Physical/Magic Resistance Cap

thedude33 · December 2017

I thought the cap was about 33k, which is 50% resistance. I see some videos where they have 40k resistance. Isn't that a waste?

Curious about both pve and pvp

Thanks

SammyFable · December 2017

For PvE sure thing.
For PvP though, even if it doesn't add any mitigation it'll make it harder for your opponent to get more damage on you through penetration.

thedude33 · December 2017

Ahh, so penetration is the counter to resist. 40k resist gets knocked down to 30k if someone hitting you has 10k penetration ?

PlagueSD · December 2017

thedude33 wrote: »

Ahh, so penetration is the counter to resist. 40k resist gets knocked down to 30k if someone hitting you has 10k penetration ?

Yep.

paulsimonps · December 2017

thedude33 wrote: »

Ahh, so penetration is the counter to resist. 40k resist gets knocked down to 30k if someone hitting you has 10k penetration ?

yep and that will leave you with 45.3% mitigation still instead of if you only had 33k and someone hit with you 10k penetration in which case you would have 34.7% As you can see its a pretty big difference, obviously there is always more in play when it comes to mitigation, especially if its a CP campaign in PvP. But again like other said, its useless for PvE cause mobs don't penetrate, the few mobs that can take away your resistance does so either fully or by a percentage and they are all as far as I know in Maw of Lorkhaj.

Targe · May 2018

FYI... There is actually no "hard cap" since Update 6.

Source:
https://help.elderscrollsonline.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/27057/~/what-gameplay-changes-were-brought-by-update-6%3F

In short, once you reach about 35k resistance it diminishes, but there is no absolute hard cap. So adding extra still does help with PvE.

paulsimonps · May 2018

Targe wrote: »

FYI... There is actually no "hard cap" since Update 6.

Source:
https://help.elderscrollsonline.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/27057/~/what-gameplay-changes-were-brought-by-update-6%3F

In short, once you reach about 35k resistance it diminishes, but there is no absolute hard cap. So adding extra still does help with PvE.

That link does in no way shape or form tell us that what you said is true. And while its been a while since I checked its most likely still the same.

Stinkyremy · May 2018

Targe wrote: »

FYI... There is actually no "hard cap" since Update 6.

In short, once you reach about 35k resistance it diminishes, but there is no absolute hard cap. So adding extra still does help with PvE.

This is right to my knowledge too, it is just diminishing returns after 33-35k
Pretty much as a PvE tank, having 32k spell, 30k phys is perfect as the healer will heal you through anything else and your dam shield will mitigate, so the CP is better being put in actual specific resistances, like direct damage, poison, dots ect

Targe · May 2018

paulsimonps wrote: »

Targe wrote: »

FYI... There is actually no "hard cap" since Update 6.

Source:
https://help.elderscrollsonline.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/27057/~/what-gameplay-changes-were-brought-by-update-6%3F

In short, once you reach about 35k resistance it diminishes, but there is no absolute hard cap. So adding extra still does help with PvE.

That link does in no way shape or form tell us that what you said is true. And while its been a while since I checked its most likely still the same.

On the fourth paragraph this line is stated. Overcharge and hard caps were removed from the game. Granted it doesn't give exact details were resistance is; however, it does state the "hard caps" have been removed. Also if you read it was updated September 2017 even though the original post was from a couple years ago. The main purpose of me posting is to debunk the "hard cap" fact which isn't real.

Granted there might be some ways to spend points and gear better in some situation; however, there is a difference between 33k to 35k Resistance versus 43k resistance which doesn't take to long to get if you know what sets to go with.

Asardes · May 2018

it's 1K x character level.

Since players are considered to be level 66 (level 50 + veteran rank 16) and even if they are lower they are battle leveled to that in all content as of One Tamriel patch, their baseline is 66K. However, mitigation is capped at 50% of that baseline, for 50% mitigation, so the actual usable resistance is 33K. Mobs in PvE have no inherent penetration stat against players, so there's no need to build up resistance past that cap. However in PvP players do have various penetration stats, either from CP, various standardized debuffs and set bonuses, lover mundus and sharpened trait, so at least in theory it makes sense to go past the cap as well as long as the remaining resistance is still below the cap. Computing mitigation given by resistance is more complicated, since it has to account for other things such as CP mitigation, and blocking. Check this thread for more details on that: https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/279426/damage-mitigation-explanation-updated-for-morrowind-new-calculator/

NPCs are considered to be level 50, so their baseline is 50K. They have no mitigation cap, but their default resistance is 18.2K in most instanced content. Overland the resistance value is half of that 9.1K. vMA is a special case since resistances vary a lot. Mobs don't have CP or other damage modifiers, computing damage against them is based almost exclusively on adjusting penetration. Ideally you should almost remove the resistance they have, using CP, mundus & debuffs, both from yourself, and other members of the group. Check this thread for more information: https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/368454/spell-penetration-examined-a-pve-dps-perspective

Targe · May 2018

Asardes wrote: »

it's 1K x character level.

