2 Handed Passive - "Forceful" hide damage change (from 100% to 73%) intended or bug?

PISTOLETVKREDIT

Hello everyone, I need a clarification about this please:

Screenshots from today:
Passive description -


Light attack damage check -


Heavy attack damage check -


As you see its 73% inflicted damage on other 3 target not 100%.

@ZOS_BrianWheeler , @ZOS_GinaBruno , @ZOS_Kevin could you please leave comments on this.

Thanks in advance.

Amerises

First thought is CP stars, like single target buff. The other targets are getting hit by an AoE rather than a ST hit.

JerBearESO

Amerises wrote: »

First thought is CP stars, like single target buff. The other targets are getting hit by an AoE rather than a ST hit.

Could also be the one that buffs light/heavy attacks perhaps? I think combined that's about the right value difference

KlauthWarthog

How much armor penetration do you have on that test?

PISTOLETVKREDIT

I didnt slot any blue stars for the test. My penetration was 4613.

@ZOS_BrianWheeler , @ZOS_GinaBruno , @ZOS_Kevin any comments please?

KlauthWarthog

PISTOLETVKREDIT wrote: »

I didnt slot any blue stars for the test. My penetration was 4613.

@ZOS_BrianWheeler , @ZOS_GinaBruno , @ZOS_Kevin any comments please?

So the dummies had 13587 resistance left, which is about 27% damage mitigation. That is why you are dealing 73% damage to the other dummies.

PISTOLETVKREDIT

1st - the description of passive says - "inflicted 100% damage" so all 4 numbers should be the same. There is nothing about pen or cp stars and so on. Logic - penetration not working on other targets makes no sense.

2nd - test with zero penentation:

KlauthWarthog

Well, your second test confirms that penetration is factored into the actual damage inflicted to the secondary targets.
0 penetration means 18200 resistance, which equals 36.4% mitigation, and 1225 is indeed 63.60% of 1926.

100% of the original damage is copied to the new targets, and then their mitigation kicks in, and the actual damage inflicted is modified accordingly.

PISTOLETVKREDIT

So you are saying penetration is factored twice? 1st target 18200 + second target 18200? And to reach 4 equial numbers my penetration should be 36 400 ?

KlauthWarthog

PISTOLETVKREDIT wrote: »

So you are saying penetration is factored twice? 1st target 18200 + second target 18200? And to reach 4 equial numbers my penetration should be 36 400 ?

Penetration is applied individually to each target. If you have 18200 penetration, you will reduce the mitigation of the first target to 0, and reduce the mitigation of the secondary targets to 0 as well.

Another example: if you have 8200 penetration, you will reduce the dummies' resistance to 10000 each, which is 20% mitigation.
If your attack would do 5000 damage to the first target, its mitigation will reduce the damage to 4000.
This 4000 will be copied to the secondary targets. They also have 20% mitigation, so the final damage to the secondary targets will be 3200.

PISTOLETVKREDIT

I did test with 18200 + cap penetration - the result is equial numbers. Here you are right.



But if you are not on the cap you should pass this pen/mitigation check twice for 1st and 2nd target. My question is why should it count mitigation twice? My character has for example 8200 own penetration (not debuffs on target) and no matter what i hit it should calculate 8200 pen (20% mitigation, ((PVE 18200 cap)). But here it is calculate like 8200 for the 1st stage = 1 *0.8 =0.8% dmg and than another 0.8*0.8 = 0.64% dmg.for 2nd stage.
For example if you have more than 2 stages in this calculation and 0 penetration you will see this:


Just think, the penetration remains the same the targets defences are the same but the 1st stage target and the last stage target will receive the different numbers. You see 5th stage is alrdy 10 %.
If the game numbers are calculated like this it is incorrect.

Dagoth_Rac

The original damage was already mitigated by the first mob's armor. It should not get mitigated again by the other mob's armor. This kind of "double dipping", of everything from crit chance to healing to damage, is something ZOS have taken steps to eliminate in a lot of other areas of combat. I am not sure why this one skill would be an exception. Seems like an oversight.

Amerises

Dagoth_Rac wrote: »

The original damage was already mitigated by the first mob's armor. It should not get mitigated again by the other mob's armor. This kind of "double dipping", of everything from crit chance to healing to damage, is something ZOS have taken steps to eliminate in a lot of other areas of combat. I am not sure why this one skill would be an exception. Seems like an oversight.

Yeah, that’s pretty interesting, and a little misleading at first glance, however I think either counting it once and copying the damage or “double dipping” makes sense. Not sure it’s an oversight as much as a mechanic decision.

