Why give Sorc so many redundant abilities？

HatchetHaro · August 6

Elendildur wrote: »

HatchetHaro wrote: »

You just need someone running the Assassination skill line. Almost every raid group already has a Nightblade proccing Hemorrhage for the Minor Savagery, either as a parse DD, or as a Werewolf for the additional Major Courage.

A werewolf wouldn't be able to proc Hemorrhage though, would it? Since Hemorrhage requires having an Assassination ability slotted, which you don't have in werewolf form. I agree with the rest of it, though

Ooh, good catch. Completely forgot about that conditional, and ESO Skillbook didn't specify. I somehow mixed that up with Calculated Defense which can proc from WW.

ZhuJiuyin · August 6

HatchetHaro wrote: »

ZhuJiuyin wrote: »

I think we must first establish a fundamental truth: a class’s overall strength is determined by its own damage output, survivability, and group contribution combined. When a change is made under the guise of “increasing class uniqueness,” yet it substantially cuts into the core stats of that class itself, it constitutes a nerf—regardless of any side benefits attached. That is exactly what happened with the U51 swap of the Sorcerer’s critical buff (and the Templar’s as well).

1. The pen-buff cannot compensate for the loss of critical.

In the current PvE environment, Pen is one of the easiest stats to cap through gear and racial passives. A standard trial group setup can easily reach the cap, whereas Critical is always a scarce and highly valuable stat.

To “utilize” this new Pen, some proposed group compositions have outright dropped other better Mythic sets and instead required the group to use Velothi—a Mythic set whose damage formula was adjusted in the previous patch (don’t get me wrong, it’s still decent, but it’s no longer top-tier for most classes). This is essentially a net-negative trade-off: if Pen is already capped, the buff is completely wasted; if it’s not capped, you have to sacrifice other more valuable stats to fit it, and overall damage often ends up no higher—or even lower.

2. “More choices” is just a fancy wrapper for taking away choice.

Some claim that this change “increases build flexibility,” but the opposite is true:

Before, groups could freely choose which critical buff to bring (Sorc or Nightblade), and that buff applied to the class itself as well—a double benefit.

Now, the Pen-buff forcibly replaces the critical buff, forcing Sorcerers to give up their own critical, while the Pen may be completely irrelevant to the group’s needs. Players have no option to keep the old effect—how is that “flexibility”? It’s simply forcing a mature, established setup to be replaced by an inferior one.

In short, this is not adding new options; it’s removing options from some players and forcing them onto others. If the devs truly wanted to add choice, they could have made the new Pen a separate passive or an optional skill, rather than directly overwriting a core group buff.

What’s more, if this change goes live, Sorcerers will struggle to be dps for the raid team for future. The so-called “more choices” will only reduce the number of viable options.

3. The skill redundancy issue is completely ignored

If anyone believe this change is an improvement, then them cannot ignore the long-standing problem of skill overlap within the Sorcerer class. This update did not address any of the redundant skills (e.g., multiple immobilizes, multiple resource passives), but instead made a one-size-fits-all swap on a key passive. This reveals that the dev team does not truly understand the Sorcerer’s pain points. Rather than giving a trivial Pen-buff, they should have reworked Exploiter or consolidated the Dark Magic passives so that Sorcerers could keep their own critical while providing group Pen through specific actions. This is not “balance” or "more choices "—it’s lazy nerfing.

4. Player feedback was ignored.

A full month before U51 hit the PTS, the community submitted extensive objections, clearly pointing out the drawbacks of this Pen-buff. Yet these comments were completely disregarded in the final update. It shows a disregard for player experience. When a change lacks any data support (the devs have published no statistics showing Pen outperforms Critical, nor any developer commentary), and goes against the practical experience of most players, it again proves that this is merely an attempt to force class representation rates, at the expense of the Sorcerer’s core gameplay.

To sum up in one sentence: If a change forces you to re-stack an easily overcapped stat while taking away a core offensive stat that scales linearly, then it is a nerf—no matter what fancy name it’s given.

(The above arguments also apply equally to the Templar.)

Okay, since you want to apply the Templar change here too, we can factor that in as well. And since you've made your arguments around raid group comps, I shall do the same here, too.

1. The pen buff absolutely compensates for the "loss" of Prophecy.

Because the critical isn't actually lost. You just need someone running the Assassination skill line. Almost every raid group already has a Nightblade proccing Hemorrhage for the Minor Savagery, either as a parse DD, or as a Werewolf for the additional Major Courage. Even if you don't have one, or your group is specced for a cleave-heavy trial where you would prefer to run all cleave classes, you can just have one of the Arcanists swap to the U47 and U48 subclassing meta of Herald + Assassination + Dawn's Wrath (also grants the Illuminate passive). Making a very minor change like that would be of zero detriment to your team, and you get the new Armour and Penetration group buffs to go along with it.

Yes, there are loads of ways to gain Penetration, which is exactly why the change to granting 2974 Penetration on Exploitation is a good thing: it means you can easily spec to take Alkosh off of a DD and let them do more damage. It's 2974 free Pen, for free, for the group, for free! Even if, for whatever reason, you don't want to make that set change, that Pen will still absolutely be useful for any target without optimal uptime of Alkosh or Crusher, such as the Enraged Fragments on Ansuul, Abominations on Bahsei, Nereid Sirens on Taleria, etc. And if that little Pen helps keep the board clear on Ansuul, it's a win for everyone.

Likewise, the Armour buff absolutely compensates for the "loss" of Sorcery. Every group should already have at least one DK granting Minor Brutality, either as a tank, or as a Z'en's DD. Generally, you'll actually see two DKs around juggling their ults to give the group Major Berserk with their Lead from the Front Class Mastery. There is zero loss of Weapon and Spell damage. In fact, the extra Armour would actually be very useful for all the overwhelming amounts of non-one-shot damage coming from so many fights, such as Ansuul (Ignite, Wrack, Poisoned Mind, Inferno, Bolt, Chilling Thought, Afterburn), Falgravn (Grievous Pulse, Sanguine Grasp, Hemorrhage, Pool of Ichor, Blood Fountain, Unstable Energy), Oaxiltso (Cinder Cleave, Ashen Wounds, Magma Sludge, Noxious Puddle, Molten Earth, Meteor Crash, Sunburst), and Kazpian (Caustic Carrion, Distressing Bolt, Daedric Bombardment, Biting Blaze, Giant Sword, Shock Wall). It may not be a big mitigation buff, but any amount is always going to help any group looking to do some serious progression; DDs would survive more, healers would have an easier time topping everyone off, it's a win-win situation.

2. You still have a choice.

The argument that this change "takes away choice" assumes every group is forced to play the meta. In reality, and especially with the power creep offered by Class Masteries, groups actually always have the flexibility to make sub-optimal composition choices or trade away maximum efficiency for the sake of comfort, even for Trifecta-level runs. Case in point, I choose not to put Martial Knowledge on anyone in my group, even if it would result in higher group damage, because I hate using it and I refuse to subject any of my team members to it.

If you choose not to optimize around the new unique Pen and Armour buffs, you can absolutely keep running your current setups without your class becoming unviable or your group suffering.

These changes simply reward groups that do choose to adapt their rosters to the extra buffs available. Circling back to point 1, making that 6% crit back up requires doing nothing for most teams, or making at most just one single class change to the roster for the small handful that needs it; you can just treat this like any meta shift from any update.

3. Skill redundancy aside, this is still an improvement.

Yes, I agree mostly on this part. No one is saying the class kit is perfect or that any of their pain points have been addressed in this PTS iteration. But calling this change a "nerf" just because it didn't simultaneously fix every problem is quite overblown. As I've demonstrated above, it's still a net positive for everyone involved, which is an improvement.

On this note, I genuinely do not mind if they swap those buffs around all the classes. People will still build their comps based on what ends up on which classes. It's just a matter of which class mains get angry on the forums, and I will say this: there's no pleasing everyone.

4. Developers look for testing data, not forum speculation.

That is the whole point of the PTS. Everyone loves to complain and rag on changes as if they know for sure it will ruin everything with their playstyle without even trying them. Couple that with the abundant doomerism panic here on the forums and the tendency for players to exaggerate their issues (and I am guilty of that from time to time), I'm going to say that the devs would be right to take that feedback with a grain of salt until they get actual gameplay data.