...

Hey Asardes,

There is a lot of good information which I agree with most of it. The only part a disagree with is that 50% mitigation is the max that you can get. I have tested this on Veteran Dungeon bosses and have notice a difference in the same attack. I now run with 42k Spell Resist and 43k Physical Resist with very little CP points put into them. My main resistance boost comes from Fortified Brass with a 2-piece undaunted set which brings me to close to 41k resist for both.

I use to run with 32k Spell Resist and 33k Physical resist. An example I can share is running Selene's Web on Veteran Mode. When the last boss Selene does her heavy bear attack I would get knocked down to about 30% while blocking; however, with the higher resist it knocks me down to about 43%. May not seem like much but it leaves me with over 40% more health.

As stated, there is no "hard cap"; however, after reaching 50% mitigation the return is diminished, but still improves. Depending on play style it's not a waste.

Granted, I'm one that don't want to argue about the actual number, but let it be known that there is no "hard cap" so people that go higher then that still gain benefits from PvE fights and not a complete waste as some would like to portray it.

paulsimonps · May 2018

@Targe

Went on the PTS today to check now that I finally had some time. Went to Saint Olmes in Veteran Asylum. First I checked his base damage. His "light attack" or Swipe, deals 172,753 damage when done with no form of mitigation, that is no resistance, no blocking or anything else. Then I went and created armor with really high resistance. It all totaled to 43,391 physical resistance and 46,691 spell resistance. This is well over the "cap" that would give you 50% damage mitigation. Your claim is that I would get more than 50% but I did not.

The damage done by Olms was 86,377 when I was wearing armor, and 172,753*0.5=86376.5, so I would say that is close enough. Even if there was diminishing returns on the mitigation per resistance after 33000 it would give me more than what I got if your claim was true. You could say this is just me making up numbers but anyone can go on the PTS right now and do the same test and they would get the same results. There is a cap for the amount of mitigation you can get from resistance.

I also did the test in the overworld with a giant next to Shatul Wayshrine. Its Obliterate cone attack deals 10,320 unmitigated and 5,160 with the same resistance as mentioned earlier. Same result of only a 50% mitigation outcome.

jypcy · May 2018

paulsimonps wrote: »

@Targe

Went on the PTS today to check now that I finally had some time. Went to Saint Olmes in Veteran Asylum. First I checked his base damage. His "light attack" or Swipe, deals 172,753 damage when done with no form of mitigation, that is no resistance, no blocking or anything else. Then I went and created armor with really high resistance. It all totaled to 43,391 physical resistance and 46,691 spell resistance. This is well over the "cap" that would give you 50% damage mitigation. Your claim is that I would get more than 50% but I did not.

The damage done by Olms was 86,377 when I was wearing armor, and 172,753*0.5=86376.5, so I would say that is close enough. Even if there was diminishing returns on the mitigation per resistance after 33000 it would give me more than what I got if your claim was true. You could say this is just me making up numbers but anyone can go on the PTS right now and do the same test and they would get the same results. There is a cap for the amount of mitigation you can get from resistance.

I also did the test in the overworld with a giant next to Shatul Wayshrine. Its Obliterate cone attack deals 10,320 unmitigated and 5,160 with the same resistance as mentioned earlier. Same result of only a 50% mitigation outcome.

Not really related but thank you for using Olms as an example. I always wondered what his attack’s actual base damage was but have been too lazy to test it out myself.

Targe · May 2018

paulsimonps wrote: »

@Targe

Went on the PTS today to check now that I finally had some time. Went to Saint Olmes in Veteran Asylum. First I checked his base damage. His "light attack" or Swipe, deals 172,753 damage when done with no form of mitigation, that is no resistance, no blocking or anything else. Then I went and created armor with really high resistance. It all totaled to 43,391 physical resistance and 46,691 spell resistance. This is well over the "cap" that would give you 50% damage mitigation. Your claim is that I would get more than 50% but I did not.

