[MATH] PvP Defensive Set Comparison (Impreg, Brass, Pariah, Riposte, + more)

Taylor_MB

@Aedaryl
I'm sorry but that is just incorrect. I understand there is a lot of information in this thread, but please go into the spreadsheet and input values you think are reasonable. We've said countless times we don't have the average stats of players in PvP to input, if you want to argue people's stats then do a forum poll and find out, otherwise we are just making assumptions based off our own builds.

Fortified Brass basically only wins against heavy armour or opponents not wearing proper gear. It has it's place, but it certainly does not outperform Impregnable in "modt of the fight". The 60% critical chance I kept referring to isn't the only stat that matters, I just set penetration and resistances on my typical builds and went from there.

Fortified Brass gets wrecked by maces. Even with little or zero penetration and less then 50% critical chance.




And without maces at 50% critical chance and penetration only only from major debuff and spinners/spriggians.



Finally, a few things not covered by the damage calculations that negatively impact Fortified Brass;
1) Resistance debuff - only one person has to debuff you and everyone does increased damage. No equivalent for critical resistance.
2) Nightblades can guarantee critical hits on any hard hitting ability they like (usually ultimates or heavy attacks). So unless you never verse NB's, you have to inflate the critical chance value slightly to account for this.
3) Mechanical Acuity is fast becoming a very popular PvP set, you have to slightly inflate the critical chance value as a result.

I'm sorry, but picking one stat and saying "that's not right" is not enough. Damage mitigation calculations are complex and things outside the formulas also have to be taken into consideration. Opinions are worthless, back it up so it becomes a fact. I'd happily concede to FB outperforming Impreg, but based on replies here and SuperStar screenshots from my guildies, 60% critical chance is a highly reasonable average.

Minno

Taylor_MB wrote: »

@Aedaryl
I'm sorry but that is just incorrect. I understand there is a lot of information in this thread, but please go into the spreadsheet and input values you think are reasonable. We've said countless times we don't have the average stats of players in PvP to input, if you want to argue people's stats then do a forum poll and find out, otherwise we are just making assumptions based of our own builds.

Fortified Brass basically only wins against heavy armour or opponents not wearing proper gear. It has it's place, but it certainly does not outperform Impregnable in "modt of the fight". The 60% critical chance I kept referring to isn't the only stat that matters, I just set penetration and resistances on my typical builds and went from there.

Fortified Brass gets wrecked by maces. Even with little or zero penetration and less then 50% critical chance.




And without maces at 50% critical chance and penetration only only from major debuff and spinners/spriggians.



Finally, a few things not covered by the damage calculations that negatively impact Fortified Brass;
1) Resistance debuff - only one person has to debuff you and everyone does increased damage. No equivalent for critical resistance.
2) Nightblades can guarantee critical hits on any hard hitting ability they like (usually ultimates or heavy attacks). So unless you never verse NB's, you have to inflate the critical chance value slightly to account for this.
3) Mechanical Acuity is fast becoming a very popular PvP set, you have to slightly inflate the critical chance value as a result.

I'm sorry, but picking one stat and saying "that's not right" is not enough. Damage mitigation calculations are complex and things outside the formulas also have to be taken into consideration. Opinions are worthless, back it up so it becomes a fact. I'd happily concede to FB outperforming Impreg, but based on replies here SuperStar screenshots from my guildies, 60% critical chance is a highly reasonable average.

honestly, that's on the person looking at the spreadsheet to input the proper armor debuff into their armor rating avg. mark, ele drain, SNB debuffs fly around like candy, and you should expect 5280 armor to instantly be removed from your build in cyro/bgs at some point.

Aedaryl

Taylor_MB wrote: »

@Aedaryl
I'm sorry but that is just incorrect. I understand there is a lot of information in this thread, but please go into the spreadsheet and input values you think are reasonable. We've said countless times we don't have the average stats of players in PvP to input, if you want to argue people's stats then do a forum poll and find out, otherwise we are just making assumptions based off our own builds.

Fortified Brass basically only wins against heavy armour or opponents not wearing proper gear. It has it's place, but it certainly does not outperform Impregnable in "modt of the fight". The 60% critical chance I kept referring to isn't the only stat that matters, I just set penetration and resistances on my typical builds and went from there.

Fortified Brass gets wrecked by maces. Even with little or zero penetration and less then 50% critical chance.




And without maces at 50% critical chance and penetration only only from major debuff and spinners/spriggians.



Finally, a few things not covered by the damage calculations that negatively impact Fortified Brass;
1) Resistance debuff - only one person has to debuff you and everyone does increased damage. No equivalent for critical resistance.
2) Nightblades can guarantee critical hits on any hard hitting ability they like (usually ultimates or heavy attacks). So unless you never verse NB's, you have to inflate the critical chance value slightly to account for this.
3) Mechanical Acuity is fast becoming a very popular PvP set, you have to slightly inflate the critical chance value as a result.

I'm sorry, but picking one stat and saying "that's not right" is not enough. Damage mitigation calculations are complex and things outside the formulas also have to be taken into consideration. Opinions are worthless, back it up so it becomes a fact. I'd happily concede to FB outperforming Impreg, but based on replies here and SuperStar screenshots from my guildies, 60% critical chance is a highly reasonable average.

