Comparison of Solar Barrage on Live and PTS

Solinur

Since a lot of People have complained about the damage reduction of SB I wanted to have a deeper look at it from the PvE perspective.
(In PvP things are a bit different and having smaller ticks will surely hurt when trying to bring someone down)

When using a skill in a rotation the important value to compare is the damage it causes in relation to the time that is consumed in casting it. Within a rotation one should also include the following light attack to get the total effect (since having a shorter cast time means more light attacks within a fight)
Another damage component is the 4x empowered that solar barrage grants to light attacks.

I tested this on my Magplar with identical setups on Live (4.0.12) and PTS (4.1.4).

Damage Values on Live / PTS:

• Solar Barrage: 3284 / 2188
• Light Attack: 2793 / 2793
• Light Attack (Empowered): 3559 / 3559

So Empowered granted 766 additional damage to the light attacks.

The total damage on Live is: Solar Barrage * 4 + Light Attack + 4 * Empowered Bonus = 18993
The total damage on PTS is: Solar Barrage * 4 + Light Attack + 4 * Empowered Bonus = 14609

However the new version is an instant cast vs. the live one, which has a cast time of 1.1s. Skills with a cast time have an animation lock of 200ms after the cast, so the effective time required to use this skill on Live is 1.3s.
Instant skill require 1s to use them.

Doing some tests even showed me that I can weave it in about 1.36 seconds on live, while the instant version on PTS was very nice to weave in 1.00 seconds. You can use the Addon Light Attack Helper to measure the times between two Light Attacks (or wait for a new Combat Metrics version which will allow to measure things like that. But it's probably still a few weeks away )

Calculating the damage per required time to use it:

• Live: 18993 Damage / 1.3 s = 14610
• PTS: 14609 Damage / 1 s = 14609

Conclusion

From a formal perspective the damage of Solar Barrage wasn't nerfed.
However, an issue arises when looking at the cost. Since the cast time was reduced that magicka per second required for this skill increased which will lead to lower DPS due to the need of using regenerating abilites. (Thx @hedna123b14_ESO to point this out to me)
Another point is the assumption that you make use of all 4 empower ticks. It's also not clear how much the freed time of 0.3 seconds can be put to use. If it allows you to squeeze in another spam attack or allows you to stitch together dot's even tighter it can be an increase in DPS. On the other hand the instant version is much nicer to weave (for me at least). Different buffs (especially additional buffs to flame damage from a DK or different CP setups) may shift the result slightly. In either case it is a nice skill to have in a magplar rotation, though I know quite a few disagree. .

Of course I'd be happy to know If I missed something or which other aspects you see to this issue.

Edit: I added the values to this Spreadsheet: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1Q85mP4VKgmn1fSA3JQtGGV6qjH2rtbU4Ba1gmETX4vs/edit#gid=0

TheNightflame

I love your magicka/dps point while dps itself is unchanged. +1.

Solinur

TheNightflame wrote: »

I love your magicka/dps point while dps itself is unchanged. +1.

This was something I initially missed and edited in. Updated the source to that.

danno8

While single target may balance out, there can be no question that the AoE is worse than on live. If you run your numbers on 2-6 targets you will see a difference, even with the extra .3s.

Personally if they wanted to lower the damage while getting rid of the cast time, I would have preferred the AoE damage stay the same, but get rid of the Empower. The overall damage would have stayed the same for AoE and single target while making the skill smoother to use.

Solinur

danno8 wrote: »

While single target may balance out, there can be no question that the AoE is worse than on live. If you run your numbers on 2-6 targets you will see a difference, even with the extra .3s.

Personally if they wanted to lower the damage while getting rid of the cast time, I would have preferred the AoE damage stay the same, but get rid of the Empower. The overall damage would have stayed the same for AoE and single target while making the skill smoother to use.

