Lamp Knight's Art makes no sense.

i11ionward · January 17

MincMincMinc wrote: »

i11ionward wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

i11ionward wrote: »

I conducted several tests on a dummy. As far as I know, the dummy has 18,200 resistance, or in other terms, 36.4% mitigation, which is roughly equivalent to 24,000 resistance for a player. All stats except penetration naturally remained consistent in each test.

First test (without Lamp Knight's Art)
My penetration: 0
My percentage damage bonus: 28%
Damage to the dummy: 1,616

Second test (with Lamp Knight's Art)
My penetration: 100,000
My percentage damage bonus: 28% (or -18% on the character stats screen)
Damage to the dummy: 1,628

From this, we can conclude that with 24,000 player armor, you'll need to build around 28% percentage damage build to deal the same damage as without the Lamp Knight's Art set. The higher the player's armor, the less percentage damage you'll need, and vice versa.

The goal of this test for myself was to evaluate the viability of the set for deeper theorycrafting in the future, so I deliberately ignored many nuances to save time for now (e.g., in real PvP scenarios, you are unlikely to have 0 penetration).

My conclusions are as follows:

The set is definitely not dead upon its arrival.
The set requires a specific build made around it.
The set works effectively with modifiers that add percentage damage.
It’s hard to say if the set has a chance to become meta and how quickly, as finding an optimal build will take time, and people who invest time in perfecting a build (if one is found) are unlikely to share it immediately.
The set looks like an interesting alternative to existing builds, at the same time it doesn't look like a trash set in my opinion, and I will definitely try to make something out of it on the live server.

FYI you can use 2h berserkers rage(not onslaught cuz its broken) to measure a target dummy's resists.

What did you change between the tests? Are you saying you slotted a swift jewelry with no enchant to get the 5 piece and that was it? Math wise this would make no sense to do equivalent damage against a ~18k resists enemy.

I have checked according to your recommendation, and the dummy indeed has 18,200 resistance. You can see this in the video, and these resistances amount to 36.4% mitigation. You can calculate this by looking at the numbers in the screenshot: 1283/2017 = 0.636, 1 - 0.636 = 0.364 or 36.4%.

You might say that my test doesn't have math sense, and you'd be right — I wasn't trying to prove anything mathematically. I simply came up with a clear and simple test for myself to determine the potential of a set for my own purposes. Then, I just shared my thoughts with the community.

You can choose to take my test seriously or not, but I’m sorry, I do not wish to continue the discussion on this matter.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nnRrRRdRa30

It was more of, your test shows that my math doesn't make sense. Which was why I was asking what changed between your hits. My math showed that when you slot the set, you should be down alot of damage unless you hit a 30-40k resists player. Your in game test showed equivalent damage after slotting the set against an 18k enemy, which means this set would be insane.

I just want to clarify that resistances for players and NPCs are different:

For a player to achieve 50% mitigation, they need to reach 33,000 resistances.
For an NPC to achieve 50% mitigation, they need to reach 25,000 resistances.

For more detailed information, please find specialized content creators.

ceruulean · January 17

MincMincMinc wrote: »

It was more of, your test shows that my math doesn't make sense. Which was why I was asking what changed between your hits. My math showed that when you slot the set, you should be down alot of damage unless you hit a 30-40k resists player. Your in game test showed equivalent damage after slotting the set against an 18k enemy, which means this set would be insane.

The math makes "no sense" because damage formulas in this game are not simple operations, but polynomials. So the simplistic math that people are doing cannot describe the full picture. Since they're complicated, the only way to get a formula is to do empirical testing, or for the devs to tell us. The devs will never tell us, so empirical testing it is. For example, this thread shows how someone got 100% damage mitigation: https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/657489/eso-mitigation-issue-100-mitigation-achieved/

ZOS addressed the 100% mitigation of course, but this just shows they have inconsistent addition/multiplication rules. I would not be surprised if their damage formulas are also complicated, and that there may be a way to create a broken build with the new set.

Actually, the damage formula might not even be a formula. Since computer science is as much a art, damage could easily be closer to politics than science. Certain buffs are additive and certain buffs are multiplicative so the player experience can feel better, and make exceptions for certain buffs to be calculated in a different category just because...

MincMincMinc · January 17

i11ionward wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

i11ionward wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

i11ionward wrote: »

I conducted several tests on a dummy. As far as I know, the dummy has 18,200 resistance, or in other terms, 36.4% mitigation, which is roughly equivalent to 24,000 resistance for a player. All stats except penetration naturally remained consistent in each test.

First test (without Lamp Knight's Art)
My penetration: 0
My percentage damage bonus: 28%
Damage to the dummy: 1,616

Second test (with Lamp Knight's Art)
My penetration: 100,000
My percentage damage bonus: 28% (or -18% on the character stats screen)
Damage to the dummy: 1,628

From this, we can conclude that with 24,000 player armor, you'll need to build around 28% percentage damage build to deal the same damage as without the Lamp Knight's Art set. The higher the player's armor, the less percentage damage you'll need, and vice versa.

The goal of this test for myself was to evaluate the viability of the set for deeper theorycrafting in the future, so I deliberately ignored many nuances to save time for now (e.g., in real PvP scenarios, you are unlikely to have 0 penetration).

My conclusions are as follows:

The set is definitely not dead upon its arrival.
The set requires a specific build made around it.
The set works effectively with modifiers that add percentage damage.
It’s hard to say if the set has a chance to become meta and how quickly, as finding an optimal build will take time, and people who invest time in perfecting a build (if one is found) are unlikely to share it immediately.
The set looks like an interesting alternative to existing builds, at the same time it doesn't look like a trash set in my opinion, and I will definitely try to make something out of it on the live server.

