How much does Grim Focus mitigation actually provide?

actosh · April 2019

Insco851 wrote: »

actosh wrote: »

It provides no mitigation............you take 15% less dmg. Did some tests on pts, kinda strong and feels like another passive.

So it’s not being reduced by cp like normal mitigation math?

If so that sounds like someone half assed the script and it’ll get patched accordingly.

Olms in vas normal

Almost max resistance(32800), minor protection running via cloak, heroic slashed olms, and weakening glyph applied as well.

dmg Taken without grim focus 5 stacks = 2326
dmg taken with active grim focus 5 stacks = 1939

2326 x 0.85(grim focus 15%) = 1977.1

Seems to me kinda way to strong tbh. Especially for PvP

U always take 15% less dmg. How much that 15% effect is depending on your other types of mitigation.

Having 0 armor, playing naked, hit will get reduced by 15%.
Fully Geared max defensive build, hit will get reduced by 15%

The most op part about it is that u have to build it up once, and then keep going. Thats why it feels like passive to me and it is totally strong for doin 5 light attacks, so for healers/tanks and the pvp guys, this is way to strong but ill take it.

Insco851 · April 2019

actosh wrote: »

Insco851 wrote: »

actosh wrote: »

It provides no mitigation............you take 15% less dmg. Did some tests on pts, kinda strong and feels like another passive.

So it’s not being reduced by cp like normal mitigation math?

If so that sounds like someone half assed the script and it’ll get patched accordingly.

Olms in vas normal

Almost max resistance(32800), minor protection running via cloak, heroic slashed olms, and weakening glyph applied as well.

dmg Taken without grim focus 5 stacks = 2326
dmg taken with active grim focus 5 stacks = 1939

2326 x 0.85(grim focus 15%) = 1977.1

Seems to me kinda way to strong tbh. Especially for PvP

Nerf incoming...

Errr uhh delete everything you’ve said. I won’t tell a soul.

Insco851 · April 2019

actosh wrote: »

Insco851 wrote: »

actosh wrote: »

It provides no mitigation............you take 15% less dmg. Did some tests on pts, kinda strong and feels like another passive.

So it’s not being reduced by cp like normal mitigation math?

If so that sounds like someone half assed the script and it’ll get patched accordingly.

Olms in vas normal

Almost max resistance(32800), minor protection running via cloak, heroic slashed olms, and weakening glyph applied as well.

dmg Taken without grim focus 5 stacks = 2326
dmg taken with active grim focus 5 stacks = 1939

2326 x 0.85(grim focus 15%) = 1977.1

Seems to me kinda way to strong tbh. Especially for PvP

U always take 15% less dmg. How much that 15% effect is depending on your other types of mitigation.

Having 0 armor, playing naked, hit will get reduced by 15%.
Fully Geared max defensive build, hit will get reduced by 15%

The most op part about it is that u have to build it up once, and then keep going. Thats why it feels like passive to me and it is totally strong for doin 5 light attacks, so for healers/tanks and the pvp guys, this is way to strong but ill take it.

It just didn’t get ran thru the normal mitigation filters... in due time tho.

And if not... lord have mercy on the nerf threads.

actosh · April 2019

It will be nerfed for sure, either it will be added to the mitigation calculation, or the value will decrease drasticlly.
Best would be to complety change the effect we get from 5 stacks.

Insco851 · April 2019

actosh wrote: »

It will be nerfed for sure, either it will be added to the mitigation calculation, or the value will decrease drasticlly.
Best would be to complety change the effect we get from 5 stacks.

True damage reduction tacked on to the very end of the calculation... too bad...

kaithuzar · April 2019

HankTwo wrote: »

@muh First of all, lets concentrate on the case were you use this skill purely for the 15% damage mitigation bonus. You can add as much extra mitigations in my example as you want, the outcome will be the same. Equal damage values in both case 2 and 3 but different numbers in case of the 'total mitigation'.

Your math is not wrong per se, but you are taking the wrong conclusions from it. The problem is that you are always comparing it to this 'baseline' you calculate. I'm telling you this baseline shouldn't matter to you. Why should I care how much damage a player would deal to a naked target without any CP and buffs. It doesn't make sense to make comparisons with that case. What's important is how much will I mitigate when I add this skill to my bar compared to how much damage I receive without it. And that's exactly 15%. Heck, the fact that you don't take battlespirit into the equation is pure arbitrariness.

And about the mitigation = extra health and healing received. Please calculate some example scenarios were you add 15% damage mitigation in one case and 17.647% extra health and healing received in another. You can add as many other damage reduction and healing received buffs as you like. Apart from adding oblivion damage, both cases should always end at the same relative amount of health.

