Buffs: X for 8 seconds every 12 seconds, Bad?

validifyedneb18_ESO

Just a quick question about timed buff procs that have a shorter duration than their cooldown, specifically focusing on Burning Spellweave and Silks of the Sun because thats one im most immediately familiar with.

Silks of the Sun Set
LEVEL 50      CHAMPION 160
(2 items) Adds 1206 Max Health
(3 items) Adds 1096 Max Magicka
(4 items) Adds 129 Spell Damage
(5 items) Adds 400 Spell Damage to your Flame Damage abilities.

Burning Spellweave Set
LEVEL 50      CHAMPION 160
(2 items) Adds 1096 Max Magicka
(3 items) Adds 129 Spell Damage
(4 items) Adds 833 Spell Critical
(5 items) When you deal damage with a Flame Damage ability, you have a 15% chance to apply the burning status effect to the enemy and gain 525 Spell Damage for 8 seconds. This effect can occur once every 12 seconds.

From what I can find online, Burning spellweave is (or used to be?) easily better than silks of the sun, but I wanted to clarify something.
So at a 15% chance, with a few flame dots up, you're probably going to get a proc for Spellweave within 1 - 2 seconds of the cooldown being off. Creating a time between buff starts of 13 seconds. 8/13 * 525 = 323, so by that logic Silks is much better, no?

I mean this is more of a wide request for comment, I want to know
A. If people watch for the buff to create burn and conserve periods in their rotation to maximize the effectiveness of the buff window? This is hard but certainly nothing new to MMOs, although I dont think ive seen anyone talk about doing this in eso.
B. How people would tend to go about calculating if ~80 spell damage is better or worse than 833 spell crit. Traditionally id take my current build and calculate everything as a % damage increase, however this means that the values change depending on the rest of my build meaning all I get are slow-to-calculate approximations.

Oh, and I guess as a bonus question if for example Julianos would be considered "just as good" as Silks of the Sun if 25% of your damage was a damage type other than flame damage?

I guess what im getting at is, I feel like the way I calculate the value of sets is probably inaccurate/ineffective at-least on the higher end, and for all I know there is an even better Trial set than all 3 of these that does the same thing as all the others but better.

SaintSubwayy

there is something very important you seem to have forgotten here.

Sun gives you Flame dmg boost, whihc cannot be increased by minor / major sorcery.
BSW gives you Spelldmg, which can be increased by Major and Minor Sorcery.
It also counts towards your light attakcs (not sure if Sun also does that)

So if you take your 323 and add minor + major sorcery, the you would end up at 323*1.3*1.1 =461.89 Spelldmg
also you only have to slot BSW on one bar, since the Buff carries over to the other bar if you swap.

IAVITNI

SaintSubwayy wrote: »

there is something very important you seem to have forgotten here.

Sun gives you Flame dmg boost, whihc cannot be increased by minor / major sorcery.
BSW gives you Spelldmg, which can be increased by Major and Minor Sorcery.
It also counts towards your light attakcs (not sure if Sun also does that)

So if you take your 323 and add minor + major sorcery, the you would end up at 323*1.3*1.1 =461.89 Spelldmg
also you only have to slot BSW on one bar, since the Buff carries over to the other bar if you swap.

This was changed a while back. Sets like Sun and Automaton should be affected by buffs and other modifiers.

validifyedneb18_ESO

Oh ok I get the bit about off-set-ing BSW, a good idea.

I dont quite understand why Sun cannot be increased by additional buffs, granted I havent looked at the specific equations for this but in general all buffs are pooled together? Is this just a general thing for all the sets that add X amount of damage to Y type damages?

Iskiab

Yup, not auto attacks. It’s just abilities so you’re only getting a sp buff to 3/4 of your damage or so.

I don’t think BSW is that great, but it’s better than the flame set.

Masel

SaintSubwayy wrote: »

there is something very important you seem to have forgotten here.

Sun gives you Flame dmg boost, whihc cannot be increased by minor / major sorcery.
BSW gives you Spelldmg, which can be increased by Major and Minor Sorcery.
It also counts towards your light attakcs (not sure if Sun also does that)

So if you take your 323 and add minor + major sorcery, the you would end up at 323*1.3*1.1 =461.89 Spelldmg
also you only have to slot BSW on one bar, since the Buff carries over to the other bar if you swap.

How is this rumor not extinct yet. These sets all benefit from these buffs, because they function as a regular weapon or spell damage boost and are included in the same way in the damage formula.

Also, major sorcery is 20% and minor is 10%, so it would be 323*1.3, since sorcery buffs are additive and net you a 30% increase.... so much false information in one post...