But if you want data, I have already done the maths and published the statistic here that, given that a target that is underpen, the 2974 Pen outweighs the 6% crit chance in damage. Sure, not all raid comps would be underpen, but also, not all groups has to run Alkosh. It's all about adapting to what's given to shift stats elsewhere; that's a core part of any raid team. In the same way, that Pen would also be good for solo/duo play like Arenas and IA, and would at least be a sidegrade in PvP, though specifics may depend on build and role (and like any update, you should adapt your builds).

At the end of the day, the complaints people have here are just massively overblown. The changes are still easy to adapt to and make useful for any PvE scenario.

You wrote a long, detailed explanation, but the entire thing contradicts yourself. Even when someone asked you to form a team, you could only generate team compositions "for the sake of change," and we all know the outcome. The team you ultimately provided was similar to my or others' predictions, completely contradicting your claims of "diversity" and "selectivity."

(The following also applies to Templars)

1. You claim: “The Penetration buff absolutely compensates for the ‘loss’ of Prophecy.”
Why use a team function that's mostly dispensable to exchange for a core attribute crucial to Sorcerer's own output and survivability, especially since this attribute is also a necessary attribute for Sorcerer skills?

2. You then say: “Critical chance isn’t really lost—just bring a Nightblade using the Assassination skill line.”
This statement is the single biggest insult to every Sorcerer player. Why should a Sorcerer have to rely on another class to get back what was taken from them? You are using someone else's tools as a fig leaf for the Sorcerer's own stripped‑down kit. Taking what is inherently ours, then telling us “it's okay, someone else can provide it”—that isn't compensation, that is deprivation.
Basically, it's like I take money from your pocket and distribute it to others, then tell you it's "good for everyone."

3. You insist: “This is still an overall improvement.”
No. As I stated repeatedly, a class's viability depends on a balance of damage output, survivability, and group utility. If you only tick one of those boxes, you are not a well‑designed class. For the Sorcerer, trading away 6% critical strike chance (An attribute with no upper limit) for a Penetration buff that is already capped in most raid environments is a net loss—both in personal DPS and in the overall feel of the class.

4. You argue: “You still have a choice—you don’t have to optimise around the new buffs.”
That is pure sophistry. In practice, the choice is an illusion. Compositions that previously relied on a Sorcerer without a Nightblade, or a Templar without a Dragonknight, will inevitably suffer. You cannot claim “choice” when the meta forces a specific pairing to maintain what was once baseline.

5. Let me summarise your entire defence:

You excuse the Sorcerer's personal loss by saying “the team has a Nightblade.”

You mask the Sorcerer's individual DPS drop by pointing to “total raid damage.”

You dodge the question of design rationale by telling everyone to “adapt to change.”

If these changes were truly reasonable, I would gladly offer that 3000 Penetration to the Nightblade in exchange for the 6% critical chance that was originally the Sorcerer's own. But you know that would never happen, because this is a blatant nerf, plain and simple. All your verbose arguments are nothing but whitewash for a decision that undermines the Sorcerer's identity and effectiveness.

HatchetHaro · August 6

ZhuJiuyin wrote: »

1. You claim: “The Penetration buff absolutely compensates for the ‘loss’ of Prophecy.”
Why use a team function that's mostly dispensable to exchange for a core attribute crucial to Sorcerer's own output and survivability, especially since this attribute is also a necessary attribute for Sorcerer skills?

You've made your arguments around raid comps, thus I made mine around that. And in a 12-man group, that's not the "Sorcerer's own output and survivability"; that's everyone's.
Once more, I must reiterate, if you are in a raid group, that 6% crit is provided, and you get 2974 penetration for you to use how you want, and if you want to just ignore that even after I've repeatedly demonstrated how useful it can be, that is your call. If you are solo, that 2974 penetration results in higher damage than that 6% crit chance would have. The 6% lower crit chance would have minimal impact on your Critical Surge procs.

You are still arguing the exact same points that mathematics has already disproven. Stick with the facts.

ZhuJiuyin wrote: »

2. You then say: “Critical chance isn’t really lost—just bring a Nightblade using the Assassination skill line.”
This statement is the single biggest insult to every Sorcerer player. Why should a Sorcerer have to rely on another class to get back what was taken from them? You are using someone else's tools as a fig leaf for the Sorcerer's own stripped‑down kit. Taking what is inherently ours, then telling us “it's okay, someone else can provide it”—that isn't compensation, that is deprivation.
Basically, it's like I take money from your pocket and distribute it to others, then tell you it's "good for everyone."

You've just described Universal Basic Income, which sounds like a very good thing to me! You are also viewing a cooperative raid roster through the lens of a solo player's personal wallet.

In a coordinated trials group, there is no "my pocket" or "your pocket". It's about what each class can bring to the table, and now there are more buffs for all. A group that brings both a Nightblade and a Sorcerer can now walk away with both the 6% critical chance and the 2974 penetration. You aren't being "deprived" of anything.

And once more, if you don't want to adapt your group compositions to make use of the new buffs, that's on you for not reaping the benefits of the extra buffs being brought to the table.

ZhuJiuyin wrote: »

3. You insist: “This is still an overall improvement.”
No. As I stated repeatedly, a class's viability depends on a balance of damage output, survivability, and group utility. If you only tick one of those boxes, you are not a well‑designed class. For the Sorcerer, trading away 6% critical strike chance (An attribute with no upper limit) for a Penetration buff that is already capped in most raid environments is a net loss—both in personal DPS and in the overall feel of the class.

Damage output: Higher.
Survivability: Almost invisible.
Group utility: It's an extra buff! For sure higher.

You're still talking about raid environments, great! Then you still get that 6% crit chance because it'll be shared from a Nightblade, and you get 2974 pen, which, I can't believe I have to say again, the group composition can be adapted to for higher damage. I don't know how many times and ways I have to say "you can drop Alkosh from one of your DDs now and so they can put on Null Arca and parse higher which means the group also benefits from the faster kills".

ZhuJiuyin wrote: »

4. You argue: “You still have a choice—you don’t have to optimise around the new buffs.”
That is pure sophistry. In practice, the choice is an illusion. Compositions that previously relied on a Sorcerer without a Nightblade, or a Templar without a Dragonknight, will inevitably suffer. You cannot claim “choice” when the meta forces a specific pairing to maintain what was once baseline.

We are now talking about basic group coordination.

This is a 12-man cooperative trials roster we are talking about, not a solo arena. If a group cannot even coordinate with even one of their twelve members to swap to Nightblade (for their incredible single-target damage) or subclass Assassination onto an Arcanist (and still keep the amazing cleave damage) to keep the group optimized, then that is a breakdown in fundamental raid leading.

Every single update in the history of ESO has introduced class synergies and pairings that groups adapt to. Claiming a composition "suffers" just because you are now encouraged to coordinate with a very well-performing class is just making excuses for a refusal to adapt. And keep in mind, once adapted, it results in a buff for the group.

ZhuJiuyin wrote: »

5. Let me summarise your entire defence:

You excuse the Sorcerer's personal loss by saying “the team has a Nightblade.”

You mask the Sorcerer's individual DPS drop by pointing to “total raid damage.”

You dodge the question of design rationale by telling everyone to “adapt to change.”

If these changes were truly reasonable, I would gladly offer that 3000 Penetration to the Nightblade in exchange for the 6% critical chance that was originally the Sorcerer's own. But you know that would never happen, because this is a blatant nerf, plain and simple. All your verbose arguments are nothing but whitewash for a decision that undermines the Sorcerer's identity and effectiveness.

Let's lay this all out one more time:
1. There is no personal loss. Rather than looking for either a Sorc or NB, groups would be looking for both a Sorc and a NB. If you're talking about Sorc DDs, well, there's no change; you can't get lower than zero demand.
2. There is no individual DPS drop. The armour pen results in higher damage than the 6% crit chance would in unoptimized situations, and optimized situations would grant everyone the 6% crit chance from Nightblades.
3. You're ignoring the design rationale. Groups are getting free stats. What are you complaining about?

At the end of the day, class pride doesn't change the numbers. You can look at this emotionally or logistically, but the maths say it's a net positive.

Look, this thread is about the change to the Exploitation passive, which I've honestly found to be fine. But it genuinely sounds like your complaints are actually about Sorcerer DDs not being meta in endgame PvE, which has nothing to do with this passive.

ZhuJiuyin · August 6

HatchetHaro wrote: »

You've made your arguments around raid comps, thus I made mine around that. And in a 12-man group, that's not the "Sorcerer's own output and survivability"; that's everyone's.
Once more, I must reiterate, if you are in a raid group, that 6% crit is provided, and you get 2974 penetration for you to use how you want, and if you want to just ignore that even after I've repeatedly demonstrated how useful it can be, that is your call. If you are solo, that 2974 penetration results in higher damage than that 6% crit chance would have. The 6% lower crit chance would have minimal impact on your Critical Surge procs.