General example from me: a player with max health 'm' starts at full health and gets damage by a player with constant dps 'd'. The targeted player already has 2 forms of mitigation (r1 and r2) and 2 boosts to his healing received (b1 and b2). He will heal himself with a constant stream of heals 'h'. How much time 't' will it take until the player dies?
Case 1) added damage mitigation 'r3': [ m / (d * r1 * r2 * r3 - h * b1 * b2) = t ]
Case 2) added health bonus and healing received 'b3': [ m *b3 / (d * r1 * r2 - h * b1 * b2 * b3) = t ]
Question: how large must the health and healing received bonus be to be equal to the added damage mitigation?
--> [ m / (d * r1 * r2 * r3 - h * b1 * b2) = m *b3 / (d * r1 * r2 - h * b1 * b2 * b3) ]
--> [ d * r1 * r2 - h * b1 * b2 * b3 = b3 * (d * r1 * r2 * r3 - h * b1 * b2) ]
--> [ d * r1 * r2 - h * b1 * b2 * b3 = b3 * d * r1 * r2 * r3 - b3 * h * b1 * b2 ]
--> [ d * r1 * r2 = b3 * d * r1 * r2 * r3 ]
--> [ 1 = b3 * r3 ]
--> [ b3 = 1/r3 ]
Conclusion: If you insert a resistance bonus of r3 = 0.85 you will find, that a health and healing received bonus of 1 / 0.85 = 1.17647 is equal to that in practice. The other mitigation and healing received sources are irrelevant to the outcome of this calculation.

I haven’t had the need to do anything other than “basic” math for 2+ decades.
Do you mind providing a source for me too understand the type of math you’re providing & how to properly solve/understand it?

actosh · April 2019

actosh wrote: »

Insco851 wrote: »

actosh wrote: »

It provides no mitigation............you take 15% less dmg. Did some tests on pts, kinda strong and feels like another passive.

So it’s not being reduced by cp like normal mitigation math?

If so that sounds like someone half assed the script and it’ll get patched accordingly.

Olms in vas normal

Almost max resistance(32800), minor protection running via cloak, heroic slashed olms, and weakening glyph applied as well.

dmg Taken without grim focus 5 stacks = 2326
dmg taken with active grim focus 5 stacks = 1939

2326 x 0.85(grim focus 15%) = 1977.1

Seems to me kinda way to strong tbh. Especially for PvP

U always take 15% less dmg. How much that 15% effect is depending on your other types of mitigation.

Having 0 armor, playing naked, hit will get reduced by 15%.
Fully Geared max defensive build, hit will get reduced by 15%

The most op part about it is that u have to build it up once, and then keep going. Thats why it feels like passive to me and it is totally strong for doin 5 light attacks, so for healers/tanks and the pvp guys, this is way to strong but ill take it.

values on vet, everything remains the same.

15138 with all things active except grim focus 5 stacks
12652 with focus active

It is always 15% less dmg taken. No need to use any formula, because they dont apply on that type of dmg "mitigation"

TheRealSniker · April 2019

Once again Forums prove themselves to have brain damage...
Heavy + maim + prot:
no procs: 2785
full procs: 2399

Med + prot:
no procs: 3695
full procs: 3183

Looking at it before all flat mitgation percentages its about just under 15%:

Doing the maths after all flat mitgation percentages its about 13,8% mitgation.

Because:
3695 - 3183 = 512
512 ... 3695 is 13,8%

pieratsos · April 2019

Jhalin wrote: »
pieratsos wrote: »
Jhalin wrote: »
pieratsos wrote: »
Jhalin wrote: »
pieratsos wrote: »
Koensol wrote: »
Minno wrote: »
muh wrote: »
Minno wrote: »
muh wrote: »
@HankTwo

HankTwo wrote: »

This argument again? Damage mitigation works the exact way the tooltip tells you and I don't understand why people would assume otherwise.

If you get hit by an attack that deals 1000 damage to you and then get the five stacks for the 15% damage mitigation, then the same attack would only deal 850 damage to you instead, no matter how many other types of damage mitigation you already had. This is exactly what 'reduces the damage you take by 15%' means.

Yes, but we're talking effective mitigation here, which is the total amount of damage mitigation. Not just the mitigation from one skill.

To work with your example here.
With just 7 medium armor (~17% spell/physical damage mitigation) and no other forms of mitigation your initial hit must've been ~1205 damage. So the 150 damage you mitigated with Grim Focus effectively are only about 12.5% of the initial hit.

If you have, e.g. 20% from Ironclad/Thick Skinned and 10% from Hardy/Elemental Defender, your initial hit must've been ~1673 which means the 150 damage Grim Focus mitigated effectively are ~9%. Is that weak? No, but the situations in which you have 15% Grim Focus mitigation are nearly non-existent in real gameplay. For heals, this once again has to compete with every other skill they slot.

As Minno said that's "just how mitigation works". I didn't claim otherwise.
Lughlongarm wrote: »
pieratsos wrote: »
muh wrote: »
Insco851 wrote: »

What’s the comparison to minor maim?

I don’t slot shade so in I’m losing maim from fear but gaining this additional damage reduction.