FYI you can use 2h berserkers rage(not onslaught cuz its broken) to measure a target dummy's resists.

What did you change between the tests? Are you saying you slotted a swift jewelry with no enchant to get the 5 piece and that was it? Math wise this would make no sense to do equivalent damage against a ~18k resists enemy.

I have checked according to your recommendation, and the dummy indeed has 18,200 resistance. You can see this in the video, and these resistances amount to 36.4% mitigation. You can calculate this by looking at the numbers in the screenshot: 1283/2017 = 0.636, 1 - 0.636 = 0.364 or 36.4%.

You might say that my test doesn't have math sense, and you'd be right — I wasn't trying to prove anything mathematically. I simply came up with a clear and simple test for myself to determine the potential of a set for my own purposes. Then, I just shared my thoughts with the community.

You can choose to take my test seriously or not, but I’m sorry, I do not wish to continue the discussion on this matter.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nnRrRRdRa30

It was more of, your test shows that my math doesn't make sense. Which was why I was asking what changed between your hits. My math showed that when you slot the set, you should be down alot of damage unless you hit a 30-40k resists player. Your in game test showed equivalent damage after slotting the set against an 18k enemy, which means this set would be insane.

I just want to clarify that resistances for players and NPCs are different:

For a player to achieve 50% mitigation, they need to reach 33,000 resistances.
For an NPC to achieve 50% mitigation, they need to reach 25,000 resistances.

For more detailed information, please find specialized content creators.

This just makes me upset from a standard standpoint...... I honestly never looked into mob mit because I basically only pvp. So the 18,200 resist dummy is equivalent to a 24k resist player. Which your test showed that the damage with and without the set was equivalent at this resist value. Assuming you didnt make any other stat changes between tests.

ceruulean wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

It was more of, your test shows that my math doesn't make sense. Which was why I was asking what changed between your hits. My math showed that when you slot the set, you should be down alot of damage unless you hit a 30-40k resists player. Your in game test showed equivalent damage after slotting the set against an 18k enemy, which means this set would be insane.

The math makes "no sense" because damage formulas in this game are not simple operations, but polynomials. So the simplistic math that people are doing cannot describe the full picture. Since they're complicated, the only way to get a formula is to do empirical testing, or for the devs to tell us. The devs will never tell us, so empirical testing it is. For example, this thread shows how someone got 100% damage mitigation: https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/657489/eso-mitigation-issue-100-mitigation-achieved/

ZOS addressed the 100% mitigation of course, but this just shows they have inconsistent addition/multiplication rules. I would not be surprised if their damage formulas are also complicated, and that there may be a way to create a broken build with the new set.

Actually, the damage formula might not even be a formula. Since computer science is as much a art, damage could easily be closer to politics than science. Certain buffs are additive and certain buffs are multiplicative so the player experience can feel better, and make exceptions for certain buffs to be calculated in a different category just because...

Yeah this is why someone had to check whether it was additive with the other basic damage done sources like berserk.

I do hate when zos breaks their own rules. Like how recovery buffs are additive, but then you have something like banner recovery cut and it is multiplicative at the end.

Alchimiste1 · January 19

Someone needs to just go on pts and test on an actual player.

Because at first glance just based on the numbers that set seems terrible

Thumbless_Bot · January 28

Alchimiste1 wrote: »

Someone needs to just go on pts and test on an actual player.

Because at first glance just based on the numbers that set seems terrible

Has anyone done solid testing on this yet? What is the verdict?

MincMincMinc · January 28

Thumbless_Bot wrote: »

Alchimiste1 wrote: »

Someone needs to just go on pts and test on an actual player.

Because at first glance just based on the numbers that set seems terrible

Has anyone done solid testing on this yet? What is the verdict?

unfortunately not yet, I'd need someone to be on the pts with me.

Mainly been trying to make stamsorc functional on live pvp..... not as easy as warden thats for sure.

MincMincMinc · January 30

Tested on a 18200 resist dummy with my current live loadout. Instead of stuhns I put on spriggans to mimic lamps 2-4 piece. Its basically laughable, nearly 30% less damage compared to a hundings era set.

Lamp hit for 6072
Spriggans hit for 8375

Seems pretty doa, most pvpers will be between 22k-28k resists with debuffs that bring them down close to the 18k of the dummy.(equivalent to a 24k resist player)

I still say the 46% damage done needs to be closer to 25%-30%. I also believe the 2-3 piece should be crit resistance bonuses considering this is a pvp specific set.

Kaelthorn_Nightbloom · January 30

MincMincMinc wrote: »

I still say the 46% damage done needs to be closer to 25%-30%. I also believe the 2-3 piece should be crit resistance bonuses considering this is a pvp specific set.

A few weeks ago, I originally said 40% but I think this needs to be 30-35% reduced damage. Anything over 35% and I have a difficult time justifying using this set. Also I think under 30% may put this set into a must-have set which might not be good.

With 35% reduced damage, the net damage increase from 0 to 10% is 23k to 30k armor.
With 35% reduced damage and Major Breach, the net damage increase from 0 -to 10% is 29k to 36k armor.
With 35% reduced damage and Major+Minor Breach, the net damage increase from 0 to 10% is 32k to 39k armor.

I think these numbers are balanced. In many PvP fights, you are getting < 0% increased damage from Lamp Art. But with 35% reduced damage, the set scales well once you get into 30k+ armor. I see no reason Lamp Art can't be 30-35% reduced damage.