You are still arguing the exact same points that mathematics has already disproven. Stick with the facts.

Please don't lose sight of the core issue this thread was created to address: Sorcerers are bloated with overlapping and redundant abilities. I have never focused solely on group comp; I’ve repeatedly emphasized the balance between a Sorc’s damage output, survivability, and group utility. You are the only one fixated on this group buff, treating "as long as there's a Nightblade in the group, nobody loses" as a universal Band-Aid—effectively allowing NB to completely replace Sorc, which is the ultimate paradox. Are Sorcerers seriously supposed to rely on other classes just to trigger/cover their own class synergy?

Furthermore, as others have pointed out, in PvP, Crit Chance is rarely as high as you assume, and Crit also directly dictates your healing output—a crucial point you completely ignore. In actual combat—especially under the stress of mechanics, dodge rolls, re-buffing, and dynamic target swapping—damage events are never seamlessly uniform. You are relying on a math model built on flawed assumptions, completely disregarding actual combat scenarios and how abilities intertwine. Dismissing the loss of Crit Chance as merely a "0.0X second delay" on procs shows a complete disconnect from real-world PvE and PvP survivability.

HatchetHaro wrote: »

You've just described Universal Basic Income, which sounds like a very good thing to me! You are also viewing a cooperative raid roster through the lens of a solo player's personal wallet.

In a coordinated trials group, there is no "my pocket" or "your pocket". It's about what each class can bring to the table, and now there are more buffs for all. A group that brings both a Nightblade and a Sorcerer can now walk away with both the 6% critical chance and the 2974 penetration. You aren't being "deprived" of anything.

And once more, if you don't want to adapt your group compositions to make use of the new buffs, that's on you for not reaping the benefits of the extra buffs being brought to the table.

Once again, you've treated "as long as the team has Nightblade, no one will lose" as a panacea, ignoring the fact that the team could originally choose one of two options. Furthermore, you've consistently treated the 3000 penetration as a significant buff, completely disregarding the fact that current teams generally don't lack penetration, rendering the 3000 penetration useless in the current meta. Therefore, the new buff is undoubtedly a loss for Sorc.

And your claim that "there is no distinction between 'my wallet' and 'your wallet'" is also fundamentally wrong(At least not entirely correct.) ; otherwise, roster leaders wouldn't enforce strict DPS thresholds and gear checks. Cleared endgame content requires meeting individual performance standards, which encompass personal DPS, group support, and mechanical competence—a combination of individual and team-oriented strengths. Ultimately, personal performance feeds directly into team synergy.

We also don't need to pretend that class elimination rates don't depend on the fundamental fact that individual DPS caps plus irreplaceable team buffs.

sacrificing 6% Crit Chance (a universally top-tier stat that benefits the entire group) in exchange for a group Penetration buff that easily overcaps and is already abundant in organized groups. This heavily cripples Sorc's ceiling as a DPS and support. And in any situation requiring roster swaps, Sorc will be the very first class benched because both its personal output and group utility fall drastically short compared to other classes.

HatchetHaro wrote: »

Damage output: Higher.
Survivability: Almost invisible.
Group utility: It's an extra buff! For sure higher.

You're still talking about raid environments, great! Then you still get that 6% crit chance because it'll be shared from a Nightblade, and you get 2974 pen, which, I can't believe I have to say again, the group composition can be adapted to for higher damage. I don't know how many times and ways I have to say "you can drop Alkosh from one of your DDs now and so they can put on Null Arca and parse higher which means the group also benefits from the faster kills".

Here we go again, with the same old rhetoric: "As long as you have NB, you'll get a 6% critical hit rate." It's like this is your lifeline.

Here we go again, with the same old rhetoric: "as long as there's a Nightblade in the group, nobody loses" [snip]

Furthermore, based on your proposed team composition, you're essentially forcing multiple non-Arcane DPS classes to use the Velothi set, abandoning far superior Mythic gear combinations in the current version, such as Huntsman and Shattered. This results in a greater overall DPS loss than having one DPS character wear Alkosh.

HatchetHaro wrote: »

We are now talking about basic group coordination.

This is a 12-man cooperative trials roster we are talking about, not a solo arena. If a group cannot even coordinate with even one of their twelve members to swap to Nightblade (for their incredible single-target damage) or subclass Assassination onto an Arcanist (and still keep the amazing cleave damage) to keep the group optimized, then that is a breakdown in fundamental raid leading.

Every single update in the history of ESO has introduced class synergies and pairings that groups adapt to. Claiming a composition "suffers" just because you are now encouraged to coordinate with a very well-performing class is just making excuses for a refusal to adapt. And keep in mind, once adapted, it results in a buff for the group.

"If a team can't coordinate even one of its 12 members—for example, switching to Nightblade or running Arcanist with Assassination subclass... that's a fundamental flaw in team leadership."

Look at what you wrote. Just a moment ago, you claimed: "Groups always have the flexibility to make sub-optimal comp choices or trade away maximum efficiency for comfort, even in Trifecta runs." You pitched this new Penetration/Armor buff as something that frees up any class to join the raid, but now you’re demanding groups strictly optimize their DP(Mainly NB, once again, that magicalas "long as there's a Nightblade in the group, nobody loses.") through forced class swaps.

Did you notice? When you repeatedly emphasize that as long as you have NB, you can continue to get 6% crit chance, aren't you also confirming how big a nerf removing this 6% crit chance would be for Sorc?

HatchetHaro wrote: »

Let's lay this all out one more time:
1. There is no personal loss. Rather than looking for either a Sorc or NB, groups would be looking for both a Sorc and a NB. If you're talking about Sorc DDs, well, there's no change; you can't get lower than zero demand.
2. There is no individual DPS drop. The armour pen results in higher damage than the 6% crit chance would in unoptimized situations, and optimized situations would grant everyone the 6% crit chance from Nightblades.
3. You're ignoring the design rationale. Groups are getting free stats. What are you complaining about?

At the end of the day, class pride doesn't change the numbers. You can look at this emotionally or logistically, but the maths say it's a net positive.

Look, this thread is about the change to the Exploitation passive, which I've honestly found to be fine. But it genuinely sounds like your complaints are actually about Sorcerer DDs not being meta in endgame PvE, which has nothing to do with this passive.

Yes, Sorc isn't a meta DPS in raid right now, but the new changes will only make him even less likely to join a raid as a DPS. Just because he's bad now doesn't mean it's okay to make him worse?

Regardless of optimal optimization, 6% crit is always a net benefit, while penetration is not. The so-called "free" stat comes at the cost of removing the best stat; it's not free. Not to mention the new stat has a clear cap that's very easy to reach and cap in the current meta.

When potential competitors disappear (i.e. Sorc), NB completely monopolizes all group Crit buffs and single-target DPS—and that is not a zero-cost scenario. But once again, look, your argument boils down to "as long as we have a NB, everything is fine."

Mechanically and mathematically, this change is a net loss for Sorcerer. Multiple people in this thread have explained this to you.[snip].

[edited for baiting]

MSattrtand · August 6

ZhuJiuyin wrote: »

effectively allowing NB to completely replace Sorc

This won't happen. The exact opposite is happening right now and was happening before multiclassing was introduced. NB has only one group buff - Minor Savagery, which duplicates Minor Prophecy from Sorc. Pre-U46, NBs' damage was bad, so they would be used only as a healer. But it wasn't a mandatory healer, unlike Warden, so you can easily swap it for Cro/Arca, and let MK-Sorc/Sorc-Tank provide Minor Prophecy and also Major Berserk, which was kinda unique.

In this patch, NB can also provide 5% damage taken on dodge, but only as a tank and... that's it? If you're not using NB-Tank, you can drop NB out of your comp safely. You can't drop Sorc, since it can provide 6% WPD from Mastery on any role. The only other class that you can actually drop out of your comp is Cro, since Major Vuln is so accessible.

ZhuJiuyin wrote: »

Once again, you've treated "as long as the team has Nightblade, no one will lose" as a panacea, ignoring the fact that the team could originally choose one of two options.

If some groups decide to drop some class, that's their choice. As I said, NB and Cro are already first candidates for elimination, not the Sorc - the fact that they are the best parse DDs saves them. If group decides to drop Sorc for some reason, they'll lose 6% WPD and better Major Berserk uptime. Group may decide to drop Warden and lose Major Resolve, Brittle, Heroism and Minor Toughness - they can play suboptimally if they want.