60% critical chance isn't highly reasonable average. The average is between 40% and 50%, if you have more, you are probably using a bad gear.

I used your calculator, and on a medium build using bloodspawn + bone pirate I always found fortified brass being better than Impreg. Maybe I used it wrong it's possible.

Spriggan and spinner are bad set only used by bad gankers. The penetration doesn't work on shielded player and it can overpenetrate light armor build.

Minno

Aedaryl wrote: »

Taylor_MB wrote: »

@Aedaryl
I'm sorry but that is just incorrect. I understand there is a lot of information in this thread, but please go into the spreadsheet and input values you think are reasonable. We've said countless times we don't have the average stats of players in PvP to input, if you want to argue people's stats then do a forum poll and find out, otherwise we are just making assumptions based off our own builds.

Fortified Brass basically only wins against heavy armour or opponents not wearing proper gear. It has it's place, but it certainly does not outperform Impregnable in "modt of the fight". The 60% critical chance I kept referring to isn't the only stat that matters, I just set penetration and resistances on my typical builds and went from there.

Fortified Brass gets wrecked by maces. Even with little or zero penetration and less then 50% critical chance.




And without maces at 50% critical chance and penetration only only from major debuff and spinners/spriggians.



Finally, a few things not covered by the damage calculations that negatively impact Fortified Brass;
1) Resistance debuff - only one person has to debuff you and everyone does increased damage. No equivalent for critical resistance.
2) Nightblades can guarantee critical hits on any hard hitting ability they like (usually ultimates or heavy attacks). So unless you never verse NB's, you have to inflate the critical chance value slightly to account for this.
3) Mechanical Acuity is fast becoming a very popular PvP set, you have to slightly inflate the critical chance value as a result.

I'm sorry, but picking one stat and saying "that's not right" is not enough. Damage mitigation calculations are complex and things outside the formulas also have to be taken into consideration. Opinions are worthless, back it up so it becomes a fact. I'd happily concede to FB outperforming Impreg, but based on replies here and SuperStar screenshots from my guildies, 60% critical chance is a highly reasonable average.

60% critical chance isn't highly reasonable average. The average is between 40% and 50%, if you have more, you are probably using a bad gear.

I used your calculator, and on a medium build using bloodspawn + bone pirate I always found fortified brass being better than Impreg. Maybe I used it wrong it's possible.

Spriggan and spinner are bad set only used by bad gankers. The penetration doesn't work on shielded player and it can overpenetrate light armor build.

You can't shield if you are cc'ed.

Taylor_MB

Aedaryl wrote: »

60% critical chance isn't highly reasonable average. The average is between 40% and 50%, if you have more, you are probably using a bad gear.

See the three examples above of 40-50% critical chance.

Aedaryl wrote: »

I used your calculator, and on a medium build using bloodspawn + bone pirate I always found fortified brass being better than Impreg. Maybe I used it wrong it's possible.

If you always got FB outperforming Impreg you might need to expand your scope a little bit. Maybe I'm rating the average players stats too highly, but I prefer to counter above average players.

Aedaryl wrote: »

Spriggan and spinner are bad set only used by bad gankers. The penetration doesn't work on shielded player and it can overpenetrate light armor build.

The largest single source of passive mitigation (apart from major protection is some cases) is a players resistances. I would not underrate spinners and spriggans so quickly.

Aedaryl

Taylor_MB wrote: »

Aedaryl wrote: »

60% critical chance isn't highly reasonable average. The average is between 40% and 50%, if you have more, you are probably using a bad gear.

See the three examples above of 40-50% critical chance.

Aedaryl wrote: »

I used your calculator, and on a medium build using bloodspawn + bone pirate I always found fortified brass being better than Impreg. Maybe I used it wrong it's possible.

If you always got FB outperforming Impreg you might need to expand your scope a little bit. Maybe I'm rating the average players stats too highly, but I prefer to counter above average players.

Aedaryl wrote: »

Spriggan and spinner are bad set only used by bad gankers. The penetration doesn't work on shielded player and it can overpenetrate light armor build.

The largest single source of passive mitigation (apart from major protection is some cases) is a players resistances. I would not underrate spinners and spriggans so quickly.

The stats you use are most of the time wrong.

I will say you the stats of average player to put in the calculator.

Armor : 6 medium/1 heavy + major resistance buff bring you to an average of 22.5k armor (spell resistance is often highter)

Penetration : Magicka builds have often around 8.2k, you can add major and minor breach on top. Physical penetration is around 3.3k, you can add major and minor fracture if you want.

Critical chance : the average is between 40-50%, let's take 50%

Critical damage : 1.5 base + 0.2 in cp + 0.1 with minor force or templar and NB passive : Average is 1.8

Critical resistance : Th biggest error I think you do is here : People always want around 2.5k critical resistance.
To compare Impregnable VS fortified brass you need to take 2500 critical resistance or 0. People choose impregnable because they can run something else than impen on the gear. If u run impregnable you have 0 base critical resistance because you are relying on impregnable for it. If you run fortified brass, you have 2500 critical resistance from impen trait and cps. It's kinda hard to simulate this but it's important.