The damage done by Olms was 86,377 when I was wearing armor, and 172,753*0.5=86376.5, so I would say that is close enough. Even if there was diminishing returns on the mitigation per resistance after 33000 it would give me more than what I got if your claim was true. You could say this is just me making up numbers but anyone can go on the PTS right now and do the same test and they would get the same results. There is a cap for the amount of mitigation you can get from resistance.

I also did the test in the overworld with a giant next to Shatul Wayshrine. Its Obliterate cone attack deals 10,320 unmitigated and 5,160 with the same resistance as mentioned earlier. Same result of only a 50% mitigation outcome.

Something doesn't seem right here. A light attack that does over 86k damage with 50% mitigation even though the highest health I have seen a tank have is 48k... Seems over powered on a PvE level.

Lightspeedflashb14_ESO · May 2018

Targe wrote: »

paulsimonps wrote: »

@Targe

Went on the PTS today to check now that I finally had some time. Went to Saint Olmes in Veteran Asylum. First I checked his base damage. His "light attack" or Swipe, deals 172,753 damage when done with no form of mitigation, that is no resistance, no blocking or anything else. Then I went and created armor with really high resistance. It all totaled to 43,391 physical resistance and 46,691 spell resistance. This is well over the "cap" that would give you 50% damage mitigation. Your claim is that I would get more than 50% but I did not.

The damage done by Olms was 86,377 when I was wearing armor, and 172,753*0.5=86376.5, so I would say that is close enough. Even if there was diminishing returns on the mitigation per resistance after 33000 it would give me more than what I got if your claim was true. You could say this is just me making up numbers but anyone can go on the PTS right now and do the same test and they would get the same results. There is a cap for the amount of mitigation you can get from resistance.

I also did the test in the overworld with a giant next to Shatul Wayshrine. Its Obliterate cone attack deals 10,320 unmitigated and 5,160 with the same resistance as mentioned earlier. Same result of only a 50% mitigation outcome.

Something doesn't seem right here. A light attack that does over 86k damage with 50% mitigation even though the highest health I have seen a tank have is 48k... Seems over powered on a PvE level.

That is just from armor resist, blocking adds another at least 25% reduction and possibly champion points and such. Seems right to me.

Targe · May 2018

Lightspeedflashb14_ESO wrote: »

Targe wrote: »

paulsimonps wrote: »

@Targe

Went on the PTS today to check now that I finally had some time. Went to Saint Olmes in Veteran Asylum. First I checked his base damage. His "light attack" or Swipe, deals 172,753 damage when done with no form of mitigation, that is no resistance, no blocking or anything else. Then I went and created armor with really high resistance. It all totaled to 43,391 physical resistance and 46,691 spell resistance. This is well over the "cap" that would give you 50% damage mitigation. Your claim is that I would get more than 50% but I did not.

The damage done by Olms was 86,377 when I was wearing armor, and 172,753*0.5=86376.5, so I would say that is close enough. Even if there was diminishing returns on the mitigation per resistance after 33000 it would give me more than what I got if your claim was true. You could say this is just me making up numbers but anyone can go on the PTS right now and do the same test and they would get the same results. There is a cap for the amount of mitigation you can get from resistance.

I also did the test in the overworld with a giant next to Shatul Wayshrine. Its Obliterate cone attack deals 10,320 unmitigated and 5,160 with the same resistance as mentioned earlier. Same result of only a 50% mitigation outcome.

Something doesn't seem right here. A light attack that does over 86k damage with 50% mitigation even though the highest health I have seen a tank have is 48k... Seems over powered on a PvE level.

That is just from armor resist, blocking adds another at least 25% reduction and possibly champion points and such. Seems right to me.

Even with 25% damage reduction from shield a shield and other CP buffs for minor type of attacks would bring it down to 64.5k of Damage which leaves a gap of 16.5k damage.

Lightspeedflashb14_ESO · May 2018

Targe wrote: »

Lightspeedflashb14_ESO wrote: »

Targe wrote: »

paulsimonps wrote: »

@Targe

Went on the PTS today to check now that I finally had some time. Went to Saint Olmes in Veteran Asylum. First I checked his base damage. His "light attack" or Swipe, deals 172,753 damage when done with no form of mitigation, that is no resistance, no blocking or anything else. Then I went and created armor with really high resistance. It all totaled to 43,391 physical resistance and 46,691 spell resistance. This is well over the "cap" that would give you 50% damage mitigation. Your claim is that I would get more than 50% but I did not.