Sun adds 400 spell damage to all abilities (including flame staff
Iight and heavy attacks) that use fire damage. Proc sets do not scale with resources so they are not affected.

This 400 spell damage is then simply added into the coefficient for spell damage for these abilities only. Since amplifiers are applied additiveley afterwards, it will be affected.

Sun is an effective 533 spell damage, assuming that you use fire abilities only. The problem Sun has is the health bonus (even though it is nice to have in many situations), since it makes the damage effectively less than julianos already, and bsw has the advantage to increase your burning uptime and can be one-barred.

TheYKcid

@Masel is the Burning debuff applied by BSW still unique, and stacking with the generic Burning status effect procced by flame damage?

This was what I was told in the past in support of BSW, but I never got around to investigating it.

del9

Masel wrote: »

SaintSubwayy wrote: »

there is something very important you seem to have forgotten here.

Sun gives you Flame dmg boost, whihc cannot be increased by minor / major sorcery.
BSW gives you Spelldmg, which can be increased by Major and Minor Sorcery.
It also counts towards your light attakcs (not sure if Sun also does that)

So if you take your 323 and add minor + major sorcery, the you would end up at 323*1.3*1.1 =461.89 Spelldmg
also you only have to slot BSW on one bar, since the Buff carries over to the other bar if you swap.

How is this rumor not extinct yet. These sets all benefit from these buffs, because they function as a regular weapon or spell damage boost and are included in the same way in the damage formula.

Also, major sorcery is 20% and minor is 10%, so it would be 323*1.3, since sorcery buffs are additive and net you a 30% increase.... so much false information in one post...

Sun adds 400 spell damage to all abilities (including flame staff
Iight and heavy attacks) that use fire damage. Proc sets do not scale with resources so they are not affected.

This 400 spell damage is then simply added into the coefficient for spell damage for these abilities only. Since amplifiers are applied additiveley afterwards, it will be affected.

Sun is an effective 533 spell damage, assuming that you use fire abilities only. The problem Sun has is the health bonus (even though it is nice to have in many situations), since it makes the damage effectively less than julianos already, and bsw has the advantage to increase your burning uptime and can be one-barred.

Interesting thanks. So according to that logic, Automoton 5th piece bonus gets the agility passive multipler from medium armor? And brutality and everything else? I’ve been trying to understand when those bonuses are factored.

ATreeGnome

The biggest advantage of BSW over silks, as someone already mentioned, is that you can use a BSW staff on one bar, a maelstrom staff on the back bar, and you will be able to carry over the BSW buff to your back bar if it procc'd on the front bar. Typically, with enough flame DoTs, this will get you pretty close to the 8/13 second uptime you mentioned in your post.

With Silks, it's only active when the 5 piece is complete. So with a typical rotation for magicka you will bar swap based on the duration of Wall of Elements, which is 8 seconds. So if you have a Silks of the Sun destro on your front bar, cast Wall of Elements plus 1 other ability on your back bar, you will have 6 seconds left to use abilities on the front bar. So you get that extra 400 flame spell damage for maybe 3/4 of the time. So 300 spell damage on average.

So in that situation BSW offers higher average spell damage, gives you extra spell crit instead of health, and gives you the an extra DoT when it's applied. So BSW will work much better in terms of raw DPS when paired with more powerful sets like Siroria that need their 5 piece to be completed 100% of the time to be effective.

To answer your more specific questions:

First, do people watch for the BSW buff to maximize their effectiveness?

Yes. But only to an extent. I think most players will make sure that they have the BSW buff before they cast their ultimate but very few go beyond that.

Second, how do you compare if ~80 spell damage is better or worse than 833 crit?

Comparing damage and crit values directly is pretty difficult and varies lot with the situation. As a rule of thumb though, 129 spell damage and 833 spell crit have the same cost to you in terms of set bonuses. You could use that ratio as a starting point for comparing. So 80 spell damage is rarely going to be worth more than 833 spell crit.

TheYKcid

@del9 they're all factored the same way as generic WD/SD is, in the same term of the equation. As long as the ability being computed meets the prerequisite of the set bonus, the behaviour will be identical to raw stats.

This even applies to healing—Sword Singer boosts the heal from Rally, for instance.

notimetocare

Also note, there is a crit and health set difference between the two

jaws343

Another note is BSW effects healing abilities and Sun does not. This is pretty important for PVP more so than PVE.

validifyedneb18_ESO

notimetocare wrote: »

Also note, there is a crit and health set difference between the two

Yeah, equating the difference of that was literally the question.