You can add bloodspawn for one of the tests too (I didn't understand if I needed to put the armor value with bloodspawn up and then the calculator will say "up x% of the time or if I don't need to put it and the calculator put the value itself).

Can you make some tests with theze reality number and post it please ?

---

About spinners and sprigan, you also need to consider the damage you gain from it doesn't increase your heal. Why wearing a set that doesn't bring you more healing and that's useless on low resistance target and shield user ?

Taylor_MB

Aedaryl wrote: »

Can you make some tests with theze reality number and post it please ?

No. I literally made this spreadsheet so people can find out themselves because I don't have the average player stats. It's pretty disingenuous to claim you do.

Aedaryl wrote: »

Critical resistance : Th biggest error I think you do is here : People always want around 2.5k critical resistance.
To compare Impregnable VS fortified brass you need to take 2500 critical resistance or 0. People choose impregnable because they can run something else than impen on the gear. If u run impregnable you have 0 base critical resistance because you are relying on impregnable for it. If you run fortified brass, you have 2500 critical resistance from impen trait and cps. It's kinda hard to simulate this but it's important.

The spreadsheet compares different sets on the same build, there is no error. If you want to compare 2 sets on 2 different builds then use a second tab in the spreadsheet. This was brought up in page one of this thread regarding different weighted armour.

Aedaryl wrote: »

About spinners and sprigan, you also need to consider the damage you gain from it doesn't increase your heal. Why wearing a set that doesn't bring you more healing and that's useless on low resistance target and shield user ?

1) As you said above, medium armour has 22k resistances, you won't be over penetrating.
2) Build examples? There are plenty, here are 3 I can think of immediately.
- Stamblades who can guarantee critical heals on cloak (not after SI)
- MagSorc who uses max magicka to boost healing ward or twillight
- MagDen who uses max magicka to boost healing ward.

Aedaryl wrote: »

You can add bloodspawn for one of the tests too (I didn't understand if I needed to put the armor value with bloodspawn up and then the calculator will say "up x% of the time or if I don't need to put it and the calculator put the value itself).

It compares single sets. So to add Bloodspawn as part of your base build simply add the resistance to base resistances. Manually adjust for uptime.

montiferus

"Taylor_MB wrote:

Maybe I'm rating the average players stats too highly, but I prefer to counter above average players

You are definitely rating the above average players too highly. I’ve never seen an above average player with a build anywhere close to that Crit rating. Most seem to hover around 40-50 percent.

BTW I appreciate everything you’ve done with this analysis just don’t agree with you on this one point. I will try both and see which works better for my play style (solo / duo).

Aedaryl

So, I expose here the reality about impregnable VS fortified brass

The set up using is with 6 medium + 1 heavy bloodspawn agaisnt high penetration build (aka light armor + major breach minimum). Values here are an average VS top tiers openworld build, it change everything.

First set up : 0 critical resistance meaning no impen.

In cp :



In no cps :



Second set up : with 2500 base critical resistance (you are running impen).

In cp :



In no cps :



You can see fortified brass is ALMOST always better.

Against mace user, fortified brass isn't always the winner.

First set up no impen VS Mace :

In cps :



Un no cps :



Second set up impen VS Maces :

In cps :



In no cps :



So in CP, Impreg is better VS maces, but in no cps fortified still better VS Maces.

So, in term of passive mitigation, if you are using medium + bloodspawn, fortified brass > Impreg exept maces in CP.

Minno

Aedaryl wrote: »

So, I expose here the reality about impregnable VS fortified brass

The set up using is with 6 medium + 1 heavy bloodspawn agaisnt high penetration build (aka light armor + major breach minimum). Values here are an average VS top tiers openworld build, it change everything.

First set up : 0 critical resistance meaning no impen.

In cp :



In no cps :



Second set up : with 2500 base critical resistance (you are running impen).

In cp :



In no cps :



You can see fortified brass is ALMOST always better.

Against mace user, fortified brass isn't always the winner.

First set up no impen VS Mace :

In cps :



Un no cps :



Second set up impen VS Maces :

In cps :



In no cps :



So in CP, Impreg is better VS maces, but in no cps fortified still better VS Maces.

So, in term of passive mitigation, if you are using medium + bloodspawn, fortified brass > Impreg exept maces in CP.

You forgot to add pirate Skeleton which overshadows both impreg and brass lol

Aedaryl

Taylor_MB wrote: »

Aedaryl wrote: »

About spinners and sprigan, you also need to consider the damage you gain from it doesn't increase your heal. Why wearing a set that doesn't bring you more healing and that's useless on low resistance target and shield user ?

1) As you said above, medium armour has 22k resistances, you won't be over penetrating.
2) Build examples? There are plenty, here are 3 I can think of immediately.
- Stamblades who can guarantee critical heals on cloak (not after SI)
- MagSorc who uses max magicka to boost healing ward or twillight
- MagDen who uses max magicka to boost healing ward.

