Jsmalls wrote: »

The problem with the physical damage implosion is a Stamina Sorc's attacks are ALL doing physical damage, from their large AoE, to their gap closer, to their weapon weaves, etc

I considered it balanced for Mag Sorcs because they are getting in one lightning attack max every weave... (Unless you are standing on top of their boundless while in execute).

For some reason Zos overlooked this when they implemented the buff to Stamina Sorc's.

^ This is why I always joke about the fact that Implosion realistically has a 100% proc chance, not 6%.

The mechanic is weird and most people don't understand how it works. Every hit of physical damage can proc a debuff that sticks to you for a few seconds, and it doesn't matter how much health you have when it procs. If your health dips to 15% during that debuff window, you pop like a balloon.

Jsmalls wrote: »

The problem with the physical damage implosion is a Stamina Sorc's attacks are ALL doing physical damage, from their large AoE, to their gap closer, to their weapon weaves, etc

I considered it balanced for Mag Sorcs because they are getting in one lightning attack max every weave... (Unless you are standing on top of their boundless while in execute).

For some reason Zos overlooked this when they implemented the buff to Stamina Sorc's.

You hit the nail on the head.

NeillMcAttack wrote: »

Giles.floydub17_ESO wrote: »

It is a 3% chance so it does not need to be reworked.. OP was just unlucky.

It's a 6% chance. And why should such a small, or large chance, (depends how you look at it I guess) decide fights!?

The argument that it doesn't happen often enough isn't an argument. It just makes the passive look even more ridiculous tbf.

It's the original design of the passive back since beta. It's always been a thing. It's only since stam sorcs were made viable that people have felt the need to complain about the passive. Your argument that it's rediculous is merely your opinion. Why shouldn't an rng passive decide the occasional fight?

NeillMcAttack wrote: »

I feel this passive is just total nonsense. As a magblade main, dropping below 15% health is common place in any fight that goes longer than 20 seconds. In fact you can expect it to happen many times over in a fight. It's in that period I can use my only reliable heal/defensive spell healing ward, or harness whilst waiting on my HOT's.
People will say keep your health above the threshold. As a light armour magblade, that simply is not possible. It's a case now where so many stam sorcs can just run heavy, S&B and keep dropping players below that 15% over and over and it will proc eventually.

Look at this and tell me it's ok where it's at!?

Implosion is literally the only finisher for many stamina builds like stamsorc lets not ruin it for us.

CosmicSoul wrote: »

NeillMcAttack wrote: »

I feel this passive is just total nonsense. As a magblade main, dropping below 15% health is common place in any fight that goes longer than 20 seconds. In fact you can expect it to happen many times over in a fight. It's in that period I can use my only reliable heal/defensive spell healing ward, or harness whilst waiting on my HOT's.
People will say keep your health above the threshold. As a light armour magblade, that simply is not possible. It's a case now where so many stam sorcs can just run heavy, S&B and keep dropping players below that 15% over and over and it will proc eventually.

Look at this and tell me it's ok where it's at!?

Implosion is literally the only finisher for many stamina builds like stamsorc lets not ruin it for us.

Can you call it a 'finisher' when it isn't even an ability. Every other finisher I know actually requires some input from the player to execute (pardon the pun). What about stam DK's? Should we give them a random chance exexute since they also don't have a class execute? What about temp's, are we counting reverse slice, I guess we can't since stamsorcs can use that too, hmm, besides nightblades, what to you mean by some stam builds!? S&B stam sorcs!! That's it really. What makes you think S&B builds should even have an execute?!

NeillMcAttack wrote: »

FriedEggSandwich wrote: »

It's the original design of the passive back since beta. It's always been a thing. It's only since stam sorcs were made viable that people have felt the need to complain about the passive. Your argument that it's rediculous is merely your opinion. Why shouldn't an rng passive decide the occasional fight?

The same reason Rich Lambert mentioned way back that they wouldn't dream of changing the ability to block cancel. They said they didnt want to remove the reactionary nature of combat. A sentiment I fully agreed with. If one can always react with a block, you can react with an ability. With battle grounds around the corner, and completion getting more tense therein, you can rest assured that this passive is going to be a deciding factor in many battles and we will be hearing many more times about how ridiculous it is to have a 6% chance to passively execute an enemy really is.

I agree 6% is more than I'm comfortable with, I would like to see it go back down to 4% and maybe only proc from direct damage. As someone already pointed out this passive used to only proc 4% of the time and only from shock damage, these days it procs 6% of the time from all physical and shock damage. I can see that the passive needs toning down, my argument is that completely removing the passive is too drastic and unecessary. Ideally the passive should be nerfed for stam sorcs and left un-nerfed for magsorcs.

Xvorg wrote: »

Solariken wrote: »

Xvorg wrote: »

Solariken wrote: »

Jsmalls wrote: »

The problem with the physical damage implosion is a Stamina Sorc's attacks are ALL doing physical damage, from their large AoE, to their gap closer, to their weapon weaves, etc

I considered it balanced for Mag Sorcs because they are getting in one lightning attack max every weave... (Unless you are standing on top of their boundless while in execute).

For some reason Zos overlooked this when they implemented the buff to Stamina Sorc's.