@ZOS_Kevin Also I wish ZOS would tell us the intent of this set. Is the set designed to primarily be used against armor stacking 45k+ tanks? If so, they should tell us, so we stop wasting our time even talking about this set.

YandereGirlfriend · January 30

I agree that the damage penalty should be lowered a bit but I don't think that the set should be balanced around the assumption of Major and Minor Breach.

Yes, those debuffs can be up incidentally if you're grouped with a Warden (or are a Warden; but if you're a Warden then why are you even interested in this set) but that isn't an issue with the set itself.

Part of the hypothetical appeal of this is allowing you to have some greater build flexibility, such as dropping the near-mandatory back-bar Ice Staff and having to slot Ele Sus. You can then use that bar slot on another damage skill, more defense, whatever you want to better shape your build.

Something like 50% is too punishing but 25% is fairly busted in the other direction. 35% feels in the ballpark of reasonable.

MincMincMinc · January 30

SkaraMinoc wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

I still say the 46% damage done needs to be closer to 25%-30%. I also believe the 2-3 piece should be crit resistance bonuses considering this is a pvp specific set.

A few weeks ago, I originally said 40% but I think this needs to be 30-35% reduced damage. Anything over 35% and I have a difficult time justifying using this set. Also I think under 30% may put this set into a must-have set which might not be good.

With 35% reduced damage, the net damage increase from 0 to 10% is 23k to 30k armor.
With 35% reduced damage and Major Breach, the net damage increase from 0 -to 10% is 29k to 36k armor.
With 35% reduced damage and Major+Minor Breach, the net damage increase from 0 to 10% is 32k to 39k armor.

I think these numbers are balanced. In many PvP fights, you are getting < 0% increased damage from Lamp Art. But with 35% reduced damage, the set scales well once you get into 30k+ armor. I see no reason Lamp Art can't be 30-35% reduced damage.

@ZOS_Kevin Also I wish ZOS would tell us the intent of this set. Is the set designed to primarily be used against armor stacking 45k+ tanks? If so, they should tell us, so we stop wasting our time even talking about this set.

Id like to test against higher resist values, but yeah we really need clarity from @ZOS_Kevin or the team on what the designed resist value threshold is. Does zos want this to be equivalent to a another 5 piece bonus when the enemy has 50k resists? 45k resists? 40k resists?

Again the vast majority of pvp players are sitting in the 22-28k resist values. If this is a pvp specific set I would imagine zos should aim for around atleast 28k resists to be equivalent to a 5 piece bonus (10% damage done)...........So for 28k resists (42%mit) you are down by 4%damage done to be equal to not running the set. To be at a 5 piece value that means we are down 14% damage done. So the 46 would be lowered by 14% to 32%. The next question is whether you are accounting for major/minor breach which most people have applied in combat which could be another 13.5% which brings me to 18.5 instead of 46%. However I wouldnt count it all the time and the other benefit of the set is to free up a breach bar space which may account for 5-10% damage done. ................ TLDR I recommend changing the set from 46% to 25% if the threshold is for the top average resists value in pvp of 28k. I also recommend giving this pvp set critical resist lines instead of the max stam lines which are near useless in today's pvp builds.

Djennku · January 31

So, aside fromdebating numbers on paper, have any of you gone in game and actually tested this out, or are you all speaking based on theory?

MincMincMinc · January 31

Djennku wrote: »

So, aside fromdebating numbers on paper, have any of you gone in game and actually tested this out, or are you all speaking based on theory?

Yeah read the thread....... it aligns with the numbers we are debating. My previous two posts basically show that this set will be useless unless you are fighting a 40-50k resist player in pvp (which is nobody)

Djennku · January 31

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Djennku wrote: »

So, aside fromdebating numbers on paper, have any of you gone in game and actually tested this out, or are you all speaking based on theory?

Yeah read the thread....... it aligns with the numbers we are debating. My previous two posts basically show that this set will be useless unless you are fighting a 40-50k resist player in pvp (which is nobody)

Again, have YOU personally tested it in game against people, or is this all speculating? Because unless you have been in game actually doing tests, numbers and paper mean absolutely nothing. This is a fact.

MincMincMinc · January 31

Djennku wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Djennku wrote: »

So, aside fromdebating numbers on paper, have any of you gone in game and actually tested this out, or are you all speaking based on theory?

Yeah read the thread....... it aligns with the numbers we are debating. My previous two posts basically show that this set will be useless unless you are fighting a 40-50k resist player in pvp (which is nobody)

Again, have YOU personally tested it in game against people, or is this all speculating? Because unless you have been in game actually doing tests, numbers and paper mean absolutely nothing. This is a fact.

Again, I just posted that I did a test against a 18200 resist dummy. Which is equivalent to a 24k resist player. The set is 30% less damage than spriggans.....its as terrible as the numbers show.

Djennku · January 31

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Djennku wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Djennku wrote: »

So, aside fromdebating numbers on paper, have any of you gone in game and actually tested this out, or are you all speaking based on theory?

Yeah read the thread....... it aligns with the numbers we are debating. My previous two posts basically show that this set will be useless unless you are fighting a 40-50k resist player in pvp (which is nobody)

Again, have YOU personally tested it in game against people, or is this all speculating? Because unless you have been in game actually doing tests, numbers and paper mean absolutely nothing. This is a fact.

Again, I just posted that I did a test against a 18200 resist dummy. Which is equivalent to a 24k resist player. The set is 30% less damage than spriggans.....its as terrible as the numbers show.

So not against an actual player. The dummy is garbage for testing a pvp build against another person.

