Virulent shot gets to ignore mitigation because it is a bleed, the same as every other intended bleed. Merciless charge being bugged is what is making it inferior, not that the new stuff is better. Next patch stam will slot gap-closers again so you may see some more vMA 2H's being used.
Virulent shot gets to ignore mitigation because it is a bleed, the same as every other intended bleed. Merciless charge being bugged is what is making it inferior, not that the new stuff is better. Next patch stam will slot gap-closers again so you may see some more vMA 2H's being used.
@Cries
- Razor Shot: This item set now deals 50% of Scattershot’s damage as poison instead of 40% as a bleed.
So this has been reverted? I didn‘t access pts and was assuming.
Virulent shot gets to ignore mitigation because it is a bleed, the same as every other intended bleed. Merciless charge being bugged is what is making it inferior, not that the new stuff is better. Next patch stam will slot gap-closers again so you may see some more vMA 2H's being used.
I think damage not affected by mitigation (except bleed) bring more confusion and inconsistencies. Maybe you will just raise damage of sets and abilities based on a % of previously dealt damage, considering average mitigation. Because, for example, mitigation can change during the time of DoT.ZOS_Gilliam wrote: »Furthermore, the Virulent Shot set was noted to ignore mitigation specifically to inform players that the intent for many of our sets and abilities based on a % of previously dealt damage are not affected by mitigation; since the initial hit in which this ability is derived from will have already been mitigated. We are also currently in the process of better defining this ruleset and will be making a pass on abilities with similar functionality to make them fit more coherently with it, so there is less confusion and inconsistencies moving forward.
ZOS_Gilliam wrote: »Greetings! Just a heads up that both of the issues mentioned with Merciless Charge’s damage over time being dodgeable and blockable will be fixed in a future update.
Furthermore, the Virulent Shot set was noted to ignore mitigation specifically to inform players that the intent for many of our sets and abilities based on a % of previously dealt damage are not affected by mitigation; since the initial hit in which this ability is derived from will have already been mitigated. We are also currently in the process of better defining this ruleset and will be making a pass on abilities with similar functionality to make them fit more coherently with it, so there is less confusion and inconsistencies moving forward.
All that being said, once these changes go live for the Merciless Charge set in particular; we are always monitoring feedback and are happy to make future adjustments as things arise.
ZOS_Gilliam wrote: »We are also currently in the process of better defining this ruleset and will be making a pass on abilities with similar functionality to make them fit more coherently with it, so there is less confusion and inconsistencies moving forward. @ZOS_Gilliam
ZOS_Gilliam wrote: »Greetings! Just a heads up that both of the issues mentioned with Merciless Charge’s damage over time being dodgeable and blockable will be fixed in a future update.
Furthermore, the Virulent Shot set was noted to ignore mitigation specifically to inform players that the intent for many of our sets and abilities based on a % of previously dealt damage are not affected by mitigation; since the initial hit in which this ability is derived from will have already been mitigated. We are also currently in the process of better defining this ruleset and will be making a pass on abilities with similar functionality to make them fit more coherently with it, so there is less confusion and inconsistencies moving forward.
All that being said, once these changes go live for the Merciless Charge set in particular; we are always monitoring feedback and are happy to make future adjustments as things arise.
paulsimonps wrote: »ZOS_Gilliam wrote: »Greetings! Just a heads up that both of the issues mentioned with Merciless Charge’s damage over time being dodgeable and blockable will be fixed in a future update.
Furthermore, the Virulent Shot set was noted to ignore mitigation specifically to inform players that the intent for many of our sets and abilities based on a % of previously dealt damage are not affected by mitigation; since the initial hit in which this ability is derived from will have already been mitigated. We are also currently in the process of better defining this ruleset and will be making a pass on abilities with similar functionality to make them fit more coherently with it, so there is less confusion and inconsistencies moving forward.