That's also a good point, let's have a look at it:

DPS Live / PTS:

• 1 Target: 14610 / 14609 (+/- 0.0%)
• 2 Targets: 24715 / 23361 (- 5.5%)
• 3 Targets: 34819 / 32113 (- 7.8%)
• 4 Targets: 44924 / 40865 (- 9.0%)
• 6 Targets: 65133 / 58369 (- 10.4%)
• 12 Targets: 125761 / 110881 (- 11.8%)

Damage of LA / Empowered is obviously always a flat increase on one target. AoE DPS goes down by 13.3%.
So in this aspect a clear nerf.

moonio

@solinur thanks so much for taking the time to test this and report back..

hedna123b14_ESO

Solinur wrote: »

Since a lot of People have complained about the damage reduction of SB I wanted to have a deeper look at it from the PvE perspective.
(In PvP things are a bit different and having smaller ticks will surely hurt when trying to bring someone down)

When using a skill in a rotation the important value to compare is the damage it causes in relation to the time that is consumed in casting it. Within a rotation one should also include the following light attack to get the total effect (since having a shorter cast time means more light attacks within a fight)
Another damage component is the 4x empowered that solar barrage grants to light attacks.

I tested this on my Magplar with identical setups on Live (4.0.12) and PTS (4.1.4).

Damage Values on Live / PTS:

• Solar Barrage: 3284 / 2188
• Light Attack: 2793 / 2793
• Light Attack (Empowered): 3559 / 3559

So Empowered granted 766 additional damage to the light attacks.

The total damage on Live is: Solar Barrage * 4 + Light Attack + 4 * Empowered Bonus = 18993
The total damage on PTS is: Solar Barrage * 4 + Light Attack + 4 * Empowered Bonus = 14609

However the new version is an instant cast vs. the live one, which has a cast time of 1.1s. Skills with a cast time have an animation lock of 200ms after the cast, so the effective time required to use this skill on Live is 1.3s.
Instant skill require 1s to use them.

Doing some tests even showed me that I can weave it in about 1.36 seconds on live, while the instant version on PTS was very nice to weave in 1.00 seconds. You can use the Addon Light Attack Helper to measure the times between two Light Attacks (or wait for a new Combat Metrics version which will allow to measure things like that. But it's probably still a few weeks away )

Calculating the damage per required time to use it:

• Live: 18993 Damage / 1.3 s = 14610
• PTS: 14609 Damage / 1 s = 14609

Conclusion

From a formal perspective the damage of Solar Barrage wasn't nerfed.
However, an issue arises when looking at the cost. Since the cast time was reduced that magicka per second required for this skill increased which will lead to lower DPS due to the need of using regenerating abilites. (Thx @hedna123b14_ESO to point this out to me)
Another point is the assumption that you make use of all 4 empower ticks. It's also not clear how much the freed time of 0.3 seconds can be put to use. If it allows you to squeeze in another spam attack or allows you to stitch together dot's even tighter it can be an increase in DPS. On the other hand the instant version is much nicer to weave (for me at least). Different buffs (especially additional buffs to flame damage from a DK or different CP setups) may shift the result slightly. In either case it is a nice skill to have in a magplar rotation, though I know quite a few disagree. .

Of course I'd be happy to know If I missed something or which other aspects you see to this issue.

One thing I am not sure one is where the empower bonus comes in. For example if its additive with all of CP, slayer and berserk bonuses, then the bonus damage to LA is even less than the 27% you got...did you test the la difference with full buffs?

Solinur

hedna123b14_ESO wrote: »

One thing I am not sure one is where the empower bonus comes in. For example if its additive with all of CP, slayer and berserk bonuses, then the bonus damage to LA is even less than the 27% you got...did you test the la difference with full buffs?

This is why I used the absolute value of empower. This way the other additive bonuses like Combat Prayer won't come into play. On the other hand the ratio between the damage values of LA, SB and Empower will scale the same with spelldamge, crit and penetration modifiers.

I also did the same test with the vMA bonus to LA. Due to the increased damage of LA over SB the comparison got shifted about 3 percent towards the PTS.

I had only a few buffs active, basically mundus, food and the templar passive to Spell damage (which also gets triggered by SB).