EDIT: also, those conclusions and statement are completely incorrect. An 18200 resistant dummy is equivalent to only 18200 resists. Nothing more.

MincMincMinc · January 31

Djennku wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Djennku wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Djennku wrote: »

So, aside fromdebating numbers on paper, have any of you gone in game and actually tested this out, or are you all speaking based on theory?

Yeah read the thread....... it aligns with the numbers we are debating. My previous two posts basically show that this set will be useless unless you are fighting a 40-50k resist player in pvp (which is nobody)

Again, have YOU personally tested it in game against people, or is this all speculating? Because unless you have been in game actually doing tests, numbers and paper mean absolutely nothing. This is a fact.

Again, I just posted that I did a test against a 18200 resist dummy. Which is equivalent to a 24k resist player. The set is 30% less damage than spriggans.....its as terrible as the numbers show.

So not against an actual player. The dummy is garbage for testing a pvp build against another person.

EDIT: also, those conclusions and statement are completely incorrect. An 18200 resistant dummy is equivalent to only 18200 resists. Nothing more.

Dummy resists convert differently than player resists.

Dummy or mobs are 500res = 1% mit (mobs are considered lvl50)
Player are 660res = 1% mit. (players are considered lvl66)

18200/500*660 = 24000resist player.

SO yeah the math still checks out and the set is horrible. Do your own testing if you want to prove us wrong.

EDIT: I also did not know this before someone pointed it out to me and confirmed it ingame and on UESP

Thumbless_Bot · January 31

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Djennku wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Djennku wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Djennku wrote: »

So, aside fromdebating numbers on paper, have any of you gone in game and actually tested this out, or are you all speaking based on theory?

Yeah read the thread....... it aligns with the numbers we are debating. My previous two posts basically show that this set will be useless unless you are fighting a 40-50k resist player in pvp (which is nobody)

Again, have YOU personally tested it in game against people, or is this all speculating? Because unless you have been in game actually doing tests, numbers and paper mean absolutely nothing. This is a fact.

Again, I just posted that I did a test against a 18200 resist dummy. Which is equivalent to a 24k resist player. The set is 30% less damage than spriggans.....its as terrible as the numbers show.

So not against an actual player. The dummy is garbage for testing a pvp build against another person.

EDIT: also, those conclusions and statement are completely incorrect. An 18200 resistant dummy is equivalent to only 18200 resists. Nothing more.

Dummy resists convert differently than player resists.

Dummy or mobs are 500res = 1% mit (mobs are considered lvl50)
Player are 660res = 1% mit. (players are considered lvl66)

18200/500*660 = 24000resist player.

SO yeah the math still checks out and the set is horrible. Do your own testing if you want to prove us wrong.

EDIT: I also did not know this before someone pointed it out to me and confirmed it ingame and on UESP

Appreciate the effort to test. I wonder if reducing the 46% to 25% would be unbalanced. If everyone could get 75% of their damage through without worrying about armor, the set might be a bit busted. Idk, would be really cool if we could test over time with different numbers before it went live. Or... maybe the damage reduction could scale based on how much armor was ignored. The more armor ignored the greater the reduction. Then again, that might defeat the purpose of the set...

MincMincMinc · January 31

Thumbless_Bot wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Djennku wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Djennku wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Djennku wrote: »

So, aside fromdebating numbers on paper, have any of you gone in game and actually tested this out, or are you all speaking based on theory?

Yeah read the thread....... it aligns with the numbers we are debating. My previous two posts basically show that this set will be useless unless you are fighting a 40-50k resist player in pvp (which is nobody)

Again, have YOU personally tested it in game against people, or is this all speculating? Because unless you have been in game actually doing tests, numbers and paper mean absolutely nothing. This is a fact.

Again, I just posted that I did a test against a 18200 resist dummy. Which is equivalent to a 24k resist player. The set is 30% less damage than spriggans.....its as terrible as the numbers show.

So not against an actual player. The dummy is garbage for testing a pvp build against another person.

EDIT: also, those conclusions and statement are completely incorrect. An 18200 resistant dummy is equivalent to only 18200 resists. Nothing more.

Dummy resists convert differently than player resists.

Dummy or mobs are 500res = 1% mit (mobs are considered lvl50)
Player are 660res = 1% mit. (players are considered lvl66)

18200/500*660 = 24000resist player.

SO yeah the math still checks out and the set is horrible. Do your own testing if you want to prove us wrong.

EDIT: I also did not know this before someone pointed it out to me and confirmed it ingame and on UESP

Appreciate the effort to test. I wonder if reducing the 46% to 25% would be unbalanced. If everyone could get 75% of their damage through without worrying about armor, the set might be a bit busted. Idk, would be really cool if we could test over time with different numbers before it went live. Or... maybe the damage reduction could scale based on how much armor was ignored. The more armor ignored the greater the reduction. Then again, that might defeat the purpose of the set...

It really comes down to a threshold of when you want this set to equal a 5 piece bonus set. The problem is that metas swing. Who knows, maybe zos comes out with a random source of 30% mit....so people stop running resists. Suddenly a set like this is power crept out of the game. IDk i mean I could walk through the math again if we want for a 5th time. Its a cool concept set for pvp, especially on classes that dont have one click wonder skills like beetles.