1) As I said above, low resistance build are light armor one, not medium armor, a magicka sorc often have 11.6k spell resistance for exemple. Running light armor + spinner + major breach +cps is stupid.

The plenty builds you think are trash :

- The critical heal cloak legend only work if you don't have a dot on the ennmi. So it's super super rare.
- A magsorc or a magden using spinner will have to use lich for sustain and will be destroy from a stamina point of vue, that's the reason no good player play with it.

The only reason to run spriggan is on a oneshot gankblade.

Minno

Aedaryl wrote: »

Taylor_MB wrote: »

Aedaryl wrote: »

About spinners and sprigan, you also need to consider the damage you gain from it doesn't increase your heal. Why wearing a set that doesn't bring you more healing and that's useless on low resistance target and shield user ?

1) As you said above, medium armour has 22k resistances, you won't be over penetrating.
2) Build examples? There are plenty, here are 3 I can think of immediately.
- Stamblades who can guarantee critical heals on cloak (not after SI)
- MagSorc who uses max magicka to boost healing ward or twillight
- MagDen who uses max magicka to boost healing ward.

1) As I said above, low resistance build are light armor one, not medium armor, a magicka sorc often have 11.6k spell resistance for exemple. Running light armor + spinner + major breach +cps is stupid.

The plenty builds you think are trash :

- The critical heal cloak legend only work if you don't have a dot on the ennmi. So it's super super rare.
- A magsorc or a magden using spinner will have to use lich for sustain and will be destroy from a stamina point of vue, that's the reason no good player play with it.

The only reason to run spriggan is on a oneshot gankblade.

You can get 16k physical armor in light. 18k physical if you build it enough. I can get 30k spell resists in light armor lol.

Even with a 5280 debuff, you aren't over penetrating. The player needs to run less than 15280 armor to make penetration useless in PvP, and most are at at 14000-15000 using shields. A majority of pvp are at 18k-22k.

Taylor_MB

Note: Just fixed an error where it was displaying Armor Master as Fortified Brass. Apologies for that, but only 162 points difference so basically the same.

@Aedaryl
Thank you for doing that, and I mean that completely sincerely, I made the spreadsheet so people could do what you have done and not just ask which is best. However, I need to present a few counter points.
1) In 2 of the examples above you go above the effective critical resistance cap for those stats, so obviously FB is going to win.
2) I really think you need to consider increasing the critical strike chance to compensate for both NB's and Mechanical Acuity. MA on a 50% critical chance build gives that build an effective critical chance of 63.8%, that is a huge increase. True not everyone wears that set (but you see it in more build videos, people are starting to catch on), but with the prevalence of NB's and MA, you do need to boost the average critical strike chance above what your opponents stat sheet would say.

So doing a direct comparison to your examples above (same stats), I just want to demonstrate that even a slight change in critical chance can result in a completely different result:

Maces

0 Base Critical Resistance
CP
Impreg wins with no adjustment

No-CP
Impreg wins with just a 4% increase in critical chance.



2500 Base Critical Resistance
CP
Impreg wins with no adjustment

No-CP
FB comes out on top here because 5000 critical resistance takes you way over the 1.6 critical damage modifier your opponent has. No surprise here.

No Maces

0 Base Critical Resistance
CP
Why would you have 0 base critical resistance in CP though?
50 point into 'Resistant' + 1 Impen + 10% Increase in critical chance makes them even-ish. 10% is a pretty large addition, but keep in mind anyone wearing MA will be getting 13.8% increase and every NB will be getting a guaranteed critical on their hardest hitting abilities, so possible.


No-CP
FB wins here. I said in OP and multiple other posts this is where FB is strongest, in no-cp against low critical chance.


2500 Base Critical Resistance
CP
Impreg wins with just a 4% increase in critical chance.


No-CP
FB comes out on top here because 5000 critical resistance takes you way over the 1.6 critical damage modifier your opponent has. No surprise here.

Summary
• I 100% agree there is a strong case for FB in no-CP provided your opponent does not run maces.
• Potentially FB also in CP provided your opponent does not run maces, but I do think you are underestimating the additional critical chance of Shadowy Disguise and Mechanical Acuity.

Again, thank you for pulling the numbers, I appreciate it.

Edit: I'm assuming MA's 18sec cooldown starts at the beginning of the 5sec proc, anyone out there confirm?

TheDoomsdayMonster

@Taylor_MB said:

2) I really think you need to consider increasing the critical strike chance to compensate for both NB's and Mechanical Acuity. MA on a 50% critical chance build gives that build an effective critical chance of 63.8%, that is a huge increase. True not everyone wears that set (but you see it in more build videos, people are starting to catch on), but with the prevalence of NB's and MA, you do need to boost the average critical strike chance above what your opponents stat sheet would say.


This is 100% correct and I agree fully...

Many people still haven't caught on to how hyper effective High Spell/Weapon crit can be when unloading your burst on an opponent...


@Aedaryl

If you think builds that feature more than 50% Spell/Weapon Crit are "using bad gear," then you are not up to date about whats happening ingame during PvP...