^ This is why I always joke about the fact that Implosion realistically has a 100% proc chance, not 6%.

The mechanic is weird and most people don't understand how it works. Every hit of physical damage can proc a debuff that sticks to you for a few seconds, and it doesn't matter how much health you have when it procs. If your health dips to 15% during that debuff window, you pop like a balloon.

Starting at 15%. Any light attack, Phys/Lit DoT makes a new chance again.

Nope, that's the misconception. Implosion can proc at any health value, even 100%. It works exactly like the delayed execute from Mage's Wrath, wherein when it procs it puts a debuff on the target for a few seconds but doesn't do any damage until the target drops below 15%. If you have the ability to run a buff tracker you will see what I'm talking about.

So you are saying that the tooltip is wrong? Becase I read that the chance of proccing it is a 6% on any phys/lit attack if the enemy is below 15%

No the tooltip isn't wrong at all, it just doesn't describe the mechanic in detail.

CosmicSoul wrote: »

NeillMcAttack wrote: »

I feel this passive is just total nonsense. As a magblade main, dropping below 15% health is common place in any fight that goes longer than 20 seconds. In fact you can expect it to happen many times over in a fight. It's in that period I can use my only reliable heal/defensive spell healing ward, or harness whilst waiting on my HOT's.
People will say keep your health above the threshold. As a light armour magblade, that simply is not possible. It's a case now where so many stam sorcs can just run heavy, S&B and keep dropping players below that 15% over and over and it will proc eventually.

Look at this and tell me it's ok where it's at!?

Implosion is literally the only finisher for many stamina builds like stamsorc lets not ruin it for us.

How about slot executioner?

Implosion needs to be reworked because this game does not use RNG, and as @Solariken said it can proc at any given health.

This game uses Random Distribution which functions differently. Think of it as a scaling proc chance. For example, Burning Light. Burning Light's initial proc chance on say, javelin is very low. Only about 8% on the first attack. The second attack it raises to 16%, third 24% so on and so forth until it procs then it resets. This assures proc consistency (slightly lower than the advertised amount) and dissuades back to back RNG proccing.

Implosion works the same way, but because it can proc at any given health, it can essentially be "queued" mathematically to auto-execute at low health if it did not already proc (with 0 damage) while you were out of execution range.

Hope this helps.

Its fine where it is, 15 percent is %10 below execute. Unless you're a tank you pretty much dead.

Speed_Kills wrote: »

@usmcjdking first time I've seen it described this way. How was this tested? For example: if it's proccing at 70% health for 0 damage, how do you know? also, if this "auto que" theory is correct, wouldn't it still be correct on tooltip. As, 6% to proc below 15%... the amount of times it procs above 15% are meaningless because the are doing 0 damage. If there is a 6% proc chance at any hp, only doing damage below 15% then the proc chance is still 6% below 15% hp.

This is also the first I have heard about random distribution. Does this mean first attack you do against a player= 6% implosion chance, 2nd (12%) , 3rd (18%)? If so, then the % proc chance would be different on a fight-by-fight basis but always greater than or equal to 6% (since that is the base % proc). The effective proc rate (with damage) would be determined by the amount of time spent below 15%, since above that (85% of your health bar) the proc would be for 0 damage.

@Speed_Kills

P(N) = C × N is the simple function for random distribution.

This can be easily tested with Poisonous Serpent (since 25% is such a phenomenal easy way to test). If you do 100 light attacks with Poisonous Serpent you will notice that regardless of what you do or how many tests you conduct, the most amount of procs that will occur will likely be on hit #3 (since the last proc OR the initiation of the test) with the average being hit #4. You procs will be somewhere between 21-29 (the deviation pattern).

In regards to Implosion, you're starting values will be different. I don't have Microsoft Excel so these numbers are utilizing my very punch-drunk, PTSD'd brain and Windows Calculator. Some rounding occurred.

Theoretical Probability - amount it will mathematically proc over time P(T): 6%
Actual Probability - amount it will most likely proc over time P(A): 5.9998%
Random Distribution Constant (I.E. scaling proc rate) - C: .0057 slightly more than half of one percent.
Max number of hits before guaranteed proc - Highest possible value of N where the C is equal to or exceeds 1 : 175
Most probable N - Numerically ordered attack that will show the most procs N: ~15
Average hits before proc - Average value of N: ~19

So, to answer your question, your chance to immediately blow someone up at low health on the first hit is .57% provided you have not begun initiating implosion procs or you had immediately procced it prior to. Conversely, say in a duel you landed 30 hits without producing an implosion proc (whether 0 or full value), the 31st hit will have ~17% chance to proc.

I'm 3 beers in tonight so I have no idea what the standard deviation would be but if I was to throw out some number it would be around 10.

If ZOS took away the ability for this skill to proc above execution, implosion flat out would not work in PVP since you would only be able to build up N when they are in execution range. It does however lend to implosion autoexecutes. This is one of the few very skills in the game that needs to be reverted back to a PRNG algorithm.

I'm actually just going to tag @Asayre in hopes he provides the actual numbers.

I like getting killed by implosion a solid GCD after I duck behind a wall and cease taking any damage.