and have any decent resists or other mitigation then riposte will perform poorly. In a plague doctor 35k hp large scale guild meta you'll see more benefit relative to running more traditional, old meta, group comps with riposte but wether that benefit is worth having people wear it is up to the raid lead. I'm guessing it can't possibly be worth giving up other sets for until you're 16+ in group size. At that point the increased mitigation from aoe caps and the increased group healing will likely render the benefit irrelevant, especially considering fear provides minor maim for a short time and engagements are often burst and disengage.

A few weeks back there was a lot of threads wanting to nerf Riposte, and in those thread I brought up the fact that Minor Maim is a very widely used Debuff that has a lot of common sources, like Fear, Choking Talons, Shades, Heroic Slash(yes its used by some Tank PvP set ups.), Frost(Lots of that from Warden Tanks) and Shadowrend(gaining popularity in BG's). Fear and Talons are the absolute most common ones, NBs and DKs both use them A LOT. So in large teams you might see that happen quite a bit. And obviously riposte does not need a nerf.

Exactly, the presence of any of these in a fight severely reduces the value of riposte proportional to the uptime you have on minor maim without riposte.

Wreuntzylla

So the awesome of this build is the mitigation is approaching max at the same time as troll king procs?

Why bad for overland pvp?

TreeHugger1

True, riposte is crap.
I once used riposte+pirate skeleton( I thought they will sync well together, riposte should help you proc pirate skeleton).
Then I did some tests with friends and saw they give around 20% mitigation in no cp and 15 % in cp( obv depends on your cp allocation).
Nearly anything in this game has diminishing returns, fatigue or any other kind of drawback.
It simply kills solo players.

I really like your builds @raasdal , shame that people copy bad meta builds.

raasdal

I apologize for interrupting the Riposte discussion, but i just updated the OP with some videos, for those interested. Will make a post in a sec, with the new section as well, to hightlight it in the thread.

TreeHugger1 wrote: »

True, riposte is crap.
I once used riposte+pirate skeleton( I thought they will sync well together, riposte should help you proc pirate skeleton).
Then I did some tests with friends and saw they give around 20% mitigation in no cp and 15 % in cp( obv depends on your cp allocation).
Nearly anything in this game has diminishing returns, fatigue or any other kind of drawback.
It simply kills solo players.

I really like your builds @raasdal , shame that people copy bad meta builds.

Hey, thanks for the kind words

On the Riposte Discussion; Thank you @paulsimonps for saving me of having to light attack a friend to death, to get the answer to the 15% vs. 10%.

For the rest of the discussion, i will only add that in any PvP oriented comparison, you need to disregard Battlespirit, in the sense that you use post-battlespirit as your baseline. Otherwise you can cut the effect of EVERYTHING into half, which just serves to complicate matters (like saying Riposte is only 7,5% due to Battlespirit). As Battlespirit is a fixed thing, which is there regardless of gear, skill etc. it should be the starting point of any calculations.

Anyways. Hope the videos are usefull for anyone wanting to try the build out for themselves. Here they come.

raasdal

Educational Videos

Disclaimer: These videos are NOT 1vX montages. I am not Sypher. I am not Kodi. etc. etc. I get carried by my builds, and my actual playing skills are only just above average. Please do not expect anything else, but examples of how to play this build, like the creator (me) intended. Also, i am horrible at saving videos. Somehow i always forget to save the clip, when something awesome happens, and just end up with all the clips of me failing, which i always save for later review to improve skills / builds.

With that said - Lets begin!

Deathmatch Highlight / Ending

https://youtu.be/z_RuCdOHEsM

This is the ending of a Deathmatch which my team lost, but i was scored highest on team scoreboard, as per the goal of the build.

This deathmatch was interesting, because i had to swap out the offensive Skoria, which i normally use in Deathmatch, for Troll King, because the opposing teams delivered much more pressure than usual. If you are on PC-EU, you will recognize some of those names on opposing team. So i died a couple of times, which usually will get me to change out, as i did here. The effect on tankability is pretty evident in this clip.

Fun to notice, is the first Xv1 on the Sorcerer. If you slow down, you will see he gets an 8,5k shield just as he gets out of CC. Unfortunately for him, this build does not care about that shield at all. Probably would have died anyway, but still...