High Spell/Weapon Crit are very, very, effective; if a given target doesn't have substantial Critical Resist, then one of these growing in number High Crit builds will crush that target very rapidly...

DoctorESO

Who said math isn't fun?

Brutusmax1mus

60% is FAR too high for average crit chance to plug into these equations imo, I used 48.

@TheDoomsdayMonster no offense, but you're running sets like spectres eye, vampire lord, and combat physician and call @Aedaryl out of date? Come on now.....

TheDoomsdayMonster

Brutusmax1mus wrote: »

60% is FAR too high for average crit chance to plug into these equations imo, I used 48.

@TheDoomsdayMonster no offense, but you're running sets like spectres eye, vampire lord, and combat physician and call @Aedaryl out of date? Come on now.....

Those sets are better than you think they are (Spectre's Eye has excellent synergy with Elusive Mist for example) and besides you gotta look at a build as a whole to properly evaluate a character...

My builds using those sets have great synergy with one another and with the abilities used with them...

It's a classic case of "the sum of the total equals more than the individual parts."


As pertains the Critical Chance, He's absolutely out of date of he thinks builds featuring more than 50% are bad...

Of course I've been on to that for a long time, but people wouldn't listen (just like people like yourself stubbornly hold on to your preconceptions about certain sets)...

It took the arrival of Mechanical Acuity to open the eyes of more people to the great value of High Spell/Weapon Crit unfortunately...


But hey, it's better to get wise later than never...

Brutusmax1mus

TheDoomsdayMonster wrote: »

Brutusmax1mus wrote: »

60% is FAR too high for average crit chance to plug into these equations imo, I used 48.

@TheDoomsdayMonster no offense, but you're running sets like spectres eye, vampire lord, and combat physician and call @Aedaryl out of date? Come on now.....

Those sets are better than you think they are (Spectre's Eye has excellent synergy with Elusive Mist for example) and besides you gotta look at a build as a whole to properly evaluate a character...

My builds using those sets have great synergy with one another and with the abilities used with them...

It's a classic case of "the sum of the total equals more than the individual parts."


As pertains the Critical Chance, He's absolutely out of date of he thinks builds featuring more than 50% are bad...

Of course I've been on to that for a long time, but people wouldn't listen (just like people like yourself stubbornly hold on to your preconceptions about certain sets)...

It took the arrival of Mechanical Acuity to open the eyes of more people to the great value of High Spell/Weapon Crit unfortunately...


But hey, it's better to get wise later than never...

Aquity is good bc you dictate when it procs and control its potential. It's also hard countered by shields. I was speaking on average numbers, only stating 60% is far too high an average imo. Lol @ "spectres has synergy with mist form". Either way, let's not argue your builds, you do you dude.

TheDoomsdayMonster

Brutusmax1mus wrote: »

TheDoomsdayMonster wrote: »

Brutusmax1mus wrote: »

60% is FAR too high for average crit chance to plug into these equations imo, I used 48.

@TheDoomsdayMonster no offense, but you're running sets like spectres eye, vampire lord, and combat physician and call @Aedaryl out of date? Come on now.....

Those sets are better than you think they are (Spectre's Eye has excellent synergy with Elusive Mist for example) and besides you gotta look at a build as a whole to properly evaluate a character...

My builds using those sets have great synergy with one another and with the abilities used with them...

It's a classic case of "the sum of the total equals more than the individual parts."


As pertains the Critical Chance, He's absolutely out of date of he thinks builds featuring more than 50% are bad...

Of course I've been on to that for a long time, but people wouldn't listen (just like people like yourself stubbornly hold on to your preconceptions about certain sets)...

It took the arrival of Mechanical Acuity to open the eyes of more people to the great value of High Spell/Weapon Crit unfortunately...


But hey, it's better to get wise later than never...

Aquity is good bc you dictate when it procs and control its potential. It's also hard countered by shields. I was speaking on average numbers, only stating 60% is far too high an average imo. Lol @ "spectres has synergy with mist form". Either way, let's not argue your builds, you do you dude.

You brought the sets I like into the discussion as a talking point; I reserve the right to debate their value as a result...


Oh and Spectre's Eye has excellent synergy with my Vampire Lord build:

Vampire Lord makes both Elusive Mist and Accelerated Drain cheaper to cast (and AD's Minor Expedition stacks with Elusives Major Expedition)...

Mighty Chudan's defensive benefits stack with those of Elusive Mist 100% of the time...

Spectre's Eye enhances that durability by proc'ing Major Evasion (and causing attacks to miss) while Misting away...

The synergy there is very powerful and very effective...




As pertains a Critical Chance value of 60+%, I agree that the average player isnt running that much, but some of the players you should be aware of are...

Its better to prepare for the best in any event as, if you can deal with them, then you can definitely deal with the lesser players...

montiferus

TheDoomsdayMonster wrote: »

..

As pertains a Critical Chance value of 60+%, I agree that the average player isnt running that much, but some of the players you should be aware of are

No....no they aren’t. At least not on my platform.