Edit: Of course the value goes a bit down if more bonuses come into play, but in a similar way as some effects like increased fire damage shifts things a bit, I don't believe that it will have a huge effect. After all this is supposed to be an estimation. The detailed value will depend on quite many parameters.

hedna123b14_ESO

Solinur wrote: »

hedna123b14_ESO wrote: »

One thing I am not sure one is where the empower bonus comes in. For example if its additive with all of CP, slayer and berserk bonuses, then the bonus damage to LA is even less than the 27% you got...did you test the la difference with full buffs?

This is why I used the absolute value of empower. This way the other additive bonuses like Combat Prayer won't come into play. On the other hand the ratio between the damage values of LA, SB and Empower will scale the same with spelldamge, crit and penetration modifiers.

I also did the same test with the vMA bonus to LA. Due to the increased damage of LA over SB the comparison got shifted about 3 percent towards the PTS.

I had only a few buffs active, basically mundus, food and the templar passive to Spell damage (which also gets triggered by SB).

Sorry I'm not sure I understand what you mean by absolute value. Can you break it down? Did you mean you accounted for the diminishing value of Empower when factoring in Champion Points, Minor/Major Berserk and Minor and Major Slayer? I realize that the spelldamage crit and magicka pool are irrelevant, but the other things I mentioned above should severely diminish empower's contribution. On several of my tests it was way below 20%. Another big aspect of the skill is that the damage is not significant enough of a damage boost to take up a slot. A magplar HAS to run: spammable (jabs/ele weapon), sun fire, inner light (front bar only), PL, blazing spear, trap(or accelerate), radiant oppression, sustain skill (spell sym/channeled focus), elemental blockade. Those ARE a must for top dps. Leaving you 1 free slot. The three options are Inner Light, Shield or Barrage. As a range dps I'd always run shield. As a melee I might run barrage, but here is the dilemma. As a melee you would have to back bar radiant since you would want a lightning staff front bar for the buff to your aoe skills. Losing inner light on back bar would severely affect your execute damage. So imho even on a melee build that chances not using a shield you cant really afford a slot for barrage...

Waffennacht

I only ever used it in PvP.

Where it gets worse like you said.

Solinur

hedna123b14_ESO wrote: »

Solinur wrote: »

hedna123b14_ESO wrote: »

One thing I am not sure one is where the empower bonus comes in. For example if its additive with all of CP, slayer and berserk bonuses, then the bonus damage to LA is even less than the 27% you got...did you test the la difference with full buffs?

This is why I used the absolute value of empower. This way the other additive bonuses like Combat Prayer won't come into play. On the other hand the ratio between the damage values of LA, SB and Empower will scale the same with spelldamge, crit and penetration modifiers.

I also did the same test with the vMA bonus to LA. Due to the increased damage of LA over SB the comparison got shifted about 3 percent towards the PTS.

I had only a few buffs active, basically mundus, food and the templar passive to Spell damage (which also gets triggered by SB).

Sorry I'm not sure I understand what you mean by absolute value. Can you break it down? Did you mean you accounted for the diminishing value of Empower when factoring in Champion Points, Minor/Major Berserk and Minor and Major Slayer? I realize that the spelldamage crit and magicka pool are irrelevant, but the other things I mentioned above should severely diminish empower's contribution. On several of my tests it was way below 20%. Another big aspect of the skill is that the damage is not significant enough of a damage boost to take up a slot. A magplar HAS to run: spammable (jabs/ele weapon), sun fire, inner light (front bar only), PL, blazing spear, trap(or accelerate), radiant oppression, sustain skill (spell sym/channeled focus), elemental blockade. Those ARE a must for top dps. Leaving you 1 free slot. The three options are Inner Light, Shield or Barrage. As a range dps I'd always run shield. As a melee I might run barrage, but here is the dilemma. As a melee you would have to back bar radiant since you would want a lightning staff front bar for the buff to your aoe skills. Losing inner light on back bar would severely affect your execute damage. So imho even on a melee build that chances not using a shield you cant really afford a slot for barrage...