Minor Maim would reduce the initial hit by 15%. Since it's the only easily accessible reduction to damage dealt by enemies it would be pretty much identical to 15% Grim Focus. The difference is that Grim Focus is personal mitigation only, Minor Maim would also reduce damage on other people in your group.
(10,000 * 0.85 [Minor Maim]) = 8500
8500 * 0.77 [Ironclad] * 0.88 [Hardy] * 0.5 [Armor] * 0.5 [Block] * 0.92 [Minor Protection] = 1325
Minno wrote: »

this is just how mitigation works and that's not as negative as you are making it out to be lol.

My intention is to provide a reality check. Not everyone is aware that "this is just how mitigation works".
Also, that it's on average less than 15% for everyone who intends to actually use the bow proc.
Whats the difference between that and minor/major protection and other dmg reductions in general. Do they work in a different way? Dont you also get a smaller dmg reduction from them as well?
They work the same way. 6% average damage reduction is a strong buff, no crazy OP, but a strong buff nevertheless. When many of the reductions options in the game are taking into effect(close to worst case scenario, like what author tried to show) mitigation bonuses are being heavily diminished. If this wasn't the case, many players would run with 100% damage immunity 100% of the time. But as you can see in game reality, mitigation bonuses like minor/major protection are considered strong and desirable. so ya, it shouldn't be the same for the 6% mitigation bonus.
I didn't know wearing armor and having CP assigned is close to worst case. Today I learned.
@Minno
Minno wrote: »
muh wrote: »
Insco851 wrote: »

What’s the comparison to minor maim?

I don’t slot shade so in I’m losing maim from fear but gaining this additional damage reduction.

Minor Maim would reduce the initial hit by 15%. Since it's the only easily accessible reduction to damage dealt by enemies it would be pretty much identical to 15% Grim Focus. The difference is that Grim Focus is personal mitigation only, Minor Maim would also reduce damage on other people in your group.
(10,000 * 0.85 [Minor Maim]) = 8500
8500 * 0.77 [Ironclad] * 0.88 [Hardy] * 0.5 [Armor] * 0.5 [Block] * 0.92 [Minor Protection] = 1325
Minno wrote: »

this is just how mitigation works and that's not as negative as you are making it out to be lol.

My intention is to provide a reality check. Not everyone is aware that "this is just how mitigation works".
Also, that it's on average less than 15% for everyone who intends to actually use the bow proc.
yea but you are saying its negative change, im saying its positive. its unnamed and will stack with things like major/minor protection and minor maim
Sorry, where am I saying it's a negative change?
"Conclusion:
The actual mitigation provided is laughable."
That's the same as saying "the sky is blue" is that negative as well?
I give you that I could've chosen a different adjective that would've got the same message across.

The actual mitigation provided is insignificant. Better?
No you are saying "the sky is generally boring" (looking at 15% in a vaccum) while ignoring the fact you can also look at the stars+feel warmth from the sun and look at pretty sunsets (ignoring fact you can use wizard reposte/minor protection/major protection without overriding the grim focus 15%).

Because the analysis doesn't take that into effect, the OP stance is biased.
What is biased about the analysis? Ofc he is not saying it is always X% dmg reduction. The rule of thumbs is the more damage mitigation you have, the less useful additional dmg mitigation will be. It is just an example of how basic mitigation works. The calculations in the OP are valid and simply serve to portray this. Nothing more, nothing less. I can't see the bias here.
Its biased cause its presented in a way to make the buff look useless when in fact its twice as effective as minor protection which is considered to be a strong mitigation buff and about half as effective as major protection which is considered to be the most OP mitigation buff and one of the most OP buffs in the game in general.
6% average mitigation is not twice as good as minor protection, it’s 75% of Minor Protection for anyone who uses the proc

LA->cast 0, 3, 6, 9, 12, LA->proc back to 0

Only tanks (who already sit on max resists, who will benefit least from all extra mitigation) will be able to sit on five stacks for the full 15% for any amount of time.

Minor Protection is mediocre, so is this and this buff isn’t even consistent or easy to keep up at decent values. Major Protection and Major Maim are the only damage modifiers that you’ll feel
It can potentially give you 15% dmg mitigation and save it for as long as you like. im not gonna sit here and take an average of 0,3,6,9,12 to make the buff look bad just so it can fit ur agenda. According to you major protection is useless too because of very low uptime.

So yeah 15% is 15%.
If you have any red cp at all, if you have an armor at all, then no it is not 15%

It will never be 15% effective mitigation.

What was calculated here is an accurate, realistic analysis of actual gains to the standard stamblade build, which is average 3% on anyone who uses the bow proc

In PvE it’s worthless, in PvP you won’t even feel the different it makes
What was calculated is an accurate demonstration of a biased argument.

Yes it will never be 15% effective mitigation. Just like minor protection wont give the stated value and just like major protection wont give the stated value either. Its all relative.