All that being said, once these changes go live for the Merciless Charge set in particular; we are always monitoring feedback and are happy to make future adjustments as things arise.
@ZOS_Gilliam @ZOS_Wrobel @ZOS_RichLambert
So basically all sets and abilities like that are gonna be like oblivion damage? The thing I don't like about the way Virulent Shot works right now is that it acts just like Oblivion damage, BUT it can be buffed and has the ability to proc a secondary effect. The Morag Tong 5p set increases the damage of Virulent shot and so does Minor Vulnerability. Those 2 are debuffs on the target and so far I have yet to find anything on the casters side that buffs just Virulent Shot above the 50% from the Scatter Shots original, obviously boosting the base Scatter shot will increase it but that is not what I was looking for.
Again, Morag Tong and Minor Vulnerability buffs Virulent Shot and it has a chance to proc the Poison Secondary effect, the Poison DoT, and since Virulent shot is NOT a DoT it has a higher chance to proc it than an actual DoT. This basically makes Virulent Shots Poison damage stronger than Oblivion damage. If you want sets and abilities like this to act like oblivion damage than they should be oblivion damage, cause anything but that and pure physical/magic damage can and will be buffed and trigger secondary effects, and even then I'm pretty sure some things like Minor Vulnerability will still buff the damage of them. Make it Oblivion damage or make it susceptible to mitigation and buff its base damage to adjust for the mitigation.
paulsimonps wrote: »@ZOS_Gilliam @ZOS_Wrobel @ZOS_RichLambert
So basically all sets and abilities like that are gonna be like oblivion damage? The thing I don't like about the way Virulent Shot works right now is that it acts just like Oblivion damage, BUT it can be buffed and has the ability to proc a secondary effect. The Morag Tong 5p set increases the damage of Virulent shot and so does Minor Vulnerability. Those 2 are debuffs on the target and so far I have yet to find anything on the casters side that buffs just Virulent Shot above the 50% from the Scatter Shots original, obviously boosting the base Scatter shot will increase it but that is not what I was looking for.
Again, Morag Tong and Minor Vulnerability buffs Virulent Shot and it has a chance to proc the Poison Secondary effect, the Poison DoT, and since Virulent shot is NOT a DoT it has a higher chance to proc it than an actual DoT. This basically makes Virulent Shots Poison damage stronger than Oblivion damage. If you want sets and abilities like this to act like oblivion damage than they should be oblivion damage, cause anything but that and pure physical/magic damage can and will be buffed and trigger secondary effects, and even then I'm pretty sure some things like Minor Vulnerability will still buff the damage of them. Make it Oblivion damage or make it susceptible to mitigation and buff its base damage to adjust for the mitigation.
ZOS_Gilliam wrote: »paulsimonps wrote: »@ZOS_Gilliam @ZOS_Wrobel @ZOS_RichLambert
So basically all sets and abilities like that are gonna be like oblivion damage? The thing I don't like about the way Virulent Shot works right now is that it acts just like Oblivion damage, BUT it can be buffed and has the ability to proc a secondary effect. The Morag Tong 5p set increases the damage of Virulent shot and so does Minor Vulnerability. Those 2 are debuffs on the target and so far I have yet to find anything on the casters side that buffs just Virulent Shot above the 50% from the Scatter Shots original, obviously boosting the base Scatter shot will increase it but that is not what I was looking for.
Again, Morag Tong and Minor Vulnerability buffs Virulent Shot and it has a chance to proc the Poison Secondary effect, the Poison DoT, and since Virulent shot is NOT a DoT it has a higher chance to proc it than an actual DoT. This basically makes Virulent Shots Poison damage stronger than Oblivion damage. If you want sets and abilities like this to act like oblivion damage than they should be oblivion damage, cause anything but that and pure physical/magic damage can and will be buffed and trigger secondary effects, and even then I'm pretty sure some things like Minor Vulnerability will still buff the damage of them. Make it Oblivion damage or make it susceptible to mitigation and buff its base damage to adjust for the mitigation.