ZhuJiuyin wrote: »

completely disregarding the fact that current teams generally don't lack penetration

Teams generally DO lack penetration. DDs in group finder pugs mostly run Medium Armour while having no pen sets in group. Even in a properly optimised group with Alkosh, non-Arca/Cro DDs are barely over the pen cap - every time some debuff falls off, they are losing damage. E. g. Falgravn with solo-tank. You have only one Crusher; that means that DDs are underpenning on Njordal, two out of three big vampires when you drop on the second floor, coagulants during the corresponding mech on the second floor, and torturers on the third floor. You DO gain DPS with this new passive that grants penetration even if you make zero changes in your builds. Yes, you'll be losing DPS on Falgravn himself if you decide to drop NB out of the group for some reason, but, well, don't do that if you care about optimising damage output? Same as you won't drop Sorc for no reason.

ZhuJiuyin wrote: »

6% crit is always a net benefit, while penetration is not

It's not a net benefit if you're sourcing it from NB. If you're not overpenning on literally every mob, penetration is a net benefit. If you do overpen on every mob, then change armour weights/support sets and gain more damage.

ceruulean · August 6

Ok, even if people argue that unique penetration buff is a net benefit, that's just increasing the powercreep and giving 12-man groups more stats and power while 4-man comps lose power. Content has already been trivialized with the amount of free stats from class masteries. Why do we need more? Is it healthy for the game?

HatchetHaro · August 7

ceruulean wrote: »

Ok, even if people argue that unique penetration buff is a net benefit, that's just increasing the powercreep and giving 12-man groups more stats and power while 4-man comps lose power. Content has already been trivialized with the amount of free stats from class masteries. Why do we need more? Is it healthy for the game?

It's even more relevant in 4-man comps! 4-man groups have half the room on the supports for set and class synergy, which means they can always find a way to make use of that Pen without going over cap, like dropping Crimson Oath or Tremorscale for one of the many other useful sets such as Lucent Echoes, Xoryn, Powerful Assault, Archdruid Devyric, Baron Zaudrus. And, as established, that Pen is more damage.

Besides, you're also not going to find nearly as many people agonizing over dungeon optimization than trial comps. There's no scoring in dungeons anyways, and the trifectas there are significantly faster to get due to having fewer players in a group, and fewer moving parts means fewer points of failure.

Power creep is another discussion entirely, so I'll keep this part brief. I do think it is somewhat of an issue, with the fault lying mainly with class masteries being a bit overtuned right now. But also, power creep in video games is only natural: with players getting more experienced, new content, and balancing changes, there will always be a meta to strive towards. It's not necessarily bad. Older content becomes more accessible while newer content (is supposed to) offer new challenges, and I am happy to be able to give the more-casual players in my core team the thrilling trifecta-pushing experience (not the BRP achievement) I've enjoyed for so long.

Pinktraining · August 7

ceruulean wrote: »

Ok, even if people argue that unique penetration buff is a net benefit, that's just increasing the powercreep and giving 12-man groups more stats and power while 4-man comps lose power. Content has already been trivialized with the amount of free stats from class masteries. Why do we need more? Is it healthy for the game?

I don't think it will cause numerical inflation. After all, inflation is based on increases, not decreases, and 3000 armor and penetration are essentially a nerf, not a buff. Aside from a few people who are unwilling to admit it for unknown reasons, most well-known streamers and players oppose this change. As others have said elsewhere, "why exchanging power that was better overall and everywhere, and for every build, to gain a situational powerup in an extremely niche setting that we wouldn't be in often and a majority of players won't be in?"

Renato90085 · August 7

maybe a bit subjective.
but in the past 4-5years
nb dps cap low than sorc
sorc have 2 synergy(atro/spalsh) and 2 buff(crit/ Berserk) can give group,nb have 0 synergy and 1 buff(crit)
and in hybridization,the 2 crit passive is same buff for dk/arc,so every group should only run a nb healer or a mk sorc
and sorc Bound Armaments got Major Prophecy/Savagery in last year U47..
few years before U47 sorc must use Essence of Weapon Power Potion,but potion not hybridization yet
so if group not have nb dps/healer,the meta stam sorc unable to gain his Minor Prophecy passive while sacrificing his dps(only 2 way is swap to magic sorc or give up 1 pet to run expert hunter) and there 2 way both is dps big loss too
in nb/necro meta the Minor Savagery very easy to got ,the group run sorc only one reason :calculated defense
This is also why I don't think it's a nerf.
Because you basically don't get to enjoy your crit passive in any pve content most years..

HatchetHaro · August 7

Pinktraining wrote: »

ceruulean wrote: »

Ok, even if people argue that unique penetration buff is a net benefit, that's just increasing the powercreep and giving 12-man groups more stats and power while 4-man comps lose power. Content has already been trivialized with the amount of free stats from class masteries. Why do we need more? Is it healthy for the game?

I don't think it will cause numerical inflation. After all, inflation is based on increases, not decreases, and 3000 armor and penetration are essentially a nerf, not a buff. Aside from a few people who are unwilling to admit it for unknown reasons, most well-known streamers and players oppose this change. As others have said elsewhere, "why exchanging power that was better overall and everywhere, and for every build, to gain a situational powerup in an extremely niche setting that we wouldn't be in often and a majority of players won't be in?"

I don't know which well-known streamers and players you are mentioning, but the well-known streamers and players I know, all of whom are good at the game, are fine with this change.

You see how that argument gets us nowhere?

But hey, since my reasons are still "unknown" to you, I can make my thought processes very easy to understand. Let's start with the PvE side of things.

To calculate the damage gain 2974 armour penetration would grant on a target, we will need to calculate:

mitigation per point of armor = max mitigation / max resistances
damage before penetration = 1 - (armour * mitigation per point of armour)
damage after penetration = 1 - ((armour - penetration) * mitigation per point of armour)
damage gain = (damage after penetration / damage before penetration) - 1

Every NPC has a cap of 25000 resistances, which results in a 50% damage mitigation. Every enemy in grouped instances has 18200 armour, which is our actual target penetration goal, and any penetration above that amount would result in no damage increase.

(Keep in mind, group compositions and sets are always flexible, and can easily be rearranged to make the best use of the new stat, such as taking Alkosh off your jail DD and letting them use other sets like Null Arca. or jail them in Morag Tong that's fine too whatever you want)

Using that, we get this graph, and the threshold where the 2974 would be at maximum effectiveness after all other penetration is applied would be at 15226 penetration, with the additional penetration granting a 6.32% damage increase.

This value is also corroborated with Hyperioxes' Penetration Calculator.

Note: This is just when we're trying to push for optimal Pen; if the base Pen is lower, the 2974 Pen would be far more valuable.

With this, we can also find out at which point the 6% crit chance from Minor Prophecy would match the 6.32% damage increase value from the 2974 Pen.

To do that, we must first also calculate the overall damage gain that 6% crit chance would grant:

damage before prophecy = (base damage * (1 - crit chance)) + (base damage * crit chance * (1 + crit damage))
damage after prophecy = (base damage * (1 - (crit chance + prophecy))) + (base damage * (crit chance + prophecy) * (1 + crit damage))
damage gain = (damage after prophecy / damage before prophecy) - 1
    since the base damage can be factored out (and also because it can just be any arbitrary number since we're looking for percentage differences here):
damage gain = (1 - (crit chance + prophecy) + ((crit chance + prophecy) * (1 + crit damage))) / (1 - (crit chance) + ((crit chance) * (1 + crit damage))) - 1

So, for the Minor Prophecy to match and surpass the 6.32% damage increase from the 2974 Pen, your crit chance before Prophecy must be at 14.9% or lower, only 4.9% crit chance above the base 10%. Any more, and the damage gain from Minor Prophecy is no longer better than the damage gain from 2974 Pen. I don't know anyone with critical chance that low in PvE, and at that point, they have way bigger issues than "oh nooo my 6% crit chance has been taken away", issues like "oh nooo Mannimarco is taking over Tamriel and I have to stop him!".

And keep in mind, in an optimized raid setting, you'll still be able to retain that 6% crit chance with minimal effort.

Hey, let's also move onto the PvP side.

Now, I have missed out earlier on the fact that player resistance caps are higher than NPCs at 33000, and therefore the 2974 Penetration buff will not be as strong as it is against NPCs.

Using the same calculations above with the new values, we end up with this, where the 2974 Pen would result in a minimum of a 4.72% damage increase without going above the target Pen.