The reality is that its twice as strong as minor protection and half as effective as major protection, a buff that is so OP to the point where it makes you nearly unkillable if its active on you. Its also worth around 70-80 CP points.

If all dmg mitigations are useless to you and you wont feel them then by all means run around with just light/medium armor and no other mitigation. If CP is the reason why its so bad then by all means, change it, you now have 80 more CP points to invest elsewhere.

Edit : Nope, not gonna claim templar are OP because of minor protection. Never claimed that minor protection is OP either. Nice strawman right there but better luck next time.
Damn where did the NB gank you?

No one is going to take it for the mitigation, when there are much better, more consistent options, which you conveniently keep ignoring

Minor Protection is in all aspects superior to Grim Focus’ buff, it will always be 8%, you are not locked out of an offensive ability to keep the 8%, it doesn’t require dropping block to spend 3 GCDs ramping up

You keep ignoring the realistic scenario of who is going to have this slotted, a medium armor build that uses it for damage

Where did the NB gank me? Cute but again, better luck next time.

Yes i know, you are not taking it for the mitigation. You take it cause its the hardest hitting non ultimate ability in the game. The fact that it gives mitigation is an added bonus. Just because its an offensive skill it doesnt mean that the mitigation it gives is useless. If all you are doing is spamming light attacks and randomly throwing ur spectral bows you are not gonna see much benefit from the mitigation. But fortunately the skill has a higher skill cap than that. Feel free to make better use of it.

Im not ignoring realistic scenarios. I never insinuated that you will have 100% uptime on the mitigation or that is broken or whatever (although it seems to be heading that way considering how it actually works) . But insinuating that the mitigation it gives is garbage is what is actually unrealistic. And since we are talking about reality, please refrain from calling minor and major protection garbage. Cause that is definitely unrealistic.

Jagdkommando · April 2019

kaithuzar wrote: »

For me, there needs to be a lot of play-test time trying to determine if I'll use assassin's will(merciless) or impale; as I can only slot one or the other.

Thoughts on value/worth comparison?

Exactly!!!! Now we can use Impale instead. Remind me please how much was the dps of Grim Focus in Combat metrics?? Thank you.

pieratsos · April 2019

muh wrote: »

Kronuxx wrote: »

The OP's beginning post is a perfect example of how human interpretation can still be biased from unbiased mathematical results.

Alright, I guess I am biased towards PvE. That said, I'm curious in which way I've been so obviously biased. What really rubs you the wrong way about the OP? So I maybe can avoid it in the future and look at it more objectively.

The fact that you are calling it useless when its actually on par or better with other forms of mitigation which are considered great in PVP. Thats his point, while ur math do actually tell the truth, ur conclusion that its useless couldnt actually be further from the truth. PVP and PVE tanking are not the same thing.

muh · April 2019

pieratsos wrote: »

muh wrote: »

Kronuxx wrote: »

The OP's beginning post is a perfect example of how human interpretation can still be biased from unbiased mathematical results.

Alright, I guess I am biased towards PvE. That said, I'm curious in which way I've been so obviously biased. What really rubs you the wrong way about the OP? So I maybe can avoid it in the future and look at it more objectively.

The fact that you are calling it useless when its actually on par or better with other forms of mitigation which are considered great in PVP. Thats his point, while ur math do actually tell the truth, ur conclusion that its useless couldnt actually be further from the truth. PVP and PVE tanking are not the same thing.

But ... I never said it's useless?

Jhalin · April 2019

actosh wrote: »

actosh wrote: »

Insco851 wrote: »

actosh wrote: »

It provides no mitigation............you take 15% less dmg. Did some tests on pts, kinda strong and feels like another passive.

So it’s not being reduced by cp like normal mitigation math?

If so that sounds like someone half assed the script and it’ll get patched accordingly.

Olms in vas normal

Almost max resistance(32800), minor protection running via cloak, heroic slashed olms, and weakening glyph applied as well.

dmg Taken without grim focus 5 stacks = 2326
dmg taken with active grim focus 5 stacks = 1939

2326 x 0.85(grim focus 15%) = 1977.1

Seems to me kinda way to strong tbh. Especially for PvP

U always take 15% less dmg. How much that 15% effect is depending on your other types of mitigation.

Having 0 armor, playing naked, hit will get reduced by 15%.
Fully Geared max defensive build, hit will get reduced by 15%

The most op part about it is that u have to build it up once, and then keep going. Thats why it feels like passive to me and it is totally strong for doin 5 light attacks, so for healers/tanks and the pvp guys, this is way to strong but ill take it.

values on vet, everything remains the same.

