ggg needs to take steps to make spells more approachable

"

shroudb wrote:

"

Saltychipmunk wrote:

but curses could benifit melee / weapons just as well as they do spells.


just use a vulnerability rather than a dedicated elemental curse along with elemental weakness and critical weakness.

hell that is what wind scream can do


hell most wander builds follow the same tree paths as spell builds ( getting crit ) etc

not quite:

take vuln vs an elemental curse on a double resist mob pre and after nerf:

both will only work at 50% efficiency after nerf and 100% pre nerf.

for siimplicity let's say that the mob has exactly 75% resists and both the attacker and the spell caster have 100dps:

vuln would boost the dps from 100->140 pre erf and from 100->120 after nerf. 120/140= 85% or 15% dps loss for the attacker.

elem weakness would boost the dps from 25-> 75 pre nerf and from 25->50 after nerf or 50% dps loss for the spell caster.

50/15=3.33

or simply put, curse nerf was 333% worse for the casters

now double those values for double curses ^^

"

Softspoken wrote:

"

shroudb wrote:

"

Saltychipmunk wrote:

but curses could benifit melee / weapons just as well as they do spells.


just use a vulnerability rather than a dedicated elemental curse along with elemental weakness and critical weakness.

hell that is what wind scream can do


hell most wander builds follow the same tree paths as spell builds ( getting crit ) etc

not quite:

take vuln vs an elemental curse on a double resist mob pre and after nerf:

both will only work at 50% efficiency after nerf and 100% pre nerf.

for siimplicity let's say that the mob has exactly 75% resists and both the attacker and the spell caster have 100dps:

vuln would boost the dps from 100->140 pre erf and from 100->120 after nerf. 120/140= 85% or 15% dps loss for the attacker.

elem weakness would boost the dps from 25-> 75 pre nerf and from 25->50 after nerf or 50% dps loss for the spell caster.

50/15=3.33

or simply put, curse nerf was 333% worse for the casters

now double those values for double curses ^^

So, your calculations seem lacking. I mean, even using the questionable logic behind the post, calculating the physical build's dps loss as 14% (1 - 120/140) implies that the elemental build's dps loss was 33% (1 - 50/75), not 50%. Arbitrarily dividing 33 by 14 yields 2.36 or 236%.

Plus, you could also view it as:
physical build lost 20 dps (140 - 120)
elemental build lost 25 dps (75 - 50)

Elemental lost 5 more dps than physical because of the reduced effects of curses than a physical build, which is 5% of their outgoing damage. You could interpret that as elemental losing 25% more dps because of the curse change than a physical build. (25/20 - 1, taken as a percentage.)

And all of this is dependent on the target in question having literally zero physical mitigation, including zero evasion (against characters not using Resolute Technique) and zero armor.

"

kompaniet wrote:

Remember monsters can now spawn with the 'armoured' modifer.

"

kompaniet wrote:

Remember monsters can now spawn with the 'armoured' modifer.

"

kompaniet wrote:

Remember monsters can now spawn with the 'armoured' modifer.