The damage done by Olms was 86,377 when I was wearing armor, and 172,753*0.5=86376.5, so I would say that is close enough. Even if there was diminishing returns on the mitigation per resistance after 33000 it would give me more than what I got if your claim was true. You could say this is just me making up numbers but anyone can go on the PTS right now and do the same test and they would get the same results. There is a cap for the amount of mitigation you can get from resistance.

I also did the test in the overworld with a giant next to Shatul Wayshrine. Its Obliterate cone attack deals 10,320 unmitigated and 5,160 with the same resistance as mentioned earlier. Same result of only a 50% mitigation outcome.

Something doesn't seem right here. A light attack that does over 86k damage with 50% mitigation even though the highest health I have seen a tank have is 48k... Seems over powered on a PvE level.

That is just from armor resist, blocking adds another at least 25% reduction and possibly champion points and such. Seems right to me.

Even with 25% damage reduction from shield a shield and other CP buffs for minor type of attacks would bring it down to 64.5k of Damage which leaves a gap of 16.5k damage.

It is very easy to get 85%+ mitigation while blocking. So 175k*. 15 is a very manageable 26k. No problem

paulsimonps · May 2018

@Targe

Not tanked Veteran Asylum I am guessing? He does hit like a fricking monster truck but it is absolutely doable. High health is indeed needed so as to add a good margin for error. As @Lightspeedflashb14_ESO said, its very easy to add +85% mitigation to a tanks set up. CP, Debuffs and self buffs are all very easy to come by and apply. As well damage shields and self heals are a thing. And unless something has changed in the meta of that fight since my break from things then the Main tank basically has a personal healer on that fight.

To the point. His base damage is not wrong and its absolutely possible to tank it if done right.

Namarkas · May 2018

Targe wrote: »

FYI... There is actually no "hard cap" since Update 6.

Source:
https://help.elderscrollsonline.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/27057/~/what-gameplay-changes-were-brought-by-update-6%3F

In short, once you reach about 35k resistance it diminishes, but there is no absolute hard cap. So adding extra still does help with PvE.

Even if the thread was updated, it is still related to the context of those patch notes. Afaik, that was when we still had soft caps (overcharged), and at some point hitting a hard cap. But that was for all stats we had. That is what they meant by "removing hard caps", generally speaking I guess. They left/reintroduced that one in particular.

Lightspeedflashb14_ESO · May 2018

Namarkas wrote: »

Targe wrote: »

FYI... There is actually no "hard cap" since Update 6.

Source:
https://help.elderscrollsonline.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/27057/~/what-gameplay-changes-were-brought-by-update-6%3F

In short, once you reach about 35k resistance it diminishes, but there is no absolute hard cap. So adding extra still does help with PvE.

Even if the thread was updated, it is still related to the context of those patch notes. Afaik, that was when we still had soft caps (overcharged), and at some point hitting a hard cap. But that was for all stats we had. That is what they meant by "removing hard caps", generally speaking I guess. They left/reintroduced that one in particular.

You are correct and this was pointed out in great detail in the next few comments after that.

Targe · May 2018

So to bring this thread back to what the Original Poster is asking.

Does having more than 33k resistance useless?

paulsimonps · May 2018

Targe wrote: »

So to bring this thread back to what the Original Poster is asking.

Does having more than 33k resistance useless?

Short answer in my experience is no which is the main debate.

I have observed a difference between 33k and 43k resistance for Physical Resistance and 32k and 42k for Spell Resistance while testing different sets on the same Veteran Dungeon Bosses.

There are some that agree that after about 33k resistance that it's a diminishing return making it impossible to reach 100% via resistance and not worth while to go much over, but is still an option. While others believe there is a hard cap and anything above 33k is 100% waste. This last couple sentences is what the actual debate is about.

My main expression of a hard cap being removed happen when VR Ranks got turned into CP points. That is when the hard cap was removed which I linked which turned into a soft cap. For those that don't know that happen a couple years ago at least which was updated again in Sept 2017.

It seems both sides have a test to back their data and I will always continue to believe in my personal data that I have found from my personal experience so no point in beating a dead horse on trying to change my opinion. Also, I'm not the only one that believes there is a diminishing return in this thread. The question for them is having more effective or should be placed else where? While other question why would anyone want to waste stats on having more than 33k resistance and don't see as viable or helpful in any manner and a complete waste.

Personally, when it comes to almost all the math and details you guys are sharing I agree with it and have been learning from it also. I appreciate people taking the time to make effective points for a healthy debate.

In short, some of us will never agree which I am fine with.