15138 with all things active except grim focus 5 stacks
12652 with focus active

It is always 15% less dmg taken. No need to use any formula, because they dont apply on that type of dmg "mitigation"

If you shoot an ability that is tooltip’d for 10,000, and someone blocks, the value drops to 5,000 (5,000 mitigated), if they have 15% reduction in CP it drops to 4,250 (750 mitigated), if they have 8% from Minor Protection it drops to 3,910 (340 mitigated)

Total of 6,090/10,000 damage mitigated

Add 15% mitigation assuming someone’s holding max Focus stacks and that 3,910 goes to 3,324 (586 mitigated)

Total of 6,675/10,000 damage mitigated

Your logic doesn’t work because you’re comparing things that aren’t baselines. You’re not even comparing relative strength on the same character. Actual mitigation from one patch to another at MAX stacks using this example which doesn’t even have major resistance buffs, it’s not even a 10% increase in mitigation.

pieratsos · April 2019

muh wrote: »

pieratsos wrote: »

muh wrote: »

Kronuxx wrote: »

The OP's beginning post is a perfect example of how human interpretation can still be biased from unbiased mathematical results.

Alright, I guess I am biased towards PvE. That said, I'm curious in which way I've been so obviously biased. What really rubs you the wrong way about the OP? So I maybe can avoid it in the future and look at it more objectively.

The fact that you are calling it useless when its actually on par or better with other forms of mitigation which are considered great in PVP. Thats his point, while ur math do actually tell the truth, ur conclusion that its useless couldnt actually be further from the truth. PVP and PVE tanking are not the same thing.

But ... I never said it's useless?

You did say that the mitigation it gives its laughable no?

muh · April 2019

pieratsos wrote: »

muh wrote: »

pieratsos wrote: »

muh wrote: »

Kronuxx wrote: »

The OP's beginning post is a perfect example of how human interpretation can still be biased from unbiased mathematical results.

Alright, I guess I am biased towards PvE. That said, I'm curious in which way I've been so obviously biased. What really rubs you the wrong way about the OP? So I maybe can avoid it in the future and look at it more objectively.

The fact that you are calling it useless when its actually on par or better with other forms of mitigation which are considered great in PVP. Thats his point, while ur math do actually tell the truth, ur conclusion that its useless couldnt actually be further from the truth. PVP and PVE tanking are not the same thing.

But ... I never said it's useless?

You did say that the mitigation it gives its laughable no?

Which as far as I know is not a synonym for useless.

Iskiab · April 2019

Jagdkommando wrote: »

kaithuzar wrote: »

For me, there needs to be a lot of play-test time trying to determine if I'll use assassin's will(merciless) or impale; as I can only slot one or the other.

Thoughts on value/worth comparison?

Exactly!!!! Now we can use Impale instead. Remind me please how much was the dps of Grim Focus in Combat metrics?? Thank you.

You could always use both. I use impale now on live, tricky thing about using it is health %s jump around a lot and 25% is a tight range. Merciless > impale combos would be good in theory if you can fit both.

NyassaV · April 2019

@ZOS_Gilliam

xAk_MoRRoWiNdx · April 2019

All this says about the devs is that

We're not ZoS' Golden children, contrary to popular belief. Never have been, never will be
They hate us
They have absolutely no clue what they're doing with these changes, and decided to pull something from the toilet and call it a good idea. "This DPS ability where you fire a damaging projectile will give you increased resistances!" QUESTION MARK???

If it weren't for Necromancer coming out, and me being interested in Elsweyr, I'd more than likely stop playing this game. My main has been nerfed for 4 years straight and I hate it.

ccfeeling · April 2019

I will try to 5 LA to gain the max mitigation in front of VHRC final boss.

They have no idea what the main tank doing in hard contents, drop block? Seriously?

Thanks the sum up, you just proved this is the most stupid team ever.

pieratsos · April 2019

muh wrote: »

pieratsos wrote: »

muh wrote: »

pieratsos wrote: »

muh wrote: »

Kronuxx wrote: »

The OP's beginning post is a perfect example of how human interpretation can still be biased from unbiased mathematical results.

Alright, I guess I am biased towards PvE. That said, I'm curious in which way I've been so obviously biased. What really rubs you the wrong way about the OP? So I maybe can avoid it in the future and look at it more objectively.

The fact that you are calling it useless when its actually on par or better with other forms of mitigation which are considered great in PVP. Thats his point, while ur math do actually tell the truth, ur conclusion that its useless couldnt actually be further from the truth. PVP and PVE tanking are not the same thing.

But ... I never said it's useless?

You did say that the mitigation it gives its laughable no?

Which as far as I know is not a synonym for useless.

po-tay-to, po-tah-to. Im prety sure when someone says the dmg mitigation it gives is laughable and insignificant then he doesnt think that its actually good or even decent for that matter. I mean, you can keep playing with words but the only thing you are achieving is reinforcing the statement that ur analysis was biased

ccfeeling · April 2019

This is the 3rd time DEV modified the Assassination skill line and stated good for tank

Executioner
When an enemy dies within 2 seconds of being damaged by one of your Assassination abilities, you restore 1876 Magicka or Stamina, whichever maximum is higher.