Incorrect, Virulent Shot will still be mitigated by Champion points and other % reductions, but will bypass the targets’ Physical Resistance for the time being. Item sets in general will continue to obey traditional rule sets of their specific parameters (i.e an Oblivion set will properly ignore all mitigation, while a Flame set will be reduced by Spell Resistance, etc). However, item sets that deal damage based off a percent of another attack that can already be mitigated, will be given the ability to bypass mitigation of further targets. If they were unable to do so, they would be hit multiple times from mitigation; causing them to become fractions of fractions and thus making balance difficult due to high variability in player choice.
Keep in mind, as I mentioned previously in the post above, we are currently in the process of better defining this rule set for abilities and sets that derive their damage on a previous attack of damage that could have been reduced. Our intent is that abilities will not double dip with offensive or defensive qualities, so that they are not stronger or weaker than they should be. The team will be posting with more details to better communicate this ruleset once it has been established and we make a pass on all similar functionalities that fall into that category.
ZOS_Gilliam wrote: »paulsimonps wrote: »@ZOS_Gilliam @ZOS_Wrobel @ZOS_RichLambert
So basically all sets and abilities like that are gonna be like oblivion damage? The thing I don't like about the way Virulent Shot works right now is that it acts just like Oblivion damage, BUT it can be buffed and has the ability to proc a secondary effect. The Morag Tong 5p set increases the damage of Virulent shot and so does Minor Vulnerability. Those 2 are debuffs on the target and so far I have yet to find anything on the casters side that buffs just Virulent Shot above the 50% from the Scatter Shots original, obviously boosting the base Scatter shot will increase it but that is not what I was looking for.
Again, Morag Tong and Minor Vulnerability buffs Virulent Shot and it has a chance to proc the Poison Secondary effect, the Poison DoT, and since Virulent shot is NOT a DoT it has a higher chance to proc it than an actual DoT. This basically makes Virulent Shots Poison damage stronger than Oblivion damage. If you want sets and abilities like this to act like oblivion damage than they should be oblivion damage, cause anything but that and pure physical/magic damage can and will be buffed and trigger secondary effects, and even then I'm pretty sure some things like Minor Vulnerability will still buff the damage of them. Make it Oblivion damage or make it susceptible to mitigation and buff its base damage to adjust for the mitigation.
Incorrect, Virulent Shot will still be mitigated by Champion points and other % reductions, but will bypass the targets’ Physical Resistance for the time being. Item sets in general will continue to obey traditional rule sets of their specific parameters (i.e an Oblivion set will properly ignore all mitigation, while a Flame set will be reduced by Spell Resistance, etc). However, item sets that deal damage based off a percent of another attack that can already be mitigated, will be given the ability to bypass mitigation of further targets. If they were unable to do so, they would be hit multiple times from mitigation; causing them to become fractions of fractions and thus making balance difficult due to high variability in player choice.
Keep in mind, as I mentioned previously in the post above, we are currently in the process of better defining this rule set for abilities and sets that derive their damage on a previous attack of damage that could have been reduced. Our intent is that abilities will not double dip with offensive or defensive qualities, so that they are not stronger or weaker than they should be. The team will be posting with more details to better communicate this ruleset once it has been established and we make a pass on all similar functionalities that fall into that category.
I think you guys are having trouble understanding what Gilliam is saying.
Let’s say that you have two targets, X and Y.
You hit target X with an attack that does 1000 dmg before mitigation.
Due to X’s mitigation, they end up taking 700 dmg.
The attack also has an effect that says “hits another nearby target for 50% of the dmg done to player X.
Player Y is standing by. Player Y gets hit for 50% of the dmg that player X got hit for, which is 50% of 700 which is 350.
Player Y will not get to mitigate the 350 dmg. This is because it is based off of the dmg received by player X, and therefore already mitigated by player X’s resistances.