@Targe

First of, the bolded part of the quote. It's not a belief, its a thoroughly tested fact. I promise you, the testing method that I described for you earlier can be replicated easily and has shown without fail so far that there is a limit to how much mitigation you can receive from resistance. You have so far not shown a scenario where this is untrue.

You say you will continue to believe in your own data over others, which really isn't that great of a mind set but whatever. I will ask you this, what is your data really? What was your method, did you first figure out the enemies base damage so as to get a base line from which to work from? Did you take any and all sources of mitigation into account properly and did you check these numbers to make sure they follow your hypothesis? Your claims of data and testing in this thread so far has been vague at best.

From what I gathered you used your own Max health to determine the outcome of your "test". But the times you did check, was there any minor maims? Was there any weakening enchantments in play? Was your CP differently allocated? Was there a damage shield applied? Unless Resistance is the only variable that changes you are gonna get really skewed results, and there are LOTs of other variables when it comes to mitigation and damage taken.

So please, tell us more about your data and how you test, would love to hear it so it might be replicated.

Lightspeedflashb14_ESO · May 2018

paulsimonps wrote: »

Targe wrote: »

So to bring this thread back to what the Original Poster is asking.

Does having more than 33k resistance useless?

Short answer in my experience is no which is the main debate.

I have observed a difference between 33k and 43k resistance for Physical Resistance and 32k and 42k for Spell Resistance while testing different sets on the same Veteran Dungeon Bosses.

There are some that agree that after about 33k resistance that it's a diminishing return making it impossible to reach 100% via resistance and not worth while to go much over, but is still an option. While others believe there is a hard cap and anything above 33k is 100% waste. This last couple sentences is what the actual debate is about.

My main expression of a hard cap being removed happen when VR Ranks got turned into CP points. That is when the hard cap was removed which I linked which turned into a soft cap. For those that don't know that happen a couple years ago at least which was updated again in Sept 2017.

It seems both sides have a test to back their data and I will always continue to believe in my personal data that I have found from my personal experience so no point in beating a dead horse on trying to change my opinion. Also, I'm not the only one that believes there is a diminishing return in this thread. The question for them is having more effective or should be placed else where? While other question why would anyone want to waste stats on having more than 33k resistance and don't see as viable or helpful in any manner and a complete waste.

Personally, when it comes to almost all the math and details you guys are sharing I agree with it and have been learning from it also. I appreciate people taking the time to make effective points for a healthy debate.

In short, some of us will never agree which I am fine with.

@Targe

First of, the bolded part of the quote. It's not a belief, its a thoroughly tested fact. I promise you, the testing method that I described for you earlier can be replicated easily and has shown without fail so far that there is a limit to how much mitigation you can receive from resistance. You have so far not shown a scenario where this is untrue.

You say you will continue to believe in your own data over others, which really isn't that great of a mind set but whatever. I will ask you this, what is your data really? What was your method, did you first figure out the enemies base damage so as to get a base line from which to work from? Did you take any and all sources of mitigation into account properly and did you check these numbers to make sure they follow your hypothesis? Your claims of data and testing in this thread so far has been vague at best.

From what I gathered you used your own Max health to determine the outcome of your "test". But the times you did check, was there any minor maims? Was there any weakening enchantments in play? Was your CP differently allocated? Was there a damage shield applied? Unless Resistance is the only variable that changes you are gonna get really skewed results, and there are LOTs of other variables when it comes to mitigation and damage taken.

So please, tell us more about your data and how you test, would love to hear it so it might be replicated.

/rekt

BejaProphet · May 2018

paulsimonps wrote: »

Targe wrote: »

So please, tell us more about your data and how you test, would love to hear it so it might be replicated.

@paulsimonps ....Bzzt....bad connection..bzzzt.......breaking up...Bzzt...agree to disagree....bzzzt......

Targe · May 2018

BejaProphet wrote: »

paulsimonps wrote: »

Targe wrote: »

So please, tell us more about your data and how you test, would love to hear it so it might be replicated.

@paulsimonp s....Bzzt....bad connection..bzzzt.......breaking up...Bzzt...agree to disagree....bzzzt......

Yeah, it's about it.

Merlin13KAGL · May 2018

Wouldn't this be greatly simplified by simple dueling someone and testing Light/Heavy/skill of choice attack damage with the various resists?

No monster hits with various buffs/debuffs, just straight testing with as much time in between as necessary.