Grim Focus: This ability and its morphs will now reduce your damage taken by 3% for each Light or Heavy Attack you use, up to 5 times. Note that this bonus will persist even if the Grim Focus buff fades from you, as it is tethered to the amount of stacks you had while the buff was active. This effect will be consumed when you use your stacks by firing the spectral bow or when you leave combat.

Beside , You guys also modified our unique Blur potential effect , extend our dark cloak HOT time , new GF good for tank ? Really ? How I gain the effect during MHK or BF HM final phase or similar case in hard trials , LA ? What ?

If you guys have no idea how to balance this class , please provide a free class change token . That's enough !

Ulfgarde · April 2019

"On average you get just 6% tooltip damage mitigation from it as a DD, which in reality gives about 3% actual mitigation."

Let's just look at your calculations, that you supplied us with:

10,000 * 0.77 [Ironclad] * 0.88 [Hardy] * 0.75 [Resistance] = 5082

10,000 * 0.77 [Ironclad] * 0.88 [Hardy] * 0.75 [Resistance] * 0.85 [Grim Focus] = 4322

5082 damage from a 10k hit, 4322 with grim focus, right? Now if we divide the latter calculation by the former one, we find that the latter calculation is close to 85% of the 5082 damage we saw earlier. That's means the latter calculation had 760 less damage than the former. Everything is working just as it should be here; it's still 15% reduction.

You can't realistically base damage received calculations off "tooltip damage mitigation". To reiterate what I just did, by removing Grim Focus's new damage mitigation in a seperate calculation with the same CP and resists, the difference in a 10k base ability's received damage between your first calculation and your second calculation WITH grim focus will be decisively around 15%, with some very small diminishing returns. You are 100% right that, based on the tooltip, the TOTAL mitigation is much less, but you will NEVER realistically base your damage received off TOTAL mitigation.

Your tl;dr would lead people to believe that the damage received is far less than it advertises, which is not true. No damage reduction source is stacking additively off the raw tooltip because that would be fundamentally broken for the game.

Consider the fact this change is intended to mostly benefit nightblades in PVP. In pvp you will often hold assassin's bow for burst of course, so that means this mitigation bonus is going to be a game-changer. For PVE I can agree that the "average" damage received is kinda redundant, but it is obvious that this change was PvP-leaned.

Overall, the damage you receive should not be practically viewed through the perspective of the tooltip damage, but rather through what difference the damage received is before the buff is considered and afterwards. It just causes misinformation otherwise.

BlackMadara · April 2019

actosh wrote: »

It will be nerfed for sure, either it will be added to the mitigation calculation, or the value will decrease drasticlly.
Best would be to complety change the effect we get from 5 stacks.

It is being handled the same as any other force of mitigation or damage reduction. For example, if you ran the same test without minor protection vs with minor protection, you will see an 8% difference in damage taken.

This 8% is relative to whatever amount of damage you are taking before applying it. If you are tanky, and will take 100 damage, it will be 92 damage. If you are squishy and will take 1000 damage, you will take 920 damage.

In one case, you take 8 less damage. In another you take 80 less damage. Both are still 8% damage reduction in their relative cases.

muh · April 2019

pieratsos wrote: »

muh wrote: »

pieratsos wrote: »

muh wrote: »

pieratsos wrote: »

muh wrote: »

Kronuxx wrote: »

The OP's beginning post is a perfect example of how human interpretation can still be biased from unbiased mathematical results.

Alright, I guess I am biased towards PvE. That said, I'm curious in which way I've been so obviously biased. What really rubs you the wrong way about the OP? So I maybe can avoid it in the future and look at it more objectively.

The fact that you are calling it useless when its actually on par or better with other forms of mitigation which are considered great in PVP. Thats his point, while ur math do actually tell the truth, ur conclusion that its useless couldnt actually be further from the truth. PVP and PVE tanking are not the same thing.

But ... I never said it's useless?

You did say that the mitigation it gives its laughable no?

Which as far as I know is not a synonym for useless.

po-tay-to, po-tah-to. Im prety sure when someone says the dmg mitigation it gives is laughable and insignificant then he doesnt think that its actually good or even decent for that matter. I mean, you can keep playing with words but the only thing you are achieving is reinforcing the statement that ur analysis was biased

I really don't know what you want... Your interpretation of my OP is as biased if anything. Most of you attacking my interpretation get hung up on the initial use of "laughable", but ignore everything else.

I've covered the mitigation you can expect from it when you're keeping it at 15%, as DD and tank for that matter.
I've gone ahead and covered the mitigation you can expect when you're using the proc as soon as it's available. Which is the mitigation I primarily meant when I wrote laughable.
I never actually said the change overall is bad, I never said I want something else, but for some reason that's what you read into it.
I also never made a comparison to any other defensive buff, that's once again your (generally speaking) interpretation.

So what the actual fluff do you want from me?