It might be simpler to say that from a net effect standpoint, the dmg doesn’t bypass mitigation so much as it just uses the mitigation of the original target rather than the splash dmg recipient.
@ZOS_Gilliam does this mean you guys will be looking at the inverse - guard - as well?
I think you guys are having trouble understanding what Gilliam is saying.
Let’s say that you have two targets, X and Y.
You hit target X with an attack that does 1000 dmg before mitigation.
Due to X’s mitigation, they end up taking 700 dmg.
The attack also has an effect that says “hits another nearby target for 50% of the dmg done to player X.
Player Y is standing by. Player Y gets hit for 50% of the dmg that player X got hit for, which is 50% of 700 which is 350.
Player Y will not get to mitigate the 350 dmg. This is because it is based off of the dmg received by player X, and therefore already mitigated by player X’s resistances.
It might be simpler to say that from a net effect standpoint, the dmg doesn’t bypass mitigation so much as it just uses the mitigation of the original target rather than the splash dmg recipient.
@ZOS_Gilliam does this mean you guys will be looking at the inverse - guard - as well?
@ZOS_Gilliam does this mean you guys will be looking at the inverse - guard - as well?
I agree with some posts above, that the problem with Virulent Shot, Merciless Charge and similar skills, that they don't count as DoTs. This bring confusion and inconsistencies that you try to avoid.ZOS_Gilliam wrote: »Incorrect, Virulent Shot will still be mitigated by Champion points and other % reductions, but will bypass the targets’ Physical Resistance for the time being. Item sets in general will continue to obey traditional rule sets of their specific parameters (i.e an Oblivion set will properly ignore all mitigation, while a Flame set will be reduced by Spell Resistance, etc). However, item sets that deal damage based off a percent of another attack that can already be mitigated, will be given the ability to bypass mitigation of further targets. If they were unable to do so, they would be hit multiple times from mitigation; causing them to become fractions of fractions and thus making balance difficult due to high variability in player choice.
Keep in mind, as I mentioned previously in the post above, we are currently in the process of better defining this rule set for abilities and sets that derive their damage on a previous attack of damage that could have been reduced. Our intent is that abilities will not double dip with offensive or defensive qualities, so that they are not stronger or weaker than they should be. The team will be posting with more details to better communicate this ruleset once it has been established and we make a pass on all similar functionalities that fall into that category.
I think you guys are having trouble understanding what Gilliam is saying.
It might be simpler to say that from a net effect standpoint, the dmg doesn’t bypass mitigation so much as it just uses the mitigation of the original target rather than the splash dmg recipient.
If we considering cases with skills with multiple targets, for example, fireball, with one initial direct damage target and several targets suffering DoT after, then when secondary targets will take damage based on initial hit then it will cause strange/unbalanced situatins, for example, our fireball initially hit breton dragon kinght with high spell resistance, and secondary DoT will applied at vampire standing near him, so vampire instead of getting increased fire damage will get redused damage, because DoT damage was already mitigated by breton dragon knight or vice versa targets scenario. So, in this case, applying separate "normal" DoT at each target will be more balanced and less confusing.ZOS_Gilliam wrote: »However, item sets that deal damage based off a percent of another attack that can already be mitigated, will be given the ability to bypass mitigation of further targets.
paulsimonps wrote: »Virulent Shot
2: Scatter Shot applies a bleed after a delay that deals 40% of your initial attack every 2 seconds for 4 seconds. The duration increases if you are further away from your target to a maximum of 12 seconds.
AWE YEAH! Its a bleed now!
Sad to not see a mention on any of the problems it and Merciless Charge had where it can be blocked and dodged, guess we will just have to test and see if it was changed. Might just have been missed from the notes.
ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »What about the "poison" / "bleed" part of the description. Is that OK @ZOS_GinaBruno?
Thx!
Boy, I'm on a roll today. Should be poison damage!