I think I misunderstood the question initially. In this test here I'm actually using my normal CP distribution, so nothing should come from this side. The other sources you mentioned will affect it though, so you are right on that.

Regarding the skills I have my doubts about PL. The cap means that it almost doesn't scale in raid and some rough calculation showed that it is almost falling behind jabs. The only thing that goes for it is the relatively low cost. I'm also not very convinced of trap/accelerate but I need to run the numbers (especially since sometimes healers in my group play Twilight Remedy).

I would also love to see any magplar build. I haven't gotten around to work on my setup a lot, since I'm too busy with addon stuff.

Solinur

Looking at a lowered empower ~20% which is 558 in above example shifts the single target result to a 1% nerf (13970 Live vs 13777 PTS)

hedna123b14_ESO

Solinur wrote: »

hedna123b14_ESO wrote: »

Solinur wrote: »

hedna123b14_ESO wrote: »

One thing I am not sure one is where the empower bonus comes in. For example if its additive with all of CP, slayer and berserk bonuses, then the bonus damage to LA is even less than the 27% you got...did you test the la difference with full buffs?

This is why I used the absolute value of empower. This way the other additive bonuses like Combat Prayer won't come into play. On the other hand the ratio between the damage values of LA, SB and Empower will scale the same with spelldamge, crit and penetration modifiers.

I also did the same test with the vMA bonus to LA. Due to the increased damage of LA over SB the comparison got shifted about 3 percent towards the PTS.

I had only a few buffs active, basically mundus, food and the templar passive to Spell damage (which also gets triggered by SB).

Sorry I'm not sure I understand what you mean by absolute value. Can you break it down? Did you mean you accounted for the diminishing value of Empower when factoring in Champion Points, Minor/Major Berserk and Minor and Major Slayer? I realize that the spelldamage crit and magicka pool are irrelevant, but the other things I mentioned above should severely diminish empower's contribution. On several of my tests it was way below 20%. Another big aspect of the skill is that the damage is not significant enough of a damage boost to take up a slot. A magplar HAS to run: spammable (jabs/ele weapon), sun fire, inner light (front bar only), PL, blazing spear, trap(or accelerate), radiant oppression, sustain skill (spell sym/channeled focus), elemental blockade. Those ARE a must for top dps. Leaving you 1 free slot. The three options are Inner Light, Shield or Barrage. As a range dps I'd always run shield. As a melee I might run barrage, but here is the dilemma. As a melee you would have to back bar radiant since you would want a lightning staff front bar for the buff to your aoe skills. Losing inner light on back bar would severely affect your execute damage. So imho even on a melee build that chances not using a shield you cant really afford a slot for barrage...

I think I misunderstood the question initially. In this test here I'm actually using my normal CP distribution, so nothing should come from this side. The other sources you mentioned will affect it though, so you are right on that.

Regarding the skills I have my doubts about PL. The cap means that it almost doesn't scale in raid and some rough calculation showed that it is almost falling behind jabs. The only thing that goes for it is the relatively low cost. I'm also not very convinced of trap/accelerate but I need to run the numbers (especially since sometimes healers in my group play Twilight Remedy).

I would also love to see any magplar build. I haven't gotten around to work on my setup a lot, since I'm too busy with addon stuff.

I run ranged on mine so it's a bit different than melee. I think PL is still decent even with the bug. I think empower is additive with CP, but i didnt test so i cant be sure...

Solinur

hedna123b14_ESO wrote: »

I run ranged on mine so it's a bit different than melee. I think PL is still decent even with the bug. I think empower is additive with CP, but i didnt test so i cant be sure...

I need to look into PL again. Especially since using bloodthirsty (to boost the improved execute) should decrease it's values further..

Siliziumdioxid

have you considered the extra damage to LAs from msa staff?

Solinur wrote: »

Calculating the damage per required time to use it:

• Live: 18993 Damage / 1.3 s = 14610
• PTS: 14609 Damage / 1 s = 14609

So this is entirely without considering the extra Elemental weapon you can fit in by not having a cast time?

Joy_Division

Add a second target dummy and see what happens to your DPS.