(That target Pen is set to 27229 because that is the amount of resistances my DK bruiser build has when all buffed up, but it actually doesn't matter here; the point is, it is a minimum of 4.72% before dropping off)

I would like to apologize for that blunder, but I don't have to, because turns out, players have critical resistances!
Here's how critical resistances work:

crit mitigation % = critical resistance / player level(66)
final critical damage taken = base damage + critical damage - crit mitigation

For example, with a player's +50% crit damage and their enemy's base 1320 crit resistance, every critical strike would just deal 1.3x damage:

crit mitigation % = 1320/66 = 20
final critical damage taken = 100% + 50% - 20% = 130% = 1.3

Using that formula and the above graph for crit chance, we can also find out at which point Minor Prophecy would match the 4.72% from the 2974 Pen.

Let us assume a few things:
1. The Sorcerer attacker is able to reliably source Minor Force, is wearing the Monomyth Reforged Mythic (for Major Force), has 1 piece of medium armour, and is a Khajiit, resulting in +94% critical damage
2. The target has 3 pieces of Impenetrable gear, granting them a total of 1320 + 132 * 3 = 1716 critical resistance

Uh oh. At even the very lowest base of 10% crit chance, Minor Prophecy only grants a total of 3.82% overall damage increase, far lower than the 4.72% from the Penetration.

It takes changing the build to have 2 axes and 4 pieces of medium armour to bump the critical damage up to +112% to even just have the no crit buff situation match the damage buff from the Pen.

Before you ask about crit burst windows, they don't matter. Crit is unpredictable RNG, and if you could control when you crit (like with Critical Rush or Mechanical Acuity), you never needed the Minor Prophecy in the first place.

Look, just so I'm not accused of not giving every side a fair shake, here are a few instances where this Exploitation change would be a nerf in any capacity:
1. You're a Sorcerer healer with no Nightblade in the group.
2. Your raid group refuses to make one simple class change.
3. You're running Onslaught in PvP. And I can count on one hand, with four fingers amputated, the number of times I've been hit with Onslaught over the past few months of Battlegrounds.
4. You're using Lamp Knight's Art, which is its own problem.

So, there's that. How's that for "unknown reasons"? I did the research, did the calculations, made the graphs, and brought the receipts. This is irrefutable proof that this Exploitation change is a buff in almost every way.

If you have questions about the formulas, ask away. If you're still on the fence and want to see more situations, show me your build or comp and ask away (or just copy the Desmos formulas yourself, they're right there). Otherwise, the math speaks for itself.

Pinktraining · August 7

HatchetHaro wrote: »
Pinktraining wrote: »

ceruulean wrote: »

Ok, even if people argue that unique penetration buff is a net benefit, that's just increasing the powercreep and giving 12-man groups more stats and power while 4-man comps lose power. Content has already been trivialized with the amount of free stats from class masteries. Why do we need more? Is it healthy for the game?

I don't think it will cause numerical inflation. After all, inflation is based on increases, not decreases, and 3000 armor and penetration are essentially a nerf, not a buff. Aside from a few people who are unwilling to admit it for unknown reasons, most well-known streamers and players oppose this change. As others have said elsewhere, "why exchanging power that was better overall and everywhere, and for every build, to gain a situational powerup in an extremely niche setting that we wouldn't be in often and a majority of players won't be in?"

I don't know which well-known streamers and players you are mentioning, but the well-known streamers and players I know, all of whom are good at the game, are fine with this change.

You see how that argument gets us nowhere?

But hey, since my reasons are still "unknown" to you, I can make my thought processes very easy to understand. Let's start with the PvE side of things.

To calculate the damage gain 2974 armour penetration would grant on a target, we will need to calculate:
mitigation per point of armor = max mitigation / max resistances
damage before penetration = 1 - (armour * mitigation per point of armour)
damage after penetration = 1 - ((armour - penetration) * mitigation per point of armour)
damage gain = (damage after penetration / damage before penetration) - 1
Every NPC has a cap of 25000 resistances, which results in a 50% damage mitigation. Every enemy in grouped instances has 18200 armour, which is our actual target penetration goal, and any penetration above that amount would result in no damage increase.

Using that, we get this graph, and the threshold where the 2974 would be at maximum effectiveness after all other penetration is applied would be at 15226 penetration, with the additional penetration granting a 6.32% damage increase.

This value is also corroborated with Hyperioxes' Penetration Calculator.

(Keep in mind, group compositions and sets are always flexible, and can easily be rearranged to make the best use of the new stat, such as taking Alkosh off your jail DD and letting them use other sets like Null Arca. or jail them in Morag Tong that's fine too whatever you want)

With this, we can also find out at which point the 6% crit chance from Minor Prophecy would match the 6.32% damage increase value from the 2974 Pen.

To do that, we must first also calculate the overall damage gain that 6% crit chance would grant:
damage before prophecy = (base damage * (1 - crit chance)) + (base damage * crit chance * (1 + crit damage))
damage after prophecy = (base damage * (1 - (crit chance + prophecy))) + (base damage * (crit chance + prophecy) * (1 + crit damage))
damage gain = (damage after prophecy / damage before prophecy) - 1
    since the base damage can be factored out (and also because it can just be any arbitrary number since we're looking for percentage differences here):
damage gain = (1 - (crit chance + prophecy) + ((crit chance + prophecy) * (1 + crit damage))) / (1 - (crit chance) + ((crit chance) * (1 + crit damage))) - 1
So, for the Minor Prophecy to match and surpass the 6.32% damage increase from the 2974 Pen, your crit chance before Prophecy must be at 14.9% or lower, only 4.9% crit chance above the base 10%. Any more, and the damage gain from Minor Prophecy is no longer better than the damage gain from 2974 Pen. I don't know anyone with critical chance that low in PvE, and at that point, they have way bigger issues than "oh nooo my 6% crit chance has been taken away", issues like "oh nooo Mannimarco is taking over Tamriel and I have to stop him!".

And keep in mind, in an optimized raid setting, you'll still be able to retain that 6% crit chance with minimal effort.

Hey, let's also move onto the PvP side.

Now, I have missed out earlier on the fact that player resistance caps are higher than NPCs at 33000, and therefore the 2974 Penetration buff will not be as strong as it is against NPCs.

Using the same calculations above with the new values, we end up with this, where the 2974 Pen would result in a minimum of a 4.72% damage increase without going above the target Pen.

(That target Pen is set to 27229 because that is the amount of resistances my DK bruiser build has when all buffed up, but it actually doesn't matter here; the point is, it is a minimum of 4.72% before dropping off)

I would like to apologize for that blunder, but I don't have to, because turns out, players have critical resistances!
Here's how critical resistances work:
crit mitigation % = critical resistance / player level(66)
final critical damage taken = base damage + critical damage - crit mitigation
For example, with a player's +50% crit damage and their enemy's base 1320 crit resistance, every critical strike would just deal 1.3x damage:
crit mitigation % = 1320/66 = 20
final critical damage taken = 100% + 50% - 20% = 130% = 1.3
Using that formula and the above graph for crit chance, we can also find out at which point Minor Prophecy would match the 4.72% from the 2974 Pen.

Let us assume a few things:
1. The Sorcerer attacker is able to reliably source Minor Force, is wearing the Monomyth Reforged Mythic (for Major Force), has 1 piece of medium armour, and is a Khajiit, resulting in +94% critical damage
2. The target has 3 pieces of Impenetrable gear, granting them a total of 1320 + 132 * 3 = 1716 critical resistance

Uh oh. At even the very lowest base of 10% crit chance, Minor Prophecy only grants a total of 3.82% overall damage increase, far lower than the 4.72% from the Penetration.

It takes changing the build to have 2 axes and 4 pieces of medium armour to bump the critical damage up to +112% to even just have the no crit buff situation match the damage buff from the Pen.

Before you ask about crit burst windows, they don't matter. Crit is unpredictable RNG, and if you could control when you crit (like with Critical Rush or Mechanical Acuity), you never needed the Minor Prophecy in the first place.

Look, just so I'm not being accused of not giving everything a fair shake, here are a few instances where this Exploitation change would be a nerf in any capacity:
1. You're a Sorcerer healer with no Nightblade in the group.
2. Your raid group refuses to make one simple class change.
3. You're running Onslaught in PvP. And I can count on one hand, with four fingers amputated, the number of times I've been hit with Onslaught over the past few months of Battlegrounds.
4. You're using Lamp Knight's Art, which is its own problem.

So, there's that. How's that for "unknown reasons"? I did the research, did the calculations, made the graphs, and brought the receipts. This is irrefutable proof that this Exploitation change is a buff in almost every way.