Taylor_MB

I can concede the average player having 60% critical chance is unreasonable. As demonstrated above, however, Impregnable still comes out on top with critical chances being much lower. It doesn't always, but in all the scenarios I've come up with, it more consistently outperforms FB.

teladoy

Is Wizard Riposte worth if im using a Ice Staff and skills like Elemental Blockade?

Elemental Force II gives a 100% chance to apply chilled to enemies, that would mean that applies Secondary Damage Type Effect: Frost that is chilled and chilled applies Minor Maim (Decrease damage done by 15%).

Is that right or im missing something?

Qbiken

teladoy wrote: »

Is Wizard Riposte worth if im using a Ice Staff and skills like Elemental Blockade?

Elemental Force II gives a 100% chance to apply chilled to enemies, that would mean that applies Secondary Damage Type Effect: Frost that is chilled and chilled applies Minor Maim (Decrease damage done by 15%).

Is that right or im missing something?

It doesn't gives you a 100% chance to apply the status effect. The base chance of applying status effects are:

•Weapon enchants 20%
•Standard ability 10%
•Area of effect abilities 5%
•Damage over time abilities 3%
•Area of effect damage over time abilities 1%

So 100% higher chance for weapon enchants becomes 40% with elemental force II.

Minno

Qbiken wrote: »

teladoy wrote: »

Is Wizard Riposte worth if im using a Ice Staff and skills like Elemental Blockade?

Elemental Force II gives a 100% chance to apply chilled to enemies, that would mean that applies Secondary Damage Type Effect: Frost that is chilled and chilled applies Minor Maim (Decrease damage done by 15%).

Is that right or im missing something?

It doesn't gives you a 100% chance to apply the status effect. The base chance of applying status effects are:

•Weapon enchants 20%
•Standard ability 10%
•Area of effect abilities 5%
•Damage over time abilities 3%
•Area of effect damage over time abilities 1%

So 100% higher chance for weapon enchants becomes 40% with elemental force II.

If you use charged, it adds 110-220% on gold one hand/2h weapons. So charged 2h impacts all the status effects you on all the skills you do, not just the enchant, it multiplies the following chance by 220%.

If you use poison injection, it's a "Standard ability" followed by a "Damage over time ability". both these would go you 32% and 9.6% of the time you hit them with the skill.

the weapon glyph is probably what you think is the 20%. that would go to 64%, so almost every other time the enchant proced, which is up to every 4 seconds.

Charged ONLY makes sense when using shock damage. Concussed causes minor vulnerability which causes the super rare 8% extra dmg to that target (which they take 8% extra damage from ALL sources, and no one is immune to this status effect except players that use shock resistance which are more rare that the minor vulnerability lol).

Berenhir

About that percentual discussion on impregnable and average crit chance vs mace pen:

It sounds as if you guys were debating how to make the more durable target dummy. Impregnable will always outperform sets like brass because of the fact that the most dangerous portions of damage are crits. Critical hits exceed the threshold of damage you can outheal or recover from. In PvP it is completely irrelevant which set reduces more damage of 10.000 hypothetical hits. What is relevant is which sets reduce the damage spikes that impose a threat to you because they will drop you in execute range and which sets offer mitigation that has the least counterplay available in game while having the smallest opportunity costs.

Impregnable and protection are the winners here because crit resist lowers the incoming damage spikes by a large margin and the counters to crit resist are rather weak with a short duration. Even minor force equals only 660 crit resistance.
Protection has the advantage that it stacks with crit resistance without diminishing returns and on top of that is the first reduction to be applied to the incoming damage while having a huge absolute value (30%) and uptime with pirate skeleton (low opp. cost). It applies to shields, even if it's only that barrier/healing ward an ally helps you out with.

Compare that to brass which is circumvented by maces, destro staves, light armour, sharpened, breach/fracture and 2h ult and of course completely ignored by bleeds. It doesnt boost shields damage mitigation and is applied after block. Imho the weakest form of defense.

Amdar_Godkiller

The problem with impregnable is that it's a much weaker opportunity cost than impens. Lets compare impen to divines, which with the warrior mundus will add about 120 weapon damage. That's with 7 divines, and in most builds, that would be roughly 2.5% more damage done. In other words, each divine adds around 0.35%. Each impen adds:

258/660 = ~3.9% crit mitigation

Which is equal to 2.6% total mitigation whenever your attacker crits.


Let's call that an average of 1.25% mitigation per piece, meaning 7 of them is around 8.75% average mitigation and 18.2% mitigation against critical bursts.

So opting for offense in PVP, you are gaining only 2.5% damage, an amount easily gained by utilizing a damage set or even a damage + sustain set, and you are getting that 2.5% damage increase at a cost of nearly 9% average mitigation (5800 physical and spell resistance would be the equivalent) with the potential to reduce burst damage by more than twice that amount.

So there is really no viable argument for using impregnable without full impen. It's not a rational choice to use impregnable in lieu of using impen, as impen is just way more powerful in pvp than all other options. The only purpose for using impregnable would be to get to 4300 crit resistance (~65% crit mitigation) without investing CP in into the Resistant star. All crit resistance beyond 3300 has sharply diminishing returns, though, so you're really only getting the full value of the first 1500 crit resistance you receive from using impregnable.