What threshold do we think the set should be based around? I estimate most players are 22-28k resists so 25k resists? 25k/660 = 37.9%
Do we assume this is a duel or open world/bg scenario? Basically do you assume breach or not? I don't think zos would plan on this set to be a dueling set so I would assume most enemies would have breach. If you want we can do half major+minor 8922/2 = 4461........... 4461/660 = 6.75% mit
Lamp is -46% -5 piece bonus and we are at +37.9%-6.75% for...........-14.85% and - a 5 piece bonus
If we assume on niche builds you could run NirnGreatsword instead of sharp maul that accounts for the 5 piece bonus basically being hundings.
Dropping major breach sources you can pick up a skillslot, most filler skills are around 8% damage boost worth.

So idk it looks like lamp still needs its -46% changed to around 30% if you assume an average enemy of 25k resists. Itll be slightly better against half the enemies and slightly worse against half the enemies. Doing 35% or more and you will probably only use this set against 30k+ resist enemies.....IMO why bother even attacking those players, they are worthless in combat anyways.

Thumbless_Bot · January 31

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Thumbless_Bot wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Djennku wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Djennku wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Djennku wrote: »

So, aside fromdebating numbers on paper, have any of you gone in game and actually tested this out, or are you all speaking based on theory?

Yeah read the thread....... it aligns with the numbers we are debating. My previous two posts basically show that this set will be useless unless you are fighting a 40-50k resist player in pvp (which is nobody)

Again, have YOU personally tested it in game against people, or is this all speculating? Because unless you have been in game actually doing tests, numbers and paper mean absolutely nothing. This is a fact.

Again, I just posted that I did a test against a 18200 resist dummy. Which is equivalent to a 24k resist player. The set is 30% less damage than spriggans.....its as terrible as the numbers show.

So not against an actual player. The dummy is garbage for testing a pvp build against another person.

EDIT: also, those conclusions and statement are completely incorrect. An 18200 resistant dummy is equivalent to only 18200 resists. Nothing more.

Dummy resists convert differently than player resists.

Dummy or mobs are 500res = 1% mit (mobs are considered lvl50)
Player are 660res = 1% mit. (players are considered lvl66)

18200/500*660 = 24000resist player.

SO yeah the math still checks out and the set is horrible. Do your own testing if you want to prove us wrong.

EDIT: I also did not know this before someone pointed it out to me and confirmed it ingame and on UESP

Appreciate the effort to test. I wonder if reducing the 46% to 25% would be unbalanced. If everyone could get 75% of their damage through without worrying about armor, the set might be a bit busted. Idk, would be really cool if we could test over time with different numbers before it went live. Or... maybe the damage reduction could scale based on how much armor was ignored. The more armor ignored the greater the reduction. Then again, that might defeat the purpose of the set...

IMO why bother even attacking those players, they are worthless in combat anyways.

Agree on your assessment.

For those players, I call them furniture. It's like when I'm trying to get to the kitchen and need to go around an end table...

MincMincMinc · January 31

Thumbless_Bot wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Thumbless_Bot wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Djennku wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Djennku wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Djennku wrote: »

So, aside fromdebating numbers on paper, have any of you gone in game and actually tested this out, or are you all speaking based on theory?

Yeah read the thread....... it aligns with the numbers we are debating. My previous two posts basically show that this set will be useless unless you are fighting a 40-50k resist player in pvp (which is nobody)

Again, have YOU personally tested it in game against people, or is this all speculating? Because unless you have been in game actually doing tests, numbers and paper mean absolutely nothing. This is a fact.

Again, I just posted that I did a test against a 18200 resist dummy. Which is equivalent to a 24k resist player. The set is 30% less damage than spriggans.....its as terrible as the numbers show.

So not against an actual player. The dummy is garbage for testing a pvp build against another person.

EDIT: also, those conclusions and statement are completely incorrect. An 18200 resistant dummy is equivalent to only 18200 resists. Nothing more.

Dummy resists convert differently than player resists.

Dummy or mobs are 500res = 1% mit (mobs are considered lvl50)
Player are 660res = 1% mit. (players are considered lvl66)

18200/500*660 = 24000resist player.

SO yeah the math still checks out and the set is horrible. Do your own testing if you want to prove us wrong.

EDIT: I also did not know this before someone pointed it out to me and confirmed it ingame and on UESP

Appreciate the effort to test. I wonder if reducing the 46% to 25% would be unbalanced. If everyone could get 75% of their damage through without worrying about armor, the set might be a bit busted. Idk, would be really cool if we could test over time with different numbers before it went live. Or... maybe the damage reduction could scale based on how much armor was ignored. The more armor ignored the greater the reduction. Then again, that might defeat the purpose of the set...

IMO why bother even attacking those players, they are worthless in combat anyways.

Agree on your assessment.

For those players, I call them furniture. It's like when I'm trying to get to the kitchen and need to go around an end table...

Right so if you assume the set should be worth a 5 piece bonus on a 25k resist enemy as your balance point. Then you have to consider whether it is a positive or negative to pigeon hole whatever build you do in certain directions. IMO if you run something that makes your build niche it should be slightly stronger as a reward.

I guess an example would be running onslaught. You are pigeon holed into running no pen in your build and hoping that the onslaught window makes it worth it. Otherwise without onslaught you are drastically down in damage. So the pen and the burst damage from the ult must be worth it enough to make your build useless at damage the other 90% of the time you are playing. (in onslaught's case it isnt used due to the sub par instant damage....in most cases dbos will hit harder and give passives for all your other skills to hit harder and give ult)

Thumbless_Bot · January 31

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Thumbless_Bot wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Thumbless_Bot wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Djennku wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Djennku wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Djennku wrote: »

So, aside fromdebating numbers on paper, have any of you gone in game and actually tested this out, or are you all speaking based on theory?