If you have questions about the formulas, ask away. If you're still on the fence and want to see more situations, show me your build or comp and ask away (or just copy the Desmos formulas yourself, they're right there). Otherwise, the math speaks for itself.

Here again, even after countless people have explained to you that your theory is based on a flawed premise, you still insist on the so-called 6.3% damage theory.

While I admire your charts, you essentially avoid addressing many points that have been repeatedly mentioned:

1. In 4/12 raids without NB, the lack of 6% critical directly impacts the entire team's DPS.

2. In optimized raids with maxed pen, pen is completely overflowing, resulting in 0% benefit, while the original 6% critical still provides a stable contribution.

3. Crit affects Sorc-class healing skills and also affects survivability, set proc, etc.

4. You ignore the fact that Sorc, as a DPS (though not mainstream, we can still see it in logs), faces stricter limitations, and assume that the team will voluntarily sacrifice using a better Mythic (according to your plan) to retain Sorc, rather than directly replacing it with Nightblade.

This is essentially a typical "closed laboratory model"—ignoring pen overflow, assuming the team can unconditionally change the entire setup for a single class, excluding skill mechanic synergies, etc. However, in the real game ecosystem, this assumption is extremely unrealistic. In actual combat, pen is a binary state of "either useful or useless," but crit is a stable benefit—this is the most fundamental difference between the two.

If we all agree that More damage = Faster fights = Fewer mechanics = Fewer chances to die = Fewer deaths = More damage, then we shouldn't ignore the 6% critical loss and assume the team is still lacking a pen. Moreover, there are better ways to provide unique buffs than pen/armor, such as WW's 6% damage.

For Sorc (or Templ), a better unique team buff would be (for example) 1. Increase your and your team members' light/heavy attack damage by 20%, or bless your and your team members' weapons so that each time a class skill deals damage, it adds an extra 1500 magic damage.

See, isn't such a unique buff more meaningful than pen or armor?

HatchetHaro · August 7

Pinktraining wrote: »

Here again, even after countless people have explained to you that your theory is based on a flawed premise, you still insist on the so-called 6.3% damage theory.

My guy, I'm simply giving you the reason why I think it's a buff (since you said it was "unknown") and I backed it up with cold hard mathematics.

It's not "theory"; it's literally how the game calculates damage. There's no flawed premise here. You didn't address my calculations, and went straight for the "flawed premise" excuse, all just because it's easier to ignore the graphs and not argue against those, which is by design. Thanks for proving that mathematics is irrefutable!

Pinktraining wrote: »

While I admire your charts, you essentially avoid addressing many points that have been repeatedly mentioned:

1. In 4/12 raids without NB, the lack of 6% critical directly impacts the entire team's DPS.

In raids without a Sorc, the lack of 2974 Pen directly impacts the entire team's DPS by forcing an Alkosh or Crimson Oath requirement. See, this works the other way too!

I mean, not bringing a Sorc into a group means you miss out on Calculated Defense. Not bringing a DK means you miss out on Heat Shock. Not bringing a Warden means you miss out on group Minor Toughness and Major Heroism. These all directly impact the entire team's DPS and survivability. It's all about making meaningful choices and weighing your options when forming a group, and making sure these puzzle pieces all fit within a group composition the team is happy with.

Pinktraining wrote: »

2. In optimized raids with maxed pen, pen is completely overflowing, resulting in 0% benefit, while the original 6% critical still provides a stable contribution.

It's free group penetration that buys you extra room in your limited item-set-budget in the raid comp. You gain that benefit by making good use of that extra pen budget, dropping certain pen-focused sets, and replacing them with other group utility or damage sets.

Pinktraining wrote: »

3. Crit affects Sorc-class healing skills and also affects survivability, set proc, etc.

Yes! I addressed this! Read my whole post! Conveniently ignoring parts of my posts and hyper-focusing on your idea of what my premise is and arguing against that is simply not constructive.

Pinktraining wrote: »

4. You ignore the fact that Sorc, as a DPS (though not mainstream, we can still see it in logs), faces stricter limitations,

I've actively acknowledged, many times, that Sorcerer DPS aren't sought-after in endgame raids. I haven't provided the reason why they aren't really sought-after, so here it is: they don't have as much cleave damage as Arcanists and Necromancers, and they don't have as much single-target damage as Nightblades. I have acknowledged that as an overall balance issue, irrelevant to the Exploitation passive change.

Pinktraining wrote: »

and assume that the team will voluntarily sacrifice using a better Mythic (according to your plan) to retain Sorc, rather than directly replacing it with Nightblade.

There are many ways to make that change to retain a Sorcerer for the buff, and switching DDs to Velothi is only one of them, which I had also specified as a possible change for fights with heavy-cleave. Just because I only gave one example does not mean it is the only way to do so.

Viable changes will always depend on the trial, fight, and strats the group wants to use.

Is keeping a Sorcerer DD going to be an optimal change? Naw, Sorcerers just aren't as good as Nightblades when it comes to single-target damage, and most groups would opt for a Sorcerer tank (see above point about my acknowledgement that this is a balancing issue irrelevant to the Exploitation passive change). But you're also going to get more damage out of keeping a Sorcerer DD and bringing a Nightblade or Assassination-subclassed DD, rather than just going for one of them.

Pinktraining wrote: »

This is essentially a typical "closed laboratory model"—ignoring pen overflow, assuming the team can unconditionally change the entire setup for a single class, excluding skill mechanic synergies, etc. However, in the real game ecosystem, this assumption is extremely unrealistic. In actual combat, pen is a binary state of "either useful or useless," but crit is a stable benefit—this is the most fundamental difference between the two.

Correction: Penetration is not a "binary state of either useful or useless". The overpen amount on an enemy is useless, sure, but that doesn't include all enemies. For example: Infused Crusher can only be applied to one enemy at a time, which means any "extra" Pen is still useful to all other enemies in the fight. Another example: there could be situations where existing Penetration sources can fall off, such as a lack of experience with Alkosh synergy-juggling (they're trying their best; let them practice!); in those situations, any "extra" Pen instantly becomes a useful buffer to bridge those gaps and make up some of the lost damage.

My own team just got this today, by the way, on a comp I made and tweaked over time from group feedback. How's that for "actual combat"?

Pinktraining wrote: »

If we all agree that More damage = Faster fights = Fewer mechanics = Fewer chances to die = Fewer deaths = More damage, then we shouldn't ignore the 6% critical loss and assume the team is still lacking a pen. Moreover, there are better ways to provide unique buffs than pen/armor, such as WW's 6% damage.

That's my favourite line! See, you do read my posts after all! I'm flattered!

The critical loss is only if you don't bring a Nightblade into the team. Bring a Nightblade = no 6% critical loss. Bring a Sorcerer = new Penetration = no need for Alkosh = less jail = more parse = more damage. Oh, also, Nightblade already = more damage, because Nightblade damage go brrrrrrr.

Pinktraining wrote: »

For Sorc (or Templ), a better unique team buff would be (for example) 1. Increase your and your team members' light/heavy attack damage by 20%, or bless your and your team members' weapons so that each time a class skill deals damage, it adds an extra 1500 magic damage.

Finally! I love seeing some actual suggestions!

Small pushback, those are some wild numbers. On first blush, I'd bring those down to like 5-10% (Heavy Attack builds are plenty strong, they don't need a buff) and 150 magic damage (it's a passive, can't be doing more than Heat Shock which DKs have to actively keep up), respectively. Thematically cool, for sure.

Pinktraining wrote: »

See, isn't such a unique buff more meaningful than pen or armor?

Isn't it nice to pitch tangible alternatives rather than just looping complaints about a change that people keep misunderstanding?

Listen, I'm fine with the changes in the current PTS iteration; the complaints about them are far overblown. I'm also fine with your suggestions, given that the numbers are toned down by like a lot.

The bad-faith doomposting over misinformed values is genuinely tiring. All I'm doing is offering a reality check, and if that can keep people informed and convince them to pivot away from the unconstructive negativity to making useful suggestions, I'm happy.

Pinktraining · August 7

HatchetHaro wrote: »

Pinktraining wrote: »

Here again, even after countless people have explained to you that your theory is based on a flawed premise, you still insist on the so-called 6.3% damage theory.

My guy, I'm simply giving you the reason why I think it's a buff (since you said it was "unknown") and I backed it up with cold hard mathematics.

It's not "theory"; it's literally how the game calculates damage. There's no flawed premise here. You didn't address my calculations, and went straight for the "flawed premise" excuse, all just because it's easier to ignore the graphs and not argue against those, which is by design. Thanks for proving that mathematics is irrefutable!