Solinur

Joy_Division wrote: »

Add a second target dummy and see what happens to your DPS.

Yes, see #5

Siliziumdioxid wrote: »

have you considered the extra damage to LAs from msa staff?
So this is entirely without considering the extra Elemental weapon you can fit in by not having a cast time?

I did and the additional LA damage shifted things a bit in favor of the PTS version (since the damage contribution from SB was reduced).
I didn't save the numbers but I can quickly check again.

Solinur

I added the vMA case and the other data here: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1Q85mP4VKgmn1fSA3JQtGGV6qjH2rtbU4Ba1gmETX4vs/edit#gid=0

It is important to note however that the bonus from vMA doesn't scale with SpellDamage and Magicka, which will reduce the "benefit" in a fully buffed environment

hedna123b14_ESO

All they needed to make barrage good was to keep the damage, while making it instant. Or better yet keep the pts version the same, just make it tick every second

Solinur

hedna123b14_ESO wrote: »

All they needed to make barrage good was to keep the damage, while making it instant. Or better yet keep the pts version the same, just make it tick every second

I looked a bit into the numbers and found that if they did that, it would be as strong as Blazing Spear (with Burning Light) on single target. (And even stronger on AoE)

hedna123b14_ESO

Solinur wrote: »

hedna123b14_ESO wrote: »

All they needed to make barrage good was to keep the damage, while making it instant. Or better yet keep the pts version the same, just make it tick every second

I looked a bit into the numbers and found that if they did that, it would be as strong as Blazing Spear (with Burning Light) on single target. (And even stronger on AoE)

Which would bring magplar in line with magblade especially if you add in the Jesus beam buff

Runefang

Solinur wrote: »

hedna123b14_ESO wrote: »

I run ranged on mine so it's a bit different than melee. I think PL is still decent even with the bug. I think empower is additive with CP, but i didnt test so i cant be sure...

I need to look into PL again. Especially since using bloodthirsty (to boost the improved execute) should decrease it's values further..

Hard to argue against its use given the cost though. I am keen to try swapping it with clench though when front barring bsw, could be better.

Stibbons

It is dps loss compared to live servers. Area damage is so low. The attended buff was actually a nerf.

Solinur

Runefang wrote: »

Solinur wrote: »

I need to look into PL again. Especially since using bloodthirsty (to boost the improved execute) should decrease it's values further..

Hard to argue against its use given the cost though. I am keen to try swapping it with clench though when front barring bsw, could be better.

Clench has horrible costs though and is not that strong after all. I also don't like BSW. I see it on par with Julianos and Mothers Sorrow at best.

Stibbons wrote: »

It is dps loss compared to live servers. Area damage is so low. The attended buff was actually a nerf.

On single target it seems to be the same as before, with execption of the cost which are a relative increase since they stayed the same. On AoE it certainly is a nerf but less then 10% on up to 6 targets.

moonio

Solinur wrote: »

hedna123b14_ESO wrote: »

All they needed to make barrage good was to keep the damage, while making it instant. Or better yet keep the pts version the same, just make it tick every second

I looked a bit into the numbers and found that if they did that, it would be as strong as Blazing Spear (with Burning Light) on single target. (And even stronger on AoE)

They should have only reduced the damage by 20%
That would have made up for the removal of cast time.

I can't see how they got to a figure of 40% it just doesn't make sense, also the relative cost increase would have made up for the empower buff.

It baffles me as to how they approached this 'balance' to be honest..

Minno

moonio wrote: »

Solinur wrote: »

hedna123b14_ESO wrote: »

All they needed to make barrage good was to keep the damage, while making it instant. Or better yet keep the pts version the same, just make it tick every second

I looked a bit into the numbers and found that if they did that, it would be as strong as Blazing Spear (with Burning Light) on single target. (And even stronger on AoE)

They should have only reduced the damage by 20%
That would have made up for the removal of cast time.

I can't see how they got to a figure of 40% it just doesn't make sense, also the relative cost increase would have made up for the empower buff.

It baffles me as to how they approached this 'balance' to be honest..

