Maintenance for the week of April 6:
• PC/Mac: No maintenance – April 6
• PC/Mac: No maintenance – April 6
Ok, but why do we need crit damage cap, if crit damage itself is subject to diminishing returns?
divnyi
✭✭✭✭✭
✭
✭
Lets say you have +75% crit, as per cap. That's x2.25 crit damage modifier.
You add +10%. That's x2.35 crit damage modifier.
So that's not +10% damage, that's 2.35 / 2.25 = +4.44%
And that's crit damage mod, your critical rate wouldn't be 100% so that's gonna be like +3%
So what's this all about?
You add +10%. That's x2.35 crit damage modifier.
So that's not +10% damage, that's 2.35 / 2.25 = +4.44%
And that's crit damage mod, your critical rate wouldn't be 100% so that's gonna be like +3%
So what's this all about?
1
-
ajkb78✭✭✭✭✭Because the standard operating procedure for MMO developers is "if it ain't broke, fix it until it is."12 -
danno8✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭I'll play Devils Advocate here.
If crit damage is already so limited at higher levels, then what does it matter if they cap it, and why do people still try to stack it at high levels rather than stacking, say, more WD and SD?2 -
Asmael✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭Is it though?
Going from 50/50 to 55/55 results in +5.25% increased damage from crits overall.
Going from 55/55 to 60/60 results in +5.75% increased damage from crits overall.
Going from 60/60 to 65/65 results in +6.25% increased damage from crits overall.
Critical hits, as a whole, do not suffer from diminishing returns in the sense that it is commonly understood, hence why I question your premise.
Per the same idea, spell damage also would suffer diminishing returns. If you dealt 1 damage for every point in spell damage:
50 SP => 50 damage
100 SP => 100 damage (+100% compared to previous value)
150 SP => 150 damage (+50% compared to previous value)
200 SP => 200 damage (+33% compared to previous value)
Your damage increase is linear (50 SP every single time), it is the damage increase relative to its initial value that diminishes.
Critical hits depend on 2 variables, which, assuming equivalent availability of both, need to be increased in similar ratios. Do note that this is not quite the case in ESO, with the ratio being closer to 1:1.9.
I'm in the middle of making a bunch of spreadsheets, I'll try to make a detailed explanation at some later point.PC EU - Zahraji of the Void, aka "Kitty", the fluffiest salmon genocider in town.
Poke @AsmaeI (last letter is uppercase "i") on PC EU or Asmael#9325 on Discord and receive a meow today.5 -
divnyi✭✭✭✭✭
✭Is it though?
Going from 50/50 to 55/55 results in +5.25% increased damage from crits overall.
Going from 55/55 to 60/60 results in +5.75% increased damage from crits overall.
Going from 60/60 to 65/65 results in +6.25% increased damage from crits overall.
Why do you increase both values at the same time though? You have two variables in your single equation, that's unsolvable.
If you anchor one of them, you will see that both are the subject to slow diminishing returns
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1ysfFfLgBiMsYjHl4dlZqGo_Ontdm6V9xuN4QSIL0ek0/edit?usp=sharingI'll play Devils Advocate here.
If crit damage is already so limited at higher levels, then what does it matter if they cap it, and why do people still try to stack it at high levels rather than stacking, say, more WD and SD?
Because WD/SD give pretty weak multiplier - it is even more of a subject to diminishing returns.
But people do run Kinras, for example. Or Bahsei. Because that's damage multi independent of crit.
Also some people just like the idea to have absolute maximum crit build, it sounds cool.Edited by divnyi on September 22, 2021 2:30PM1 -
Xebov✭✭✭✭✭
✭So what's this all about?
You try to make a point by turning an absolut (additive) increase into a relative (multiplicative) increase.
If you add +10% crit damage you do 10% more damage based on your non crit damage, which is how every game calculates this. If it would be diminishing retunrs your 10% added would grand you less than 10% based on how much you already have, similar to the old CP system where every 10 points granted you less additional bonus than the previous one.
1 -
danno8✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Because WD/SD give pretty weak multiplier - it is even more of a subject to diminishing returns.
But people do run Kinras, for example. Or Bahsei. Because that's damage multi independent of crit.
Also some people just like the idea to have absolute maximum crit build, it sounds cool.
Well there's your answer. Even with shrinking relative increases (diminishing returns just isn't quite the correct term here) critical damage is still far more valuable than other stats in the range that we are talking about here.