BlackMadara · April 2019

Jhalin wrote: »

actosh wrote: »

actosh wrote: »

Insco851 wrote: »

actosh wrote: »

It provides no mitigation............you take 15% less dmg. Did some tests on pts, kinda strong and feels like another passive.

So it’s not being reduced by cp like normal mitigation math?

If so that sounds like someone half assed the script and it’ll get patched accordingly.

Olms in vas normal

Almost max resistance(32800), minor protection running via cloak, heroic slashed olms, and weakening glyph applied as well.

dmg Taken without grim focus 5 stacks = 2326
dmg taken with active grim focus 5 stacks = 1939

2326 x 0.85(grim focus 15%) = 1977.1

Seems to me kinda way to strong tbh. Especially for PvP

U always take 15% less dmg. How much that 15% effect is depending on your other types of mitigation.

Having 0 armor, playing naked, hit will get reduced by 15%.
Fully Geared max defensive build, hit will get reduced by 15%

The most op part about it is that u have to build it up once, and then keep going. Thats why it feels like passive to me and it is totally strong for doin 5 light attacks, so for healers/tanks and the pvp guys, this is way to strong but ill take it.

values on vet, everything remains the same.

15138 with all things active except grim focus 5 stacks
12652 with focus active

It is always 15% less dmg taken. No need to use any formula, because they dont apply on that type of dmg "mitigation"

If you shoot an ability that is tooltip’d for 10,000, and someone blocks, the value drops to 5,000 (5,000 mitigated), if they have 15% reduction in CP it drops to 4,250 (750 mitigated), if they have 8% from Minor Protection it drops to 3,910 (340 mitigated)

Total of 6,090/10,000 damage mitigated

Add 15% mitigation assuming someone’s holding max Focus stacks and that 3,910 goes to 3,324 (586 mitigated)

Total of 6,675/10,000 damage mitigated

Your logic doesn’t work because you’re comparing things that aren’t baselines. You’re not even comparing relative strength on the same character. Actual mitigation from one patch to another at MAX stacks using this example which doesn’t even have major resistance buffs, it’s not even a 10% increase in mitigation.

You should never compare baselines in a system that uses multiplicative functions for mitigation. If you did, then nothing seems strong. If you have the 15% damage reduction, you will ALWAYS take 15% less damage than you would have without it. That is what is important. Now, if you already stack a lot of mitigation, the actual value might not be that high, but it will still be 15%. So the choice is to use the 15% damage reduction and reduce your other mitigation sources in exchange for something else, or to not use the 15% damage reduction.

Real life scenario. You are must pay a percentage of your income to another entity. They allow you to spend money on necessities, to lower the amount of your "available" income. You make $1000, and they demand 10%. If you don't buy necessities, you pay the entity $100. If you buy $500 of necessities, you pay the entity $50. In both cases, you lost 10% of your "available" incomex but the values differ.

This is kind of how American taxes work.

muh · April 2019

Ulfgarde wrote: »
"On average you get just 6% tooltip damage mitigation from it as a DD, which in reality gives about 3% actual mitigation."

Let's just look at your calculations, that you supplied us with:
10,000 * 0.77 [Ironclad] * 0.88 [Hardy] * 0.75 [Resistance] = 5082
10,000 * 0.77 [Ironclad] * 0.88 [Hardy] * 0.75 [Resistance] * 0.85 [Grim Focus] = 4322
5082 damage from a 10k hit, 4322 with grim focus, right? Now if we divide the latter calculation by the former one, we find that the latter calculation is close to 85% of the 5082 damage we saw earlier. That's means the latter calculation had 760 less damage than the former. Everything is working just as it should be here; it's still 15% reduction.

You can't realistically base damage received calculations off "tooltip damage mitigation". To reiterate what I just did, by removing Grim Focus's new damage mitigation in a seperate calculation with the same CP and resists, the difference in a 10k base ability's received damage between your first calculation and your second calculation WITH grim focus will be decisively around 15%, with some very small diminishing returns. You are 100% right that, based on the tooltip, the TOTAL mitigation is much less, but you will NEVER realistically base your damage received off TOTAL mitigation.

Your tl;dr would lead people to believe that the damage received is far less than it advertises, which is not true. No damage reduction source is stacking additively off the raw tooltip because that would be fundamentally broken for the game.

Consider the fact this change is intended to mostly benefit nightblades in PVP. In pvp you will often hold assassin's bow for burst of course, so that means this mitigation bonus is going to be a game-changer. For PVE I can agree that the "average" damage received is kinda redundant, but it is obvious that this change was PvP-leaned.

Overall, the damage you receive should not be practically viewed through the perspective of the tooltip damage, but rather through what difference the damage received is before the buff is considered and afterwards. It just causes misinformation otherwise.

Well the initial quote you put up there is specifically looking at the case where you're using the proc as soon as it becomes available. Which is most likely not a PvP usecase already.