Because they all play nightblades or stamina templar lol

Runefang

Solinur wrote: »

Runefang wrote: »

Solinur wrote: »

I need to look into PL again. Especially since using bloodthirsty (to boost the improved execute) should decrease it's values further..

Hard to argue against its use given the cost though. I am keen to try swapping it with clench though when front barring bsw, could be better.

Clench has horrible costs though and is not that strong after all. I also don't like BSW. I see it on par with Julianos and Mothers Sorrow at best.

Stibbons wrote: »

It is dps loss compared to live servers. Area damage is so low. The attended buff was actually a nerf.

On single target it seems to be the same as before, with execption of the cost which are a relative increase since they stayed the same. On AoE it certainly is a nerf but less then 10% on up to 6 targets.

BSW front bar is definitely better than Julianos. I get 54% uptime on average (without clench) which about 16 SP less than Juli. However it carries over to the back bar and procs burning more often. So better all around.

Solinur

Runefang wrote: »

BSW front bar is definitely better than Julianos. I get 54% uptime on average (without clench) which about 16 SP less than Juli. However it carries over to the back bar and procs burning more often. So better all around.

Yes. I was talking to one of our DK's and found that he got procs more often than once per second. Given that, it makes it hard to estimate but given that at about 56% uptime the potency is the same (considering all set bonuses). I guess that burning proc pushes it ahead. Additionally, it is a proc set so having it on one bar is clearly a bonus too.

The change to glyph mechanics might even push it a bit further in wolfhunter

LioraValkyrie

I think the effect of the Solar Barrage change needs to be calculated within the context of a rotation, as opposed to the raw damage produced by the skill itself.

The 1.1 second cast time of Solar Barrage seems to have been deliberately synchronized with the 1.1 second cast time of Puncturing Sweeps so that Solar Barrage could be cast on cooldown in place of Sweeps in a melee templar rotation.

The removal of the cast time and lowering of the damage seems to indicate the devs' wish for us to use an additional skill in a Sweeps-based rotation, preferably a DoT or buff with a roughly 8 second duration, or an additional spammable if using Crushing Shock or Elemental Weapons.

hedna123b14_ESO

LioraValkyrie wrote: »

I think the effect of the Solar Barrage change needs to be calculated within the context of a rotation, as opposed to the raw damage produced by the skill itself.

The 1.1 second cast time of Solar Barrage seems to have been deliberately synchronized with the 1.1 second cast time of Puncturing Sweeps so that Solar Barrage could be cast on cooldown in place of Sweeps in a melee templar rotation.

The removal of the cast time and lowering of the damage seems to indicate the devs' wish for us to use an additional skill in a Sweeps-based rotation, preferably a DoT or buff with a roughly 8 second duration, or an additional spammable if using Crushing Shock or Elemental Weapons.

On a melee rotation you currently have:
Blockade>shards>RL>PL>Sweep x 2>free skill. This is an 8 second rotation. With a cast time you would have to drop a jab to cast it like you said, but now you can just cast barrage as your last skill. But its still bad because of sustain issues.

Stibbons

hedna123b14_ESO wrote: »

LioraValkyrie wrote: »

I think the effect of the Solar Barrage change needs to be calculated within the context of a rotation, as opposed to the raw damage produced by the skill itself.

The 1.1 second cast time of Solar Barrage seems to have been deliberately synchronized with the 1.1 second cast time of Puncturing Sweeps so that Solar Barrage could be cast on cooldown in place of Sweeps in a melee templar rotation.

The removal of the cast time and lowering of the damage seems to indicate the devs' wish for us to use an additional skill in a Sweeps-based rotation, preferably a DoT or buff with a roughly 8 second duration, or an additional spammable if using Crushing Shock or Elemental Weapons.

On a melee rotation you currently have:
Blockade>shards>RL>PL>Sweep x 2>free skill. This is an 8 second rotation. With a cast time you would have to drop a jab to cast it like you said, but now you can just cast barrage as your last skill. But its still bad because of sustain issues.

And the sustain is the bottleneck of magplars.