The next 660 crit resistance will only be slightly weaker than the first 1500, as it will still always help against NBs and Templars (unless you have a healer running transmutation), but the last 340 will be much less useful most of the time. In short, impregnable isn't really a viable set compared to other sources of mitigation. It's insane to not use impenetrable mathematically, and 4300 crit resistance is overkill and will cost you too much in terms of potential DPS loss.

The only exception that even kind of makes sense would be so that you could wear 4 pieces of sturdy armor to lower block cost. In other words, impregnable isn't strictly speaking a mitigation set, it's a block cost reduction set that nets you 16% reduced cost and allows you to forgo using your red CP towards crit resistance.

Berenhir

Amdar_Godkiller wrote: »

The problem with impregnable is that it's a much weaker opportunity cost than impens. Lets compare impen to divines, which with the warrior mundus will add about 120 weapon damage. That's with 7 divines, and in most builds, that would be roughly 2.5% more damage done. In other words, each divine adds around 0.35%. Each impen adds:

258/660 = ~3.9% crit mitigation

Which is equal to 2.6% total mitigation whenever your attacker crits.


Let's call that an average of 1.25% mitigation per piece, meaning 7 of them is around 8.75% average mitigation and 18.2% mitigation against critical bursts.

So opting for offense in PVP, you are gaining only 2.5% damage, an amount easily gained by utilizing a damage set or even a damage + sustain set, and you are getting that 2.5% damage increase at a cost of nearly 9% average mitigation (5800 physical and spell resistance would be the equivalent) with the potential to reduce burst damage by more than twice that amount.

So there is really no viable argument for using impregnable without full impen. It's not a rational choice to use impregnable in lieu of using impen, as impen is just way more powerful in pvp than all other options. The only purpose for using impregnable would be to get to 4300 crit resistance (~65% crit mitigation) without investing CP in into the Resistant star. All crit resistance beyond 3300 has sharply diminishing returns, though, so you're really only getting the full value of the first 1500 crit resistance you receive from using impregnable.


The next 660 crit resistance will only be slightly weaker than the first 1500, as it will still always help against NBs and Templars (unless you have a healer running transmutation), but the last 340 will be much less useful most of the time. In short, impregnable isn't really a viable set compared to other sources of mitigation. It's insane to not use impenetrable mathematically, and 4300 crit resistance is overkill and will cost you too much in terms of potential DPS loss.

The only exception that even kind of makes sense would be so that you could wear 4 pieces of sturdy armor to lower block cost. In other words, impregnable isn't strictly speaking a mitigation set, it's a block cost reduction set that nets you 16% reduced cost and allows you to forgo using your red CP towards crit resistance.

Impregnable gives you basically immunity to crit + 28% block cost reduction when going for red CP. You could also build for immunity to crit + 35% dodge and sprint reduction in heavy.

All impen in gold is 1807 crit resist. There is no other set which has a 5pc bonus that gives 1.4x the bonus of 7 armour traits.

Divines is so weak as damage trait that noone would use that ever in an environment where you have to balance damage against utility.

Taylor_MB

@teladoy
I recently experimented with using Ice Staff to apply Minor Maim on my PvP tank instead of Wizard's Riposte and I'm very sorry to report it is a huge disappointment. Asides from WR the best way to get high Maim up time is using an Asylum Staff or being a NB and spamming Fear.

Let me expand a little on the percentages others have mentioned above and why it sucks for status effect up time.
20% form weapon enchant is increased to 84% with both Destruction Staff and Charged trait. The up time this provides can also be boosted by running Torug's Pact. This provides (without TP) ~40-50% uptime (based on casual testing) for single target, so alright for 1v1 but absolutely pales in comparison to WR for 1vX or group play.

Elemental Blockade is an AoE DoT, so with full bonuses has a 4.2% chance to proc every tick. With 2 people standing in your AoE for all 9 ticks (pretty sure it's 9, might be 8) you get a 75.6% chance to proc once. So not too flash.

Outside of a 1v1 the only way to get Minor Maim up time anywhere near to what you get with WR is to be a Warden, layering multiple AoE's on top of each other whilst using a Charged Frost staff (for extra AoE). I have not ranked up a MagWarden yet, so I can't give you specific results, but it is definitely possible and effective. Unfortunately this is the only way to get decent Maim up time with out WR.

---

@Minno
Just to clarify your last paragraph, minor vulnerability procs every time concussed procs, which is why blockade back bar (combined with shock enchant) MagDK's are so strong. Infused + Berserker are stronger in all other builds though.

---

@Amdar_Godkiller
Great analysis! That is one of the limitations of my spreadsheet, it is purely comparing defensive sets, it's up to extra analysis like yours to figure out if it's worth the trade off for someones specific build. As you mentioned at the end, Impreg's best advantage comes from opening up other trait options, specifically Sturdy, and other CP options.