CTF Highlight

https://youtu.be/jmwzeBy2eFo

This is a short highlight from the beginning of a CTF match, that i think showcases pretty honestly, what the build can and cannot do. I am tanking the entire team, splitting them up, and managing to get some kills in the process. Kills do not come easily when solo and outnumbered, but they do come - as this shows.

CTF Full Match

https://youtu.be/5H-dqGRb5Ig

Again; This is NOT a highlight. This is a full CTF match, to educate anyone interested on how to play this build succesfully, in CTF matches. Watch it at your own peril.

While this may not be the most actionpacked match, and pretty much a walkover, it is nice and short, and thus serves the purpose well.

Domination Full Match

https://youtu.be/Zx_ZD1aZSns

Again again; This is NOT a highlight. This is a full DOM match, to educate anyone interested on how to play this build succesfully, in DOM matches.

In this particular match, my team is not able to actually win, but as per the purpose of the build, i do get the highscore on my own team. But i do make several mistakes during this match. Especially with failed usage of SA, which really needs proper setup and timing, to do anything but tickle.

Waffennacht

Dear OP,

Thank you for saving me an ability slot. Just re went through your guide and saw your potion. I think I may just drop my major expedition ability and slot that potion!

Now I'm going to go through your new stuff

Minno

Waffennacht wrote: »

Dear OP,

Thank you for saving me an ability slot. Just re went through your guide and saw your potion. I think I may just drop my major expedition ability and slot that potion!

Now I'm going to go through your new stuff

Butterfly-blessed thistle-scrub jelly?

raasdal

Waffennacht wrote: »

Dear OP,

Thank you for saving me an ability slot. Just re went through your guide and saw your potion. I think I may just drop my major expedition ability and slot that potion!

Now I'm going to go through your new stuff

Most OP Potion in the game IMO. It is not just one skillslot for the Major Expedition. It's two. In No CP, the heal over time, is basically equivalent to having Vigor or Rapid Regen ticking 24/7. The utility provided by this combo is immense. Whenever i can manage to go without the regens / resources from the Tripot, i always go to this one.

Minno wrote: »

Waffennacht wrote: »

Dear OP,

Thank you for saving me an ability slot. Just re went through your guide and saw your potion. I think I may just drop my major expedition ability and slot that potion!

Now I'm going to go through your new stuff

Butterfly-blessed thistle-scrub jelly?

Yup, yup and yup.

Minno

raasdal wrote: »

Waffennacht wrote: »

Dear OP,

Thank you for saving me an ability slot. Just re went through your guide and saw your potion. I think I may just drop my major expedition ability and slot that potion!

Now I'm going to go through your new stuff

Most OP Potion in the game IMO. It is not just one skillslot for the Major Expedition. It's two. In No CP, the heal over time, is basically equivalent to having Vigor or Rapid Regen ticking 24/7. The utility provided by this combo is immense. Whenever i can manage to go without the regens / resources from the Tripot, i always go to this one.

Minno wrote: »

Waffennacht wrote: »

Dear OP,

Thank you for saving me an ability slot. Just re went through your guide and saw your potion. I think I may just drop my major expedition ability and slot that potion!

Now I'm going to go through your new stuff

Butterfly-blessed thistle-scrub jelly?

Yup, yup and yup.

Cheap pot. No excuses left for Templars/DKs complaining about having no mobility lol.

Datolite

raasdal wrote: »

datoliteb16_ESO wrote: »

raasdal wrote: »

I am in 3 x Impen. I would prefer 4, but my Troll King shoulders will not drop for me. So they are currently Well Fitted. Two bodypieces of Pariah are Reinforced, because they did not drop Impen untill right now, as that is supposed to be fixed with HOTR. But even then, i would probably still want to keep Chest and Legs in reinforced. Chest for sure, no doubt about that one. Impen is not really needed, when you have so high base resist. And Impen / Resist stacks negatively.

Ok so you're basically running with what you got. What do you think of divines for even more mag damage or regen? What about infused for the tristat?