Pinktraining wrote: »

While I admire your charts, you essentially avoid addressing many points that have been repeatedly mentioned:

1. In 4/12 raids without NB, the lack of 6% critical directly impacts the entire team's DPS.

In raids without a Sorc, the lack of 2974 Pen directly impacts the entire team's DPS by forcing an Alkosh or Crimson Oath requirement. See, this works the other way too!

I mean, not bringing a Sorc into a group means you miss out on Calculated Defense. Not bringing a DK means you miss out on Heat Shock. Not bringing a Warden means you miss out on group Minor Toughness and Major Heroism. These all directly impact the entire team's DPS and survivability. It's all about making meaningful choices and weighing your options when forming a group, and making sure these puzzle pieces all fit within a group composition the team is happy with.

Pinktraining wrote: »

2. In optimized raids with maxed pen, pen is completely overflowing, resulting in 0% benefit, while the original 6% critical still provides a stable contribution.

It's free group penetration that buys you extra room in your limited item-set-budget in the raid comp. You gain that benefit by making good use of that extra pen budget, dropping certain pen-focused sets, and replacing them with other group utility or damage sets.

Pinktraining wrote: »

3. Crit affects Sorc-class healing skills and also affects survivability, set proc, etc.

Yes! I addressed this! Read my whole post! Conveniently ignoring parts of my posts and hyper-focusing on your idea of what my premise is and arguing against that is simply not constructive.

Pinktraining wrote: »

4. You ignore the fact that Sorc, as a DPS (though not mainstream, we can still see it in logs), faces stricter limitations,

I've actively acknowledged, many times, that Sorcerer DPS aren't sought-after in endgame raids. I haven't provided the reason why they aren't really sought-after, so here it is: they don't have as much cleave damage as Arcanists and Necromancers, and they don't have as much single-target damage as Nightblades. I have acknowledged that as an overall balance issue, irrelevant to the Exploitation passive change.

Pinktraining wrote: »

and assume that the team will voluntarily sacrifice using a better Mythic (according to your plan) to retain Sorc, rather than directly replacing it with Nightblade.

There are many ways to make that change to retain a Sorcerer for the buff, and switching DDs to Velothi is only one of them, which I had also specified as a possible change for fights with heavy-cleave. Just because I only gave one example does not mean it is the only way to do so.

Viable changes will always depend on the trial, fight, and strats the group wants to use.

Is keeping a Sorcerer DD going to be an optimal change? Naw, Sorcerers just aren't as good as Nightblades when it comes to single-target damage, and most groups would opt for a Sorcerer tank (see above point about my acknowledgement that this is a balancing issue irrelevant to the Exploitation passive change). But you're also going to get more damage out of keeping a Sorcerer DD and bringing a Nightblade or Assassination-subclassed DD, rather than just going for one of them.

Pinktraining wrote: »

This is essentially a typical "closed laboratory model"—ignoring pen overflow, assuming the team can unconditionally change the entire setup for a single class, excluding skill mechanic synergies, etc. However, in the real game ecosystem, this assumption is extremely unrealistic. In actual combat, pen is a binary state of "either useful or useless," but crit is a stable benefit—this is the most fundamental difference between the two.

Correction: Penetration is not a "binary state of either useful or useless". The overpen amount on an enemy is useless, sure, but that doesn't include all enemies. For example: Infused Crusher can only be applied to one enemy at a time, which means any "extra" Pen is still useful to all other enemies in the fight. Another example: there could be situations where existing Penetration sources can fall off, such as a lack of experience with Alkosh synergy-juggling (they're trying their best; let them practice!); in those situations, any "extra" Pen instantly becomes a useful buffer to bridge those gaps and make up some of the lost damage.

My own team just got this today, by the way, on a comp I made and tweaked over time from group feedback. How's that for "actual combat"?

Pinktraining wrote: »

If we all agree that More damage = Faster fights = Fewer mechanics = Fewer chances to die = Fewer deaths = More damage, then we shouldn't ignore the 6% critical loss and assume the team is still lacking a pen. Moreover, there are better ways to provide unique buffs than pen/armor, such as WW's 6% damage.

That's my favourite line! See, you do read my posts after all! I'm flattered!

The critical loss is only if you don't bring a Nightblade into the team. Bring a Nightblade = no 6% critical loss. Bring a Sorcerer = new Penetration = no need for Alkosh = less jail = more parse = more damage. Oh, also, Nightblade already = more damage, because Nightblade damage go brrrrrrr.

Pinktraining wrote: »

For Sorc (or Templ), a better unique team buff would be (for example) 1. Increase your and your team members' light/heavy attack damage by 20%, or bless your and your team members' weapons so that each time a class skill deals damage, it adds an extra 1500 magic damage.

Finally! I love seeing some actual suggestions!

Small pushback, those are some wild numbers. On first blush, I'd bring those down to like 5-10% (Heavy Attack builds are plenty strong, they don't need a buff) and 150 magic damage (it's a passive, can't be doing more than Heat Shock which DKs have to actively keep up), respectively. Thematically cool, for sure.

Pinktraining wrote: »

See, isn't such a unique buff more meaningful than pen or armor?

Isn't it nice to pitch tangible alternatives rather than just looping complaints about a change that people keep misunderstanding?

Listen, I'm fine with the changes in the current PTS iteration; the complaints about them are far overblown. I'm also fine with your suggestions, given that the numbers are toned down by like a lot.

The bad-faith doomposting over misinformed values is genuinely tiring. All I'm doing is offering a reality check, and if that can keep people informed and convince them to pivot away from the unconstructive negativity to making useful suggestions, I'm happy.

There's no need to be so hostile. If you calm down, you'll realize that no one is refuting your table or questioning the math. The problem is that your assumptions are too heavily biased towards simulated environments rather than current realities.

As others have pointed out, real combat and simulations can be vastly different. For example, you argued that a light attack + BA combo can deal 5 hits of damage, using this as a basis for calculating Power Surge's healing opportunities. However, Bound Armaments have prerequisites and cannot be considered effective spam (compared to Force Shock).

"In raids without warlocks, the lack of 2974 penetration directly impacts the entire raid's DPS because it forces the raid to use Alkosh or Crimson." "It's free group penetration." Similarly, this is another point where you and others disagree, because your premise is that the raid doesn't have a full pen, but the reality is the opposite; current raids have sufficient pen. Furthermore, even using Alkosh or Crimson might not result in a DPS loss greater than the change in raid composition due to incorporating this 2974 penetration. Therefore, the so-called free benefit doesn't necessarily work. Exchanging a guaranteed-to-work attribute for a potentially ineffective one clearly, it cant call a buff to that class.

Furthermore, frankly, I haven't seen what you call "bad-faith doomposting ." Everyone here is trying to offer suggestions for balancing Sorc. There are certainly complaints, but they are far from your claim of "bad-faith doomposting ." Many people even offered suggestions for improvement at the very beginning of the PTS.

MSattrtand · August 7

Pinktraining wrote: »

your premise is that the raid doesn't have a full pen, but the reality is the opposite; current raids have sufficient pen

Current raids do not have sufficient pen on all targets 100% of the time in every pull. Some examples from real logs. They belong to the same static group.

Vrol HM:

Bahsei HM:

Taleria HM:

Note: this is penetration on the main boss. In all of those fights, they had only two Crushers. That means that the whole group are guaranteed to underpen on some mobs if they are more than two.

A group with experienced tanks and an experienced ZenKosh will still benefit from Sorc's pen. They need to make no changes to their group comp, since they already have a Sorc Tank or Sorc DD, to do more damage. They already have NB Tank or NB DD, so they won't lose any damage because Sorc won't be able to provide Minor Prophecy.

And my GF PUG Vrol HM:

Well, no Alkosh in GF groups. As expected. We had only Sorc, no NB. We had effective 122% Crit Damage, 59% Crit Chance and 14504 Pen. If our Sorc provided 2974 Pen instead of 6% Crit Chance, we'd have 122% Crit Damage, 53% Crit Chance and 17478 Pen. Let's substitute these numbers into the damage calculator:

Well, that's almost a 1.9% damage increase. As expected, that would be a buff for a typical PUG.

HatchetHaro · August 7

Pinktraining wrote: »

There's no need to be so hostile. If you calm down, you'll realize that no one is refuting your table or questioning the math.

I don't see the hostility, but I am watching you actively ignore or twist points I've made. But okay, whatever floats your boat.