JerBearESO

Could be PvP cleave related? If intended I mean, I would be a countermeasure to the cleave from NPC enemy problem a bit. Does this happen with lightning heavy? That would be a bit of an indicator as to whether it's intended design or not.

Necrotech_Master

JerBearESO wrote: »

Could be PvP cleave related? If intended I mean, I would be a countermeasure to the cleave from NPC enemy problem a bit. Does this happen with lightning heavy? That would be a bit of an indicator as to whether it's intended design or not.

i believe so, mitigation is still taken into account with the splash dmg

the only part that these passives ignore would be battle spirit because the dmg would be "double dipping" on that (-50% dmg on the initial attack, so if battle spirit applied to the splash it would be reduced by another 50% before accounting for mitigation)

that part tends to cause problems when the thing being attacked is an NPC lol

WrathOfInnos

JerBearESO wrote: »

Could be PvP cleave related? If intended I mean, I would be a countermeasure to the cleave from NPC enemy problem a bit. Does this happen with lightning heavy? That would be a bit of an indicator as to whether it's intended design or not.

Adding to this, you would not want the splash damage to be dealt without checking the recipient's mitigation. Imagine hitting a glass cannon and the nearby tank with capped resistances feels the same impact.

I think it should be changed so all targets in the area receive the same base hit, then each one calculates mitigation only using their individual resistances. Basically how every other AoE ability works (Pulsar, Whirling Blades, Scythe).

sleepy_worm

JerBearESO wrote: »

Does this happen with lightning heavy?

Yes, it does.

Mr_Jord_Joe

WrathOfInnos wrote: »

JerBearESO wrote: »

Could be PvP cleave related? If intended I mean, I would be a countermeasure to the cleave from NPC enemy problem a bit. Does this happen with lightning heavy? That would be a bit of an indicator as to whether it's intended design or not.

Adding to this, you would not want the splash damage to be dealt without checking the recipient's mitigation. Imagine hitting a glass cannon and the nearby tank with capped resistances feels the same impact.

I think it should be changed so all targets in the area receive the same base hit, then each one calculates mitigation only using their individual resistances. Basically how every other AoE ability works (Pulsar, Whirling Blades, Scythe).

Free AOE? Maybe this not happens, ZoS nerfed HA of staff because this insane stuff...

aru

Probably has an answer with penetration or something, but it'd be good to have a response from developers.

sleepy_worm

I think you should assume that a non-response is confirmation that it is working as intended.

KlauthWarthog

I am inclined to believe that communication is actively prevented by the game's management.
This is a simple question with a binary answer - intended or not intended.
And not even that gets an answer around here anymore.

Panderbander

Just replace every instance of the word "damage" with "crown store" or "crowns". You'll get a response ASAP

CameraBeardThePirate

I'm confused - your question was answered by a player already?

Forceful takes 100% of the damage you deal to someone, and deals that damage to everyone nearby.

However, their mitigation will apply to the damage still, so it won't be exactly 100% damage.

Zodiarkslayer

Well, Id like to know why it says one thing in the tool tip and does another in the game.

And if it is intended to work this way, I'd like to have an explanation. Well, actually a simple confirmation would be okay at this point.

Galeriano

Dagoth_Rac wrote: »

The original damage was already mitigated by the first mob's armor. It should not get mitigated again by the other mob's armor. This kind of "double dipping", of everything from crit chance to healing to damage, is something ZOS have taken steps to eliminate in a lot of other areas of combat. I am not sure why this one skill would be an exception. Seems like an oversight.

Not entirely an oversight. Imagine simple situation in PvP where for example You apply bunch of resistance debuffs to one enemy lowering his resistances to almost zero. It would be a bit wierd for enemies around him to get full damage value without taking their resistances into consideration.

ZOS_Icy

Greetings,

We've removed some comments due to spamming and thread bumping, please keep the threads constructive and on topic.

• Spamming: Please do not post spam on the official The Elder Scrolls Online forums. Below are a few examples of what we define as spamming:
  - Posting the same message more than once
  - Posting messages that are nonsensical or have no real content
  - Posting messages or images large enough to disrupt the normal flow of conversation
  - Reposting material that has been removed by a member of the ESO Team
  Also, please refrain from posting the same topic in multiple areas of the forum, or cross-posting in an attempt to gain further views or replies. This is considered spamming, and the duplicate threads will be removed.

• Thread Bumping: Please refrain from replying to discussion threads for the sole purpose of “bumping” them. This is considered to be a form of spam because it does not add to the discussion in a constructive or meaningful way. We understand that everyone would like to keep their discussion active and visible, but we encourage you to strive for meaningful and constructive posts instead of posts that consist of nothing more than “Bump!”

To review our community rules, you may find them here.

Thank you for your understanding.