Yeah read the thread....... it aligns with the numbers we are debating. My previous two posts basically show that this set will be useless unless you are fighting a 40-50k resist player in pvp (which is nobody)

Again, have YOU personally tested it in game against people, or is this all speculating? Because unless you have been in game actually doing tests, numbers and paper mean absolutely nothing. This is a fact.

Again, I just posted that I did a test against a 18200 resist dummy. Which is equivalent to a 24k resist player. The set is 30% less damage than spriggans.....its as terrible as the numbers show.

So not against an actual player. The dummy is garbage for testing a pvp build against another person.

EDIT: also, those conclusions and statement are completely incorrect. An 18200 resistant dummy is equivalent to only 18200 resists. Nothing more.

Dummy resists convert differently than player resists.

Dummy or mobs are 500res = 1% mit (mobs are considered lvl50)
Player are 660res = 1% mit. (players are considered lvl66)

18200/500*660 = 24000resist player.

SO yeah the math still checks out and the set is horrible. Do your own testing if you want to prove us wrong.

EDIT: I also did not know this before someone pointed it out to me and confirmed it ingame and on UESP

Appreciate the effort to test. I wonder if reducing the 46% to 25% would be unbalanced. If everyone could get 75% of their damage through without worrying about armor, the set might be a bit busted. Idk, would be really cool if we could test over time with different numbers before it went live. Or... maybe the damage reduction could scale based on how much armor was ignored. The more armor ignored the greater the reduction. Then again, that might defeat the purpose of the set...

IMO why bother even attacking those players, they are worthless in combat anyways.

Agree on your assessment.

For those players, I call them furniture. It's like when I'm trying to get to the kitchen and need to go around an end table...

Right so if you assume the set should be worth a 5 piece bonus on a 25k resist enemy as your balance point. Then you have to consider whether it is a positive or negative to pigeon hole whatever build you do in certain directions. IMO if you run something that makes your build niche it should be slightly stronger as a reward.

I guess an example would be running onslaught. You are pigeon holed into running no pen in your build and hoping that the onslaught window makes it worth it. Otherwise without onslaught you are drastically down in damage. So the pen and the burst damage from the ult must be worth it enough to make your build useless at damage the other 90% of the time you are playing. (in onslaught's case it isnt used due to the sub par instant damage....in most cases dbos will hit harder and give passives for all your other skills to hit harder and give ult)

If it gets to 25%, I was thinking going full damage with something like clever bb, lamp knight fb with nirn 2 handed sword, recovery head and shoulders, like magma 1 piece, and maybe ssc or markyn, ddf, s&s. High weapon damage to accompany the full pen, with some recovery from the monster pieces.

MincMincMinc · February 1

Thumbless_Bot wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Thumbless_Bot wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Thumbless_Bot wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Djennku wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Djennku wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Djennku wrote: »

So, aside fromdebating numbers on paper, have any of you gone in game and actually tested this out, or are you all speaking based on theory?

Yeah read the thread....... it aligns with the numbers we are debating. My previous two posts basically show that this set will be useless unless you are fighting a 40-50k resist player in pvp (which is nobody)

Again, have YOU personally tested it in game against people, or is this all speculating? Because unless you have been in game actually doing tests, numbers and paper mean absolutely nothing. This is a fact.

Again, I just posted that I did a test against a 18200 resist dummy. Which is equivalent to a 24k resist player. The set is 30% less damage than spriggans.....its as terrible as the numbers show.

So not against an actual player. The dummy is garbage for testing a pvp build against another person.

EDIT: also, those conclusions and statement are completely incorrect. An 18200 resistant dummy is equivalent to only 18200 resists. Nothing more.

Dummy resists convert differently than player resists.

Dummy or mobs are 500res = 1% mit (mobs are considered lvl50)
Player are 660res = 1% mit. (players are considered lvl66)

18200/500*660 = 24000resist player.

SO yeah the math still checks out and the set is horrible. Do your own testing if you want to prove us wrong.

EDIT: I also did not know this before someone pointed it out to me and confirmed it ingame and on UESP

Appreciate the effort to test. I wonder if reducing the 46% to 25% would be unbalanced. If everyone could get 75% of their damage through without worrying about armor, the set might be a bit busted. Idk, would be really cool if we could test over time with different numbers before it went live. Or... maybe the damage reduction could scale based on how much armor was ignored. The more armor ignored the greater the reduction. Then again, that might defeat the purpose of the set...

IMO why bother even attacking those players, they are worthless in combat anyways.

Agree on your assessment.

For those players, I call them furniture. It's like when I'm trying to get to the kitchen and need to go around an end table...

Right so if you assume the set should be worth a 5 piece bonus on a 25k resist enemy as your balance point. Then you have to consider whether it is a positive or negative to pigeon hole whatever build you do in certain directions. IMO if you run something that makes your build niche it should be slightly stronger as a reward.

I guess an example would be running onslaught. You are pigeon holed into running no pen in your build and hoping that the onslaught window makes it worth it. Otherwise without onslaught you are drastically down in damage. So the pen and the burst damage from the ult must be worth it enough to make your build useless at damage the other 90% of the time you are playing. (in onslaught's case it isnt used due to the sub par instant damage....in most cases dbos will hit harder and give passives for all your other skills to hit harder and give ult)

If it gets to 25%, I was thinking going full damage with something like clever bb, lamp knight fb with nirn 2 handed sword, recovery head and shoulders, like magma 1 piece, and maybe ssc or markyn, ddf, s&s. High weapon damage to accompany the full pen, with some recovery from the monster pieces.

Itll fall right into place as a frontbar set. Should fit into the usual Monster+trainee+mythic+frontbar and backbar.