If critical damage went all the way up into the +500% range where each extra 10% added only resluts in an extra 2% of actual damage, then perhaps there would be reason to favor other stats, but at the +125% range it is still far and away better than WD/SD.
A different option for ZoS would be to shrink the amount of bonus each slice of crit damage gives, or increase the amount of WD/SD slice bonuses.
Or soft caps, actual diminishing returns.0 -
Xebov✭✭✭✭✭
✭
You ignore the basic logic behind it. You make a point by doing it wrong and the worst part is you even seem to know it.0 -
divnyi✭✭✭✭✭
✭
You ignore the basic logic behind it. You make a point by doing it wrong and the worst part is you even seem to know it.
So weapon damage doesn't have diminishing returns by your logic, which is obviously false.0 -
Xebov✭✭✭✭✭
✭
You ignore the basic logic behind it. You make a point by doing it wrong and the worst part is you even seem to know it.
So weapon damage doesn't have diminishing returns by your logic, which is obviously false.
If you get 100 weapon damage you receive a damage increase equivalent to that 100 weapon damage no matter if you sit on 1000 or 5000 weapon damage already. Its again an additive calculation. What you are doing is mistaking diminishing returns with relative increases.
If we assume that 100 Weapon Damage translates to 10 damage and you get 2*100 weapon damage than you get a damage increase of 2*10. If there would be dimishing returns you would get 10 from the first 100 and 9 from the next 100 as an absolut value, totaling you to 19. Every of your weapon damage points is worth the exact same absolut damage because there is no diminishing returns.0 -
divnyi✭✭✭✭✭
✭
You ignore the basic logic behind it. You make a point by doing it wrong and the worst part is you even seem to know it.
So weapon damage doesn't have diminishing returns by your logic, which is obviously false.
If you get 100 weapon damage you receive a damage increase equivalent to that 100 weapon damage no matter if you sit on 1000 or 5000 weapon damage already.
And what information does flat damage give to you? How much faster would you kill a boss with 5M health, if you have 1000 more dps?0 -
FrancisCrawford✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭Is it though?
Going from 50/50 to 55/55 results in +5.25% increased damage from crits overall.
Going from 55/55 to 60/60 results in +5.75% increased damage from crits overall.
Going from 60/60 to 65/65 results in +6.25% increased damage from crits overall.
Critical hits, as a whole, do not suffer from diminishing returns in the sense that it is commonly understood, hence why I question your premise.
Per the same idea, spell damage also would suffer diminishing returns. If you dealt 1 damage for every point in spell damage:
50 SP => 50 damage
100 SP => 100 damage (+100% compared to previous value)
150 SP => 150 damage (+50% compared to previous value)
200 SP => 200 damage (+33% compared to previous value)
Your damage increase is linear (50 SP every single time), it is the damage increase relative to its initial value that diminishes.
Critical hits depend on 2 variables, which, assuming equivalent availability of both, need to be increased in similar ratios. Do note that this is not quite the case in ESO, with the ratio being closer to 1:1.9.
I'm in the middle of making a bunch of spreadsheets, I'll try to make a detailed explanation at some later point.
I'd say that the returns diminish to a lesser extent than OP was suggesting.
I'd use examples in which the crit rate was unchanged for various levels of crit damage. E.g.:
50% crit, 100% crit damage --> damage = 1.5x base.
50% crit, 120% crit damage --> damage = 1.6x base.
50% crit, 140% crit damage --> damage = 1.7x base. (Without a cap.)
The ratios 1.6/1.5 and 1.7/1.6 are what really matter. (They indicate 6 2/3% and 6 1/4% increases in overall damage respectively.)
That said -- what sort of crit rates should we assume? What do people have now? Will they likely go down a little with the cap on crit damage?
0 -
FrancisCrawford✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭
You ignore the basic logic behind it. You make a point by doing it wrong and the worst part is you even seem to know it.
So weapon damage doesn't have diminishing returns by your logic, which is obviously false.
If you get 100 weapon damage you receive a damage increase equivalent to that 100 weapon damage no matter if you sit on 1000 or 5000 weapon damage already. Its again an additive calculation. What you are doing is mistaking diminishing returns with relative increases.
If we assume that 100 Weapon Damage translates to 10 damage and you get 2*100 weapon damage than you get a damage increase of 2*10. If there would be dimishing returns you would get 10 from the first 100 and 9 from the next 100 as an absolut value, totaling you to 19. Every of your weapon damage points is worth the exact same absolut damage because there is no diminishing returns.