I would not go Divines. The gain is really insignificant. Infused is the same thing. You would gain something like 250 total resources (80/80/80) per piece (large ones). In my opinion that is no where near worth loosing the tankiness that the resist stacking or Impen gets you. IF i were to choose something that was not Reinforced or Impen, i would go Well-Fitted. I sprint alot in this build, and dodgeroll fairly often as well. It is a highly mobile build, so you move around alot. So that would actually fit the build well. Have considered trying out 0 Impen and use Well-Fitted instead, but never got around to trying it.

Waffennacht wrote: »

I'm glad you're getting positive responses about your build!

Thanks! - So am i

Have you by any chance gotten around to trying it yet? I am just wondering if all these defensive traits will hurt the build's sustain. So far we have nothing but some arcane jewelry and a staff for magicka regen.

By the way, I'm considering swapping out the lingering health pot for immovability+major expedition/magicka regen. Since Ritual already procs troll king. What do you think?

raasdal

datoliteb16_ESO wrote: »

raasdal wrote: »

datoliteb16_ESO wrote: »

raasdal wrote: »

I am in 3 x Impen. I would prefer 4, but my Troll King shoulders will not drop for me. So they are currently Well Fitted. Two bodypieces of Pariah are Reinforced, because they did not drop Impen untill right now, as that is supposed to be fixed with HOTR. But even then, i would probably still want to keep Chest and Legs in reinforced. Chest for sure, no doubt about that one. Impen is not really needed, when you have so high base resist. And Impen / Resist stacks negatively.

Ok so you're basically running with what you got. What do you think of divines for even more mag damage or regen? What about infused for the tristat?

I would not go Divines. The gain is really insignificant. Infused is the same thing. You would gain something like 250 total resources (80/80/80) per piece (large ones). In my opinion that is no where near worth loosing the tankiness that the resist stacking or Impen gets you. IF i were to choose something that was not Reinforced or Impen, i would go Well-Fitted. I sprint alot in this build, and dodgeroll fairly often as well. It is a highly mobile build, so you move around alot. So that would actually fit the build well. Have considered trying out 0 Impen and use Well-Fitted instead, but never got around to trying it.

Waffennacht wrote: »

I'm glad you're getting positive responses about your build!

Thanks! - So am i

Have you by any chance gotten around to trying it yet? I am just wondering if all these defensive traits will hurt the build's sustain. So far we have nothing but some arcane jewelry and a staff for magicka regen.

By the way, I'm considering swapping out the lingering health pot for immovability+major expedition/magicka regen. Since Ritual already procs troll king. What do you think?

Have not tried switching out the Traits, and don't think i will have the time or motivation to try it out. But for the regen, we do have plenty. Mundus + 3 x Jewelry + Food (Witchmother) + Argonian Passive (HUGE!). I never really struggle with sustain, as you can see in the videos.

For the potion, there is no such thing as what you mention. Speed potion comes with Stamina / Immov or Stamina / Wep Dmg. And that is it. IF there was a potion with Speed + Magicka, that would surely be a possible choice though But i would not touch the potion. The Speed is essential. You will die MUCH more, and not be able to compete for any objectives, without speed. But the healing part could be forgone, you are right. But that healtick contributes alot in itself, and is worth much more, than immov + stam would be.

IF you want to do something, you can use a Tripot as secondary option, which you can chug, if you feel like you are hurting on resources, and is in a position where you don't need the speed. But i hate micro managing those potions, as ZOS somehow made that impossible to do smoothly, while engaged in combat.

HiImRex

Argonian op I did not hear it here first sorry

weedgenius

Hey @raasdal, has your build changed much in the last year given various updates and balance attempts? I just found this build while looking for a Battlegrounds build to use to optimize my Argonian Templar. What changes do you suggest, if any?

RaresDorian

@raasdal as a fellow magplar I'd love to know what are you running atm!

raasdal

@weedgenius

Yeah, this build is very outdated by now. I did however make a remastered version of it last patch (Summerset), as it received a huge buff by the release of Sloads - adding another Oblivion Damage set to the game. I was using Sloads / Knightslayer / Troll with Infused Oblivion Enchant. Got some decent hate whispers! Think that will still work today, despite the Sload nerf. If heavy attack is boring, just switch KS to Surge.

@RaresDorian

To be honest, i don’t have a Magplar build this patch. MagDK is just in a much better spot - can’t stop playing it. For what i would be running probably, see above