Amdar_Godkiller

Berenhir wrote: »

Amdar_Godkiller wrote: »

The problem with impregnable is that it's a much weaker opportunity cost than impens. Lets compare impen to divines, which with the warrior mundus will add about 120 weapon damage. That's with 7 divines, and in most builds, that would be roughly 2.5% more damage done. In other words, each divine adds around 0.35%. Each impen adds:

258/660 = ~3.9% crit mitigation

Which is equal to 2.6% total mitigation whenever your attacker crits.


Let's call that an average of 1.25% mitigation per piece, meaning 7 of them is around 8.75% average mitigation and 18.2% mitigation against critical bursts.

So opting for offense in PVP, you are gaining only 2.5% damage, an amount easily gained by utilizing a damage set or even a damage + sustain set, and you are getting that 2.5% damage increase at a cost of nearly 9% average mitigation (5800 physical and spell resistance would be the equivalent) with the potential to reduce burst damage by more than twice that amount.

So there is really no viable argument for using impregnable without full impen. It's not a rational choice to use impregnable in lieu of using impen, as impen is just way more powerful in pvp than all other options. The only purpose for using impregnable would be to get to 4300 crit resistance (~65% crit mitigation) without investing CP in into the Resistant star. All crit resistance beyond 3300 has sharply diminishing returns, though, so you're really only getting the full value of the first 1500 crit resistance you receive from using impregnable.


The next 660 crit resistance will only be slightly weaker than the first 1500, as it will still always help against NBs and Templars (unless you have a healer running transmutation), but the last 340 will be much less useful most of the time. In short, impregnable isn't really a viable set compared to other sources of mitigation. It's insane to not use impenetrable mathematically, and 4300 crit resistance is overkill and will cost you too much in terms of potential DPS loss.

The only exception that even kind of makes sense would be so that you could wear 4 pieces of sturdy armor to lower block cost. In other words, impregnable isn't strictly speaking a mitigation set, it's a block cost reduction set that nets you 16% reduced cost and allows you to forgo using your red CP towards crit resistance.

Impregnable gives you basically immunity to crit + 28% block cost reduction when going for red CP. You could also build for immunity to crit + 35% dodge and sprint reduction in heavy.

All impen in gold is 1807 crit resist. There is no other set which has a 5pc bonus that gives 1.4x the bonus of 7 armour traits.

Divines is so weak as damage trait that noone would use that ever in an environment where you have to balance damage against utility.

Oh I know, but the numbers work the same for all options besides block cost really. Infused is on par with divines, reinforced is never even half as strong as impen, nirnhoned as it exists would need to be almost tripled to be even viable on a sash, training is not for endgame buids, well-fitted is really not useful except to certain mag builds with very low stamina, invigorating is garbage in PVP. The only trait that ever can compare at all to impen in terms of value for any build is sturdy.

I agree that impregnable has a purpose, I just don't view it as competitive in terms of mitigation because of the situations in which it actually is useful aren't what many people tend to use it for.

I have a friend that was convinced into using it as a medium armor mitigation set, and it just doesn't function effectively in that capacity. I tried to talk him into Pariah or Blessed Meridia jewelry and weapons instead, but you know how it goes.

Amdar_Godkiller

Taylor_MB wrote: »

@teladoy
I recently experimented with using Ice Staff to apply Minor Maim on my PvP tank instead of Wizard's Riposte and I'm very sorry to report it is a huge disappointment. Asides from WR the best way to get high Maim up time is using an Asylum Staff or being a NB and spamming Fear.

Let me expand a little on the percentages others have mentioned above and why it sucks for status effect up time.
20% form weapon enchant is increased to 84% with both Destruction Staff and Charged trait. The up time this provides can also be boosted by running Torug's Pact. This provides (without TP) ~40-50% uptime (based on casual testing) for single target, so alright for 1v1 but absolutely pales in comparison to WR for 1vX or group play.

Elemental Blockade is an AoE DoT, so with full bonuses has a 4.2% chance to proc every tick. With 2 people standing in your AoE for all 9 ticks (pretty sure it's 9, might be 8) you get a 75.6% chance to proc once. So not too flash.

Outside of a 1v1 the only way to get Minor Maim up time anywhere near to what you get with WR is to be a Warden, layering multiple AoE's on top of each other whilst using a Charged Frost staff (for extra AoE). I have not ranked up a MagWarden yet, so I can't give you specific results, but it is definitely possible and effective. Unfortunately this is the only way to get decent Maim up time with out WR.

---

@Minno
Just to clarify your last paragraph, minor vulnerability procs every time concussed procs, which is why blockade back bar (combined with shock enchant) MagDK's are so strong. Infused + Berserker are stronger in all other builds though.

---

@Amdar_Godkiller
Great analysis! That is one of the limitations of my spreadsheet, it is purely comparing defensive sets, it's up to extra analysis like yours to figure out if it's worth the trade off for someones specific build. As you mentioned at the end, Impreg's best advantage comes from opening up other trait options, specifically Sturdy, and other CP options.

Yeah it was just something I was discussing with my guild master who was running it on a new build the other day. I'm trying to get him to coordinate a cancerous battlegrounds premade group of blessed meridia / sload's semblance / swarm mother werewolf trolls. You ever run the numbers on BM?