It will still only be a one bar set, but there really arent any good frontbar wd sets that carry over to the backbar. Honestly for BGs I have been questioning just running rallying and powerful assault to un-pug my teamates. You get so much free damage from sharp maul and breach that you dont need much else for damage. Stuhns still sits at #1 for me for dizzy builds. Hard to beat it. Oakfather's can compare, but you need a backbar heavy or medium set which is hard to find other than PA.

MXVIIDREAM · March 12

I understand this may seem like a stupid question, if you know the answer, but how is spriggans more damage when they’re both pen sets ?

MincMincMinc · March 12

MXVIIDREAM wrote: »

I understand this may seem like a stupid question, if you know the answer, but how is spriggans more damage when they’re both pen sets ?

How you must consider pen is basically a % bonus damage. For PvP 660pen = 1% damage done. For PvE 500pen = 1% damage done. Which only adds confusion. (PvP is considered lvl66 in the game's mind even though everyone is technically lvl50)

So then simply convert all the bonuses on an average target and youll find that spriggans is more. Kinda sad since spriggans is just as bad as hundings these days. I have several posts in this thread writing out the math. For Lamp's sake you need to pick a resist range that you assume 90% of enemies fall under.

bgs at high mmr people sit a 26k-30k
Openworld Pugs sit 20k-26k
1vXers sit around 26k-34k

So on average 24-25k is probably the balance point you could assume.

calamity192 · March 13

I've dropped a piece of this set yesterday and was thinking about possible place for it. Have you got any ideas?

After some thinking, the shell I decided to try this set in Status Effects on DK.

The main reason for that is Combustion probably. Almost single-handedly mitigates the drawback of this set with 40% increased damage of your Burning and Poison status effects.

The second thing is Elemental Explosion: Trauma + Assassin's Misery + Off Balance. This should be fun.
After some unintelligent calculation I concluded that if target has more than 19%ish res (depends on the amount of increased damage, the more you have the more res will cut it, your captain) - this set gives more damage. Which I found acceptable...

With that said, here are the numbers that should help to mitigate and push forward:
Set: -46%
Malacath band: 16%, since we want to build around Status Effect, crit damage probably something we could sacrifice (?)
Combustion: 40%,
Ancient Knowledge 2: 12%
Major berserk: 10%, from Chains of Devastation most likely
Fiery Banner: 11%, Flame Damage (6% more DoT damage) + Class Mastery + Minor Berserk (5% more damage)
CP Thaumaturgy: 6%
CP Exploiter: 10%

Burning is applied with Destructive Touch and Poison with Venomous Claw.
The question is what to choose as second set... I was always dreaming of using Serpent's Disdain somewhere... But something like Deadly Strike could be good too. Or maybe something for durability...

MincMincMinc · March 13

calamity192 wrote: »

I've dropped a piece of this set yesterday and was thinking about possible place for it. Have you got any ideas?

After some thinking, the shell I decided to try this set in Status Effects on DK.

The main reason for that is Combustion probably. Almost single-handedly mitigates the drawback of this set with 40% increased damage of your Burning and Poison status effects.

The second thing is Elemental Explosion: Trauma + Assassin's Misery + Off Balance. This should be fun.
After some unintelligent calculation I concluded that if target has more than 19%ish res (depends on the amount of increased damage, the more you have the more res will cut it, your captain) - this set gives more damage. Which I found acceptable...

With that said, here are the numbers that should help to mitigate and push forward:
Set: -46%
Malacath band: 16%, since we want to build around Status Effect, crit damage probably something we could sacrifice (?)
Combustion: 40%,
Ancient Knowledge 2: 12%
Major berserk: 10%, from Chains of Devastation most likely
Fiery Banner: 11%, Flame Damage (6% more DoT damage) + Class Mastery + Minor Berserk (5% more damage)
CP Thaumaturgy: 6%
CP Exploiter: 10%

Burning is applied with Destructive Touch and Poison with Venomous Claw.
The question is what to choose as second set... I was always dreaming of using Serpent's Disdain somewhere... But something like Deadly Strike could be good too. Or maybe something for durability...

Your basic comparison thought process is not correct here. For example:

Normal build:
Gets major berserk +10%
Slots another generic 5 piece 10% damage done set

Lamp Build
Gets major berserk +10%
Loses lamp -46%

Both builds get the 10% which cancels it out. If you want to compare a set you need to only consider what that set gains/loses compared to another set on your build.

At best as we described many times in this thread this set is equivalent to hundings when fighting a player that is around 30k+ resists which is basically pointless.

calamity192 · March 13

Your basic comparison thought process is not correct here. For example:

Normal build:
Gets major berserk +10%
Slots another generic 5 piece 10% damage done set

Lamp Build
Gets major berserk +10%
Loses lamp -46%

Both builds get the 10% which cancels it out. If you want to compare a set you need to only consider what that set gains/loses compared to another set on your build.

At best as we described many times in this thread this set is equivalent to hundings when fighting a player that is around 30k+ resists which is basically pointless.

Yes and no. But lets take your example with generic 10% damage done set then. Let's put it as bare sets + 10% major berserk, 46% more damage (to cancel Lamp's reduction) and whooping 96% more damage.

So the more damage you gain, the more armour will cut it. And the better this set will be. And keep in mind that constantly maintaining Breaches is an effort not everyone would be able to make. And not every player here is a strong duelist with his powerful not-a-bogstnd-vampire-warden-sorc-shield abilities. Some players like to play Tarnished Nightmare and Oakensoul. So it's not about being pointless or pointful, it's about where can you put this set in. If you will always look at sets as a "this should be better than what I have now, period" then the whole concept of rpgs could die... Without wacky and fun stuff.