I'm well aware that the relative difference between those two equations comes down to be 15%. But at some point you have to ask yourself if the mitigation you gain in the broad picture is worth it to slot additional defense. You can't evaluate this if you're only looking at the relative 15% mitigation it provides. like BlackMadara wrote just a few post before this. If my mitigation already is high, do I really need to slot another 15% if it just reduces the damage I take by 1-2% overall?

You can't evaluate how much a defensive ability is worth in your current situation if all you're looking at is its tooltip. And that's what my OP is looking at.

Ragnaroek93 · April 2019

This thread is stupid. The damage which you would take after calculating your mitigations gets reduced by ~15%. You present your numbers and calculations in a way which makes this skill look much weaker than it is.

John_Falstaff · April 2019

Ragnaroek93 wrote: »

This thread is stupid. The damage which you would take after calculating your mitigations gets reduced by ~15%. You present your numbers and calculations in a way which makes this skill look much weaker than it is.

I wonder as to the source? Mind, not questioning, but just wondered if you checked how does it really work.

Also, the part on the average number of stacks should be correct in any way. You'll almost never have full five stacks if you're weaving correctly, so for PvE the mitigation is hardly there.

Ragnaroek93 · April 2019

John_Falstaff wrote: »

Ragnaroek93 wrote: »

This thread is stupid. The damage which you would take after calculating your mitigations gets reduced by ~15%. You present your numbers and calculations in a way which makes this skill look much weaker than it is.

I wonder as to the source? Mind, not questioning, but just wondered if you checked how does it really work.

Also, the part on the average number of stacks should be correct in any way. You'll almost never have full five stacks if you're weaving correctly, so for PvE the mitigation is hardly there.

Tested it on PTS against players (it was a tiny bit less than 15% but who cares). I'm pretty sure that the change wasn't made for group PvE dd's, more to help light and med armor nb to survive better especially for group vs group PvP where they just explode in AoE currently without playing a tank build.

muh · April 2019

John_Falstaff wrote: »

Ragnaroek93 wrote: »

This thread is stupid. The damage which you would take after calculating your mitigations gets reduced by ~15%. You present your numbers and calculations in a way which makes this skill look much weaker than it is.

I wonder as to the source? Mind, not questioning, but just wondered if you checked how does it really work.

Also, the part on the average number of stacks should be correct in any way. You'll almost never have full five stacks if you're weaving correctly, so for PvE the mitigation is hardly there.

They're not wrong, I never claimed otherwise. It's just that people don't want to understand what I actually wrote in the OP.

You always reduce the amount of damage you take by the amount of damage that is written on your tooltip, if you only look at the damage you take before and after you added a source of mitigation.

muh wrote: »
10,000 * 0.77 [Ironclad] * 0.88 [Hardy] * 0.75 [Resistance] = 5082
We mitigated 49.1% of the initial hit.
If we add 15% from Grim Focus into that equation now:
10,000 * 0.77 [Ironclad] * 0.88 [Hardy] * 0.75 [Resistance] * 0.85 [Grim Focus] = 4322
We end up mitigating 56.8% of damage.

So we actually got just 7.6% (= [5082 - 4322] / 10,000) increased mitigation out of 15% Grim Focus mitigation. But the story doesn't end here.

Let's just look at the example with 15% Grim Focus from my OP.

Without Grim Focus we would take 5082 damage, with Grim Focus it's only 4322.
5082 - 4322 = 760
760 / 5082 = ~15%
760 / 10000 (initial hit) = 7.6%

7.6% is still significant, but only realistic if you're sitting on your bow proc. Other sources with lower tooltips would provide less than that, mitigation with higher tooltips would provide more than this. Added that to the OP as well, since that apparently is what confuses people.

Edit:
To expand on this, and why looking and total mitigation is important lets look at my tank example from the OP again.

muh wrote: »
For a resistance capped tank (33000 Phys/Spell Resistance), with Minor Protection (8% mitigation) who just slots it for the mitigation (so actually keeps it at 15%), while blocking (50% mitigation) the fomula would look like:
10,000 * 0.77 [Ironclad] * 0.88 [Hardy] * 0.5 [Resistance] * 0.5 [Block] * 0.92 [Minor Protection] * 0.85 [Grim Focus] = 1325
That's only 2.3% increased damage mitigation from Grim Focus.

I didn't include the value pre-Grim Focus, because I thought people could work it out themselves, but here we go.

Without Grim Focus

10,000 * 0.77 [Ironclad] * 0.88 [Hardy] * 0.5 [Resistance] * 0.5 [Block] * 0.92 [Minor Protection] = 1558

So we're looking at
1558 [w/o GF] - 1325 [w/ GF] = 234 mitigated damage.
234 / 1558 = ~15%
234 / 10000 = 2.34%
The first doesn't tell me if it actually is worth to slot it or if it already is heavily reduced by diminishing returns. The latter shows me how much it actually provides in the grand picture of damage mitigation of my build.