Overall, I'm extremely impressed by how well non-native English speakers post here and elsewhere, and you seem to be an example of that rule.
[snip]
[edited for rude/insulting comment]Edited by ZOS_Icy on September 24, 2021 11:08AM0 -
Xebov✭✭✭✭✭
✭FrancisCrawford wrote: »
If you use overall dps that factors in your crit rate yes, if you just look at the damage done if you crit then no.FrancisCrawford wrote: »
You ignore the basic logic behind it. You make a point by doing it wrong and the worst part is you even seem to know it.
So weapon damage doesn't have diminishing returns by your logic, which is obviously false.
If you get 100 weapon damage you receive a damage increase equivalent to that 100 weapon damage no matter if you sit on 1000 or 5000 weapon damage already. Its again an additive calculation. What you are doing is mistaking diminishing returns with relative increases.
If we assume that 100 Weapon Damage translates to 10 damage and you get 2*100 weapon damage than you get a damage increase of 2*10. If there would be dimishing returns you would get 10 from the first 100 and 9 from the next 100 as an absolut value, totaling you to 19. Every of your weapon damage points is worth the exact same absolut damage because there is no diminishing returns.
Overall, I'm extremely impressed by how well non-native English speakers post here and elsewhere, and you seem to be an example of that rule.
[snip]
Thank you.
I think the general concept of diminishing returns doesnt require fine points of the language, its an easy and general concept. Of course you are right that as a non native speaker some things are a bit harder to word right.
[edited to remove quote]Edited by ZOS_Icy on September 24, 2021 11:10AM0 -
MrBrownstone✭✭✭✭✭
✭@Xebov
Let's say you have 1000 spell damage and 100% crit damage.
You have the option to pick 100 spell damage or 10% crit damage.
You would pick the crit damage because it's a higher damage boost based on how damage works in this game.
Let's say you were given this option multiple times, always picked crit damage and now sitting at 1000 spell damage and %300 crit damage.
This time you might wanna pick the 100 spell damage because the bump from 300% crit damage to 310% is negligible compared to the bump from 1000 to 1100 spell damage. THIS is diminishing returns.
The part where you said something like "+9 damage instead of +10 like the old cp system" is double diminishing.
However;
The op is wrong. Just because crit damage is diminishing it doesn't mean it's balanced. It's still the strongest stat and before it starts becoming actually worthless, your build is complete anyway so there is no reason to prefer other stats over crit.
Other stats would only be useful in examples like I said, like when you reach tons of crit damage, which is impossible currently.2 -
Xebov✭✭✭✭✭
✭MrBrownstone wrote: »
Let's say you have 1000 spell damage and 100% crit damage.
You have the option to pick 100 spell damage or 10% crit damage.
You would pick the crit damage because it's a higher damage boost based on how damage works in this game.
Let's say you were given this option multiple times, always picked crit damage and now sitting at 1000 spell damage and %300 crit damage.
This time you might wanna pick the 100 spell damage because the bump from 300% crit damage to 310% is negligible compared to the bump from 1000 to 1100 spell damage. THIS is diminishing returns.
No it is not because the increase in absolut damage you get from 100%->110% is the same you get when going from 300%->310%. Its 10% of your non crit damage in both cases. Diminishing returns would mean that the increase in absolut damage gained from 100%->110% would have to be bigger than the one from 300%->310%. What you showcase here is just that through the huge 300% bonus an increase in 100 spell damage for the non crit base damage would yield to a higher absolut damage increase compared to going from 300% to 310%.
0 -
MrBrownstone✭✭✭✭✭
✭I think you don't understand what is important here. Yes, the increase in damage will be the same. However, for gaining a flat amount of damage you need to think percentages. When you have 10k dps, a 5k dps boost is huge. When you have 100k dps, 5k isn't that huge.
Someone above asked a very smart question: How long does it take for you to kill an enemy?
The increase in damage reduces your time to kill the enemy and they're inversely proportional. So you shouldn't think additive, you should think multiplicative.
You're correct, the flat amount of damage increase is the same but IF after a certain point investing in spell damage is a better option than crit, that literally means crit has diminishing returns. This is because the crit damage bonuses are additive.
If it was multiplicative, investing in crit would always be the better option.