Kaelthorn_Nightbloom · March 13

I've been running Lamp Art on a bash build w/ Deadlands, Malacath, Thrive in Chaos, and Venemous Knife (+8% martial damage, Minor Vulnerability) with Exploiter on Shield Throw. The best way to describe the experience is that the damage is consistently average and sometimes above or below average depending on how many sources of damage reduction the target has. For example, an enemy player that has 25-30% damage reduction (Protection, Blue/Red CP, Nibenay, Vamp 3, etc) will take around 1600 to 1800 bash damage. An enemy player with almost no damage reduction will take 2200 to 2400 bash damage.

Lamp Art is really good at preventing your damage from going too low. I haven't hit anyone under 1500 bash damage except when a DK pops Corrosive. But it also works the other way. I haven't hit anyone over 2800 and the only way I can hit over 2500 is when I get a 6x Thrive in Chaos (+36% damage).

The biggest issue I have so far is that I must run Malacath to make up for some of the -46% damage loss, so the burst potential is low because there is no crit damage. For reference, a Khajiit Shadow bash build running a second damage set will land 8-10k bash interrupt crits against PvE players. I crit someone for 10016 bash damage during Whitestrake's Mayhem but that's impossible with Lamp Art and Malacath.

MincMincMinc · March 13

calamity192 wrote: »

Your basic comparison thought process is not correct here. For example:

Normal build:
Gets major berserk +10%
Slots another generic 5 piece 10% damage done set

Lamp Build
Gets major berserk +10%
Loses lamp -46%

Both builds get the 10% which cancels it out. If you want to compare a set you need to only consider what that set gains/loses compared to another set on your build.

At best as we described many times in this thread this set is equivalent to hundings when fighting a player that is around 30k+ resists which is basically pointless.

Yes and no. But lets take your example with generic 10% damage done set then. Let's put it as bare sets + 10% major berserk, 46% more damage (to cancel Lamp's reduction) and whooping 96% more damage.

So the more damage you gain, the more armour will cut it. And the better this set will be. And keep in mind that constantly maintaining Breaches is an effort not everyone would be able to make. And not every player here is a strong duelist with his powerful not-a-bogstnd-vampire-warden-sorc-shield abilities. Some players like to play Tarnished Nightmare and Oakensoul. So it's not about being pointless or pointful, it's about where can you put this set in. If you will always look at sets as a "this should be better than what I have now, period" then the whole concept of rpgs could die... Without wacky and fun stuff.

Sorry, but I dont understand what you are trying to show. The math still hasn't changed since I last did it before. If you want a mediocre set on players under 30kres which only starts to compare to other sets against enemies above 35-40kres than this set works. Problem is that most pugs OW run 22-26k resists so its highly unlikely you will come close to using this set against 90% of targets.

Which is why I pushed for zos to lower the 46% down to atleast be closer to the top end of the typical player base.

Sluggy · March 13

calamity192 wrote: »

I've dropped a piece of this set yesterday and was thinking about possible place for it. Have you got any ideas?

After some thinking, the shell I decided to try this set in Status Effects on DK.

The main reason for that is Combustion probably. Almost single-handedly mitigates the drawback of this set with 40% increased damage of your Burning and Poison status effects.

The second thing is Elemental Explosion: Trauma + Assassin's Misery + Off Balance. This should be fun.
After some unintelligent calculation I concluded that if target has more than 19%ish res (depends on the amount of increased damage, the more you have the more res will cut it, your captain) - this set gives more damage. Which I found acceptable...

With that said, here are the numbers that should help to mitigate and push forward:
Set: -46%
Malacath band: 16%, since we want to build around Status Effect, crit damage probably something we could sacrifice (?)
Combustion: 40%,
Ancient Knowledge 2: 12%
Major berserk: 10%, from Chains of Devastation most likely
Fiery Banner: 11%, Flame Damage (6% more DoT damage) + Class Mastery + Minor Berserk (5% more damage)
CP Thaumaturgy: 6%
CP Exploiter: 10%

Burning is applied with Destructive Touch and Poison with Venomous Claw.
The question is what to choose as second set... I was always dreaming of using Serpent's Disdain somewhere... But something like Deadly Strike could be good too. Or maybe something for durability...

I've been running a status effect DK on and off for the last year and I can't say I'd be too excited about this set. Although I have no idea where the decrease rests in the calculation so it's kind hard to say without that knowledge. Multipliers are always weird like that.

It seems like an especially odd choice on a DK where you already have Corrosive Armor to do the exact same thing but just in smaller windows (Remember, most status effect damage is direct damage, not dots! So corrosive does work for them). The only situation where it might pan out would be that you could lean more into standing in your own Standard of Might to effectively get the 15% extra damage from that while also getting the same effective penetration from corrosive. Combine with something like Malacath's and the 12% from a lightening staff it might make up the difference but it almost feels like you'd be back at square one where you just had any other five-piece and dropped your corrosive like normal.

Overall there are just much better sets to use in that situation, I think. Relequin, Draugrkin, Pyrebrand, and the Asylum Staff all being the pretty obvious goto choices. In every case you can lean into CP, the lover mundus, sharpened trait on the staff, and if using force pulse then the natural extra penetration of staffs as well (because stupidly enough, when running a setup like this you can actually just use Elemental Sus as your spammable too). It's pretty easy to hit about 20k-24k pen on such a build with just those. At that point corrosive almost seems like overkill reserved for the super tanks.