There is no benefit beyond the 33k cap. There is only one other situation where armor is reduced (non-PvP) where it would potentially benefit from more than cap, but in that very instance (shatter vMoL, shalks Fang Lair), it disregards all armor entirely, so more wouldn't help in either circumstance.

Devs have never intended base armor resist to mitigate more than 50%. If it did, coupled with everything else, it would be possible to make build that were nigh invincible.

& Olms most definitely hits hard, taking a healthy chunk of resources through CP's, mitigation, and block.

The numbers simply do not lie.

*And show the Combat Metrics for the results, not just your perception of those results.

Targe · May 2018

So I decided to do some more digging on this topic.

I debunk my own impression on a patch note post that I linked after doing more research. I realize that I was incorrect in the interpretation on a sourced linked. From my experience after I switched to 43k resistance I would have about 10% more health on the same attacks that were happening before from bosses. Not for sure why, but is the impression that I got and was basing my opinion on. Granted I use an add-on that tells health by % and what I used to determine the before and after. There may be other factors at play which I am going to look even further into. My guess is that I changed my CP points at that time, but hard to remember since I have been running with the same setup for quite some time now.

So the patch note which I linked as my source was a cliff note version about the patch changes. Here is a link to what I found to support my claim expressed earlier about no hard cap.
https://help.elderscrollsonline.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/27057/~/what-gameplay-changes-were-brought-by-update-6?
This is the main statement in the cliff note version of the patch notes.
Overcharge and hard caps were removed from the game.

However, after going through the entire patch note related to the cliff note version I found this statement directly from ESO.
Removed Overcharge from the game.
The only stats that now cap are Impenetrable, reducing the Critical Strike bonus damage to 0%, and Armor and Spell Resistance, which are capped at 50% mitigation.
This information may be found at the following link:
https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/154426/patch-notes-v1-6-5

So in short, resistance is in the overcharged category and not the hard cap category which I got my information reversed.

The information can be found in the BIG CHANGES / UPDATES / NEW FEATURES section or easily found by going to the link press ctrl + F on a PC and search "Removed Overcharge from the game" within the browser.

Hard facts like this is what I was mainly looking for if someone wanted to dispute the point I was making before. Not just a comment that I was wrong with little to no explanation.

paulsimonps · May 2018

Targe wrote: »

So I decided to do some more digging on this topic.

I debunk my own impression on a patch note post that I linked after doing more research. I realize that I was incorrect in the interpretation on a sourced linked. From my experience after I switched to 43k resistance I would have about 10% more health on the same attacks that were happening before from bosses. Not for sure why, but is the impression that I got and was basing my opinion on. Granted I use an add-on that tells health by % and what I used to determine the before and after. There may be other factors at play which I am going to look even further into. My guess is that I changed my CP points at that time, but hard to remember since I have been running with the same setup for quite some time now.

So the patch note which I linked as my source was a cliff note version about the patch changes. Here is a link to what I found to support my claim expressed earlier about no hard cap.
https://help.elderscrollsonline.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/27057/~/what-gameplay-changes-were-brought-by-update-6?
This is the main statement in the cliff note version of the patch notes.
Overcharge and hard caps were removed from the game.

However, after going through the entire patch note related to the cliff note version I found this statement directly from ESO.
Removed Overcharge from the game.
The only stats that now cap are Impenetrable, reducing the Critical Strike bonus damage to 0%, and Armor and Spell Resistance, which are capped at 50% mitigation.
This information may be found at the following link:
https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/154426/patch-notes-v1-6-5

So in short, resistance is in the overcharged category and not the hard cap category which I got my information reversed.

The information can be found in the BIG CHANGES / UPDATES / NEW FEATURES section or easily found by going to the link press ctrl + F on a PC and search "Removed Overcharge from the game" within the browser.

Hard facts like this is what I was mainly looking for if someone wanted to dispute the point I was making before. Not just a comment that I was wrong with little to no explanation.

To be honest, a straight up answer like that from a patch note in regards to game play functionalities is super rare. ZOS is not exactly open about how things work in their game. For example if you were to ask about the scaling of different abilities in regards to magicka and spell power you would be hard pressed to find anything official on it. Most knowledge the community have from the game is done by theorycrafters that rigorously test it all and try to reverse engineer the formulas used. I have never seen the mitigation formula written down anywhere by ZOS but I know from hours and hours of testing that it works. I am still missing some parts for a true 100% formula, I am missing the weakening enchantment and similar effects on it, but in time it will evolve like all other community knowledge about the game.

But I will thank you for managing to dig that up, quite impressive actually #nosarcasm.