It's called "diminishing returns" if something brings less value the more you invest in it and that's literally the case with crit damage here.
You yourself admitted that spell damage would be the better pick after a certain crit damage.Edited by MrBrownstone on September 24, 2021 11:07AM3 -
Noldornir✭✭✭Because it's not diminishing (strictly speaking).
Only things that actually are diminishing is things that "REDUCE" like Aegis (reduce damage taken).
Quick example= you get a 100k hit by a PVE boss and you have resistance cap; 100k becomes 50k then you apply minor aegis to whatever's left of it and the 5% of 50% is 2.5k
Crit is different in this way:
let's now assume we have 2 distinct modifier (shadow and brittle); in this example i'll pretend shadow is 10% (to get easier math but changes nothing):
base hit= 10k if critting it becomes 15k (at base) then we add up 10% from shadow= 15.000+1500=16.500 then we add 10% from brittle= 16.500+1.650= 18.150 -> brittle actually gave you more (1650*100/15000= 11%) because it used the percentage of an already "buffed" value.
This is not diminishing as actually the brittle was boosted by the previous effect while, in the previous example, aegis was only actually being worth a 2.5% since the original 100k hit value was halved before (it would also sink down to 1.25% when blocking).
Thing about critical convienece is different, more similiar to crit rate: below certain % it's better to get more chanche to hit while, above those, you want more crit damage (which is why most PvE builds go shadow if their crit is above 70% or thief if below)0 -
Einstein_✭✭✭✭The crit cap will not matter, and will change nothing, stacking crit is still the most effectiv way to push DPS. ppl will just go for more crit chance instead of dmg.
The "proplem" is how dmg is calculated, or better said that crit is just to overtuned especially since they added 1000 base WD/SD.
if you neglect strait up dmg multipliers and pen ect the effectiv dmg looks kinda like this.
avg dmg =(SD + magicka / 10.5) x 1+(crit chance % x crit dmg %)
so its made out of 2 base componens :
1. base dmg (SD and magicka)
2. your crit dmg and crit chance
If you have a multiplication you want to push both values equal efficent. (example: 0.2 x 0.8 =0.16 but 0.5 x 0.5 = 0.25)
Your first value (base dmg) is already pretty high, 7000 SD + 30000 mag / 10.5 = ~10 000. yo a gain of 150 SD is not alot, its only ~1.5% gain.
But your second value (crit) gets way higher returns (adding 10 crit dmg to 70% chance and 110% dmg is a
(1+0.7x1.2)/(1+0.7x1.1) - 1 = ~4% dmg gain.
in summary as long as pushing crit is more effective then adding SD/WD ppl will go for crit chance and dmg.
My suggestion would be to lower crit dmg multipliers by some %.
ZoS should have the math knowlege to balance it, so ppl can build for both ways effective instead of that stupid cap.
Edited by Einstein_ on September 24, 2021 12:27PM1 -
divnyi✭✭✭✭✭
✭base hit= 10k if critting it becomes 15k (at base) then we add up 10% from shadow= 15.000+1500=16.500 then we add 10% from brittle= 16.500+1.650= 18.150 -> brittle actually gave you more (1650*100/15000= 11%) because it used the percentage of an already "buffed" value.
Brittle literally adds 10% to 160% in this example. So shadow damage increase is 160%/150% while brittle damage increase is 170%/160%. Which confirms the diminishing returns thing.Quick example= you get a 100k hit by a PVE boss and you have resistance cap; 100k becomes 50k then you apply minor aegis to whatever's left of it and the 5% of 50% is 2.5k
There is no diminishing returns here. Any percentage resistance increases your Effective HP by
Effective HP = (Old HP)/(1 - percentage).
You had 40k before armor mitigation? You now have 80k. After aegis you have 84.2k.
This is why percent damage mitigations are so OP in PvP (where it matters). Necro is literally carried by that additional 10% mitigation.1 -
Xebov✭✭✭✭✭
✭MrBrownstone wrote: »It's called "diminishing returns" if something brings less value the more you invest in it and that's literally the case with crit damage here.
Thats not the case here. You said yourself: "Yes, the increase in damage will be the same." There is no diminishing returns for crit damage because for every x% increase in crit damage you get y damage. It doesnt matter how much % crit damage you already posses, the result is always the same. Diminishing returns would mean that you would get less than y damage based on how much crit damage bonus you got already.MrBrownstone wrote: »You yourself admitted that spell damage would be the better pick after a certain crit damage.