Pinktraining wrote: »

The problem is that your assumptions are too heavily biased towards simulated environments rather than current realities.

Current realities? Everything I've said has been based on years of running and raid leading trial trifectas. Don't you worry, I'm pulling from real experience.

Pinktraining wrote: »

As others have pointed out, real combat and simulations can be vastly different. For example, you argued that a light attack + BA combo can deal 5 hits of damage, using this as a basis for calculating Power Surge's healing opportunities. However, Bound Armaments have prerequisites and cannot be considered effective spam (compared to Force Shock).

I actually never called Bound Armaments a "spammable". All I did was use a 5-hit GCD window as a statistical example to calculate the probability of triggering Critical Surge's 1-second internal cooldown.

There are many other ways to register multiple simultaneous damage events in a single GCD window. Any combination of light attacks, active DoTs, status effects, set bonuses, delayed procs, and multi-hit abilities can happen in the course of a fight.

My post also calculated a 3-hit scenario right alongside the 5-hit one to show the difference in Crit Surge's heal proc delay across different combat frequencies. Neither scenario was presented as a rigid rotation. Framing them as such is just misinterpretation.

At this point, nothing short of a live call-by-call replay of a full PvP duel and all of the damage events and frequency fluctuations would satisfy you. I think I did just fine by offering two general realistic scenarios. For your reference, you can re-read my post on that, and you'll find that there's no mention of "spam" or "spammable" in there.

Pinktraining wrote: »

"In raids without warlocks, the lack of 2974 penetration directly impacts the entire raid's DPS because it forces the raid to use Alkosh or Crimson." "It's free group penetration." Similarly, this is another point where you and others disagree, because your premise is that the raid doesn't have a full pen, but the reality is the opposite; current raids have sufficient pen.

This is another case of misinterpreting my premise. My premise isn't that "the raid doesn't have full pen"; it's that raid groups currently reach full pen by spending a set on it, and with the new changes, depending on the comp, they can save on that set.

Don't know where "warlocks" come in here, but if we're talking about D&D, I'd love to have Lokkestiiz as my patron.

Pinktraining wrote: »

Furthermore, even using Alkosh or Crimson might not result in a DPS loss greater than the change in raid composition due to incorporating this 2974 penetration. Therefore, the so-called free benefit doesn't necessarily work. Exchanging a guaranteed-to-work attribute for a potentially ineffective one clearly, it cant call a buff to that class.

Sorcerer tanks and Nightblade DDs are literally part of the meta right now. That is zero change in raid composition.

Hey, look, if you don't want to change your composition for reasons beyond my comprehension, you do you. I'm not here to dictate what your group does. There's loads of people who will gladly take any damage boost they can get.

Pinktraining wrote: »

Furthermore, frankly, I haven't seen what you call "bad-faith doomposting ." Everyone here is trying to offer suggestions for balancing Sorc. There are certainly complaints, but they are far from your claim of "bad-faith doomposting ." Many people even offered suggestions for improvement at the very beginning of the PTS.

Misinterpreting basic group build mechanics just to argue against me on points I've never made speaks for itself. The math and actual raid utility are clear for anyone actually interested in working with this change. Feel free to structure your groups however you prefer.

Savagejack · August 7

Sorc also has 6 sustain passives for whatever reason.

SonOfAsura · August 8

3000 Pen is not gonna replace Alkosh.

3000 Pen is nothing for optimized raid groups. It can be useful only for PUGs, nothing more.

Don’t tell me about Tremorscale and Crimson Set. They have a cooldown, and you can only use them in Asylum Sanctorium, nothing more.

You still need Alkosh for every trash fight in raids. You still need Alkosh where bosses or elite side adds come one by one.

Runic Sunder and Crystal Weapon are another hilarious thing. There is no way you’re putting Crystal Weapon on a Sorc DD or bringing an Arcanist tank.

SonOfAsura · August 8

It could be unique 10% critical damage done or 5% damage done rather than 2974 pen

Umbracat449 · August 10

I'm just reading a human, hachet, vs Ai posts, from pink.

aLi3nZ · August 11

Turtle_Bot wrote: »

aLi3nZ wrote: »

For PvP seems ok. Just use precise staff instead of sharpened.

I explained this earlier, but making this change is a net nerf for PvP. Sharpened has also not been a top tier trait for a while due to everyone using percent mitigations instead of armor because of Corrosive and Onslaught making armor a very mediocre mitigation stat, also not a good trait due to Onslaught being so common now since it is basically corrosive but without the AoE DoT. (These are also part of the reason why Light armor has been so mediocre in PvP recently, since outside of the massively lowered base armor and extra damage taken from martial damage, the pen bonus has really lost it's effectiveness due to the above shifts in the meta to account for the rise of DK and onslaught).

Making the change to Precise over other traits is either:
- A damage/healing loss if previously running Nirnhoned since the lower weapon/spell damage is a direct nerf to tooltips of both damage and healing.
- A damage, buff/debuff and sustain loss if previously running Charged due to lower status proc chance (sundered which is breach and weapon damage, concussed which is vulnerability and overcharged which is mag restore).

Running an extra piece of Light armor is also a nerf since it is a direct reduction in armor values (light armor builds have at most 12-13k armor before resolve buffs/sets) and is extra damage taken from martial attacks per Light armor piece:
- physical (common due to stamsorcs being a solid anti-meta option this patch)
- poison (everywhere to try and counter WW)
- bleed (everywhere due to WW refresh)
- disease (more common now with Necro masteries giving that class a viable niche build for PvP, also common on weapon enchants because the diseased status inflicts defile which reduces healing and shields).

So to make up for this change in the exploiter passive, I'm either losing defense (armor/healing) or offense (status proc uptime and associated buffs/debuffs, or weapon/spell damage) or both at once and that's just to get that 6% crit chance back.

I’m confused. What should I run on my lightning staff trait wise then? Sharp precise charged nirnhorn? I have 36% crit without precise and usually run sharpened which gives me 10k penetration or so without breaches

Turtle_Bot · August 11

aLi3nZ wrote: »

Turtle_Bot wrote: »

aLi3nZ wrote: »

For PvP seems ok. Just use precise staff instead of sharpened.

I explained this earlier, but making this change is a net nerf for PvP. Sharpened has also not been a top tier trait for a while due to everyone using percent mitigations instead of armor because of Corrosive and Onslaught making armor a very mediocre mitigation stat, also not a good trait due to Onslaught being so common now since it is basically corrosive but without the AoE DoT. (These are also part of the reason why Light armor has been so mediocre in PvP recently, since outside of the massively lowered base armor and extra damage taken from martial damage, the pen bonus has really lost it's effectiveness due to the above shifts in the meta to account for the rise of DK and onslaught).

Making the change to Precise over other traits is either:
- A damage/healing loss if previously running Nirnhoned since the lower weapon/spell damage is a direct nerf to tooltips of both damage and healing.
- A damage, buff/debuff and sustain loss if previously running Charged due to lower status proc chance (sundered which is breach and weapon damage, concussed which is vulnerability and overcharged which is mag restore).

Running an extra piece of Light armor is also a nerf since it is a direct reduction in armor values (light armor builds have at most 12-13k armor before resolve buffs/sets) and is extra damage taken from martial attacks per Light armor piece:
- physical (common due to stamsorcs being a solid anti-meta option this patch)
- poison (everywhere to try and counter WW)
- bleed (everywhere due to WW refresh)
- disease (more common now with Necro masteries giving that class a viable niche build for PvP, also common on weapon enchants because the diseased status inflicts defile which reduces healing and shields).

So to make up for this change in the exploiter passive, I'm either losing defense (armor/healing) or offense (status proc uptime and associated buffs/debuffs, or weapon/spell damage) or both at once and that's just to get that 6% crit chance back.

I’m confused. What should I run on my lightning staff trait wise then? Sharp precise charged nirnhorn? I have 36% crit without precise and usually run sharpened which gives me 10k penetration or so without breaches

If you are currently running Sharpened, then switching to Precise will keep your build mostly the same as it currently is (at least for the front bar, the back bar will likely feel that drop in crit chance though due to less frequent crit heals).

If you are running a different trait (Nirn or Charged), you will need to try and make adjustments to other parts of the build, e.g.:
- swap to precise and run more medium armor if you're not stacking max mag, for the extra weapon/spell damage to replace Nirn while keeping the crit chance
- run more Light armor for extra crit chance and keep Nirn/Charged and just try to deal with the lower base armor
- swap mundus to crit chance (if it's something else) and try to make up for that mundus change with other areas of the build