Yes, which has nothing to do with dimishing returns. Your total damage is composed out of 2 stats, one being static damage and the other being a percent based crit damage bonus based on that. Your total damage is the result of calculating them together. This also means that for the question of diminishing returns you have to look on each statt individualy and not at the product of both. By the way, if you calculate a fixed value together with a % value you always have the case that raises in one value are more benefitial than raises in the other.Edited by Xebov on September 24, 2021 5:38PM0 -
MrBrownstone✭✭✭✭✭
✭MrBrownstone wrote: »It's called "diminishing returns" if something brings less value the more you invest in it and that's literally the case with crit damage here.
Thats not the case here. You said yourself: "Yes, the increase in damage will be the same." There is no diminishing returns for crit damage because for every x% increase in crit damage you get y damage. It doesnt matter how much % crit damage you already posses, the result is always the same. Diminishing returns would mean that you would get less than y damage based on how much crit damage bonus you got already.MrBrownstone wrote: »You yourself admitted that spell damage would be the better pick after a certain crit damage.
Yes, which has nothing to do with dimishing returns. Your total damage is composed out of 2 stats, one being static damage and the other being a percent based crit damage bonus based on that. Your total damage is the result of calculating them together. This also means that for the question of diminishing returns you have to look on each statt individualy and not at the product of both. By the way, if you calculate a fixed value together with a % value you always have the case that raises in one value are more benefitial than raises in the other.
So apparently our understanding of "diminishing returns" is not the same, I better go research if my understanding is correct or not. Because if something starts becoming less valuable after a certain amount of investment, I call that diminishing returns. You only classify it diminishing if it literally gives you less numbers. Your understanding is not false at all, I just think my explanation makes it count diminishing as well
EDIT: Alright I did my research and guess you were right, just because something becomes less valuable to invest in over time doesn't make it diminishing returns. It literally has to increase less the more you invest in it. In this case, crit isn't diminishing.
However my original point also stands, the more you invest in it, the more crit becomes the inferior option compared to other damage boosts. However we're not gonna reach that point since it requires a very high crit damage percentage. So overall crit is overperforming and capping it makes sense. 125% is a bit too low tho, 150% could be the sweet spotEdited by MrBrownstone on September 24, 2021 6:39PM1 -
MrBrownstone✭✭✭✭✭
✭Because it's not diminishing (strictly speaking).
Only things that actually are diminishing is things that "REDUCE" like Aegis (reduce damage taken).
Quick example= you get a 100k hit by a PVE boss and you have resistance cap; 100k becomes 50k then you apply minor aegis to whatever's left of it and the 5% of 50% is 2.5k
Crit is different in this way:
let's now assume we have 2 distinct modifier (shadow and brittle); in this example i'll pretend shadow is 10% (to get easier math but changes nothing):
base hit= 10k if critting it becomes 15k (at base) then we add up 10% from shadow= 15.000+1500=16.500 then we add 10% from brittle= 16.500+1.650= 18.150 -> brittle actually gave you more (1650*100/15000= 11%) because it used the percentage of an already "buffed" value.
This is not diminishing as actually the brittle was boosted by the previous effect while, in the previous example, aegis was only actually being worth a 2.5% since the original 100k hit value was halved before (it would also sink down to 1.25% when blocking).
Thing about critical convienece is different, more similiar to crit rate: below certain % it's better to get more chanche to hit while, above those, you want more crit damage (which is why most PvE builds go shadow if their crit is above 70% or thief if below)
But the crit damage bonuses are additive in this game. 10% + 10% = 20% here. Works the same way for almost everything.
Usually if it's something that benefits you, it's additive but if it's something that harms you, it's multiplicative
So for example all damage boosts are additive but mitigation is multiplicative (otherwise 100% mitigation would be possible)0 -
Xebov✭✭✭✭✭
✭MrBrownstone wrote: »EDIT: Alright I did my research and guess you were right, just because something becomes less valuable to invest in over time doesn't make it diminishing returns. It literally has to increase less the more you invest in it. In this case, crit isn't diminishing.
MrBrownstone wrote: »125% is a bit too low tho, 150% could be the sweet spot
Iam not so sure about this. 150% will require buffs and sets usually found in organized trial groups because the uptime or availability outside of it is bad. 125% is possible even in less optimized environments. 150% feels to me like a cap designed for high tier groups instead of an actual balance.
1