Increased chance for elemental ailments

There are skills both passive and active that increase the chance to ignite/freeze/chill/shock. How do these work??

They don't increase the chance, they add the chance.

If you have 15% chance to ignite, every time you cast a spell, it (probably) rolls to see if it got a number <= 15 out of 100. If so, it ignites the target, the duration determined by the fire damage done to said target.

"

anubite wrote:

They don't increase the chance, they add the chance.

If you have 15% chance to ignite, every time you cast a spell, it (probably) rolls to see if it got a number <= 15 out of 100. If so, it ignites the target, the duration determined by the fire damage done to said target.

This is not accurate.

"

From the Mechanics thread in the Beta General Discussion forum
If you land a critical strike with an attack or spell that deals fire damage, the enemy begins Burning. Burning causes damage over time. Humanoids, Monkeys and Sea Witches will flee while burning.
Burning lasts 4 seconds, and the amount of damage over time is 1/3 of the fire damage dealt per second. So a total of 4/3 of the original damage, over 4 seconds.

Status ailments (burning/frozen/chilled/shocked) occur when a player lands a critical strike that has enough damage of the appropriate elemental type.

"

From the Mechanics thread in the Beta General Discussion forum
Burning, Chilled, Frozen, and Shocked are collectively known as Status Ailments.
The duration of the chilled, frozen, and shocked statuses is related to the amount of cold/lightning damage dealt:
Shocked: 276ms per 1% max life dealt as lightning
Chilled: 138ms per 1% max life dealt as cold
Frozen: 100ms per 1% max life dealt as cold

All three are capped at considering 1/3 of max life - if you deal more than 1/3 max life as that element, the status ailment occurs as though you did exactly 1/3.

The maximum unmodified durations are therefore:
Shock: 9.2 seconds
Chill: 4.6 seconds
Freeze: 3.33 seconds

If the duration would be less that 300ms, it's ignored entirely (the effect is not applied).
For characters using Chaos Inoculation, these durations are calculated based on what the character's maximum life would be if they did not have Chaos Inoculation.

Okay, now that we have covered the basics, it is unclear how this extra chance to ignite or shock or freeze is implemented. My guess is that the value generated to determine if an attack was a critical strike (let's call that the Critical Attempt Value) is checked once against the critical strike chance and then the chance to produce a status ailment is checked again by adding the additional bonus chance to ignite/chill/freeze/shock to the critical strike chance and then comparing that to the Critical Attempt Value.

That is my guess. However, I have zero verification for this and would like some feedback, preferably from someone who can verify the game mechanics from first-hand exposure.

edit: format

No, what I described works perfectly with what you just described. It does nothing to change your chance to critical strike.

Notice the lack of "additional or increased" under these effects. They are simply giving your skills a chance to cause the effect on hit. The duration of said effect is the result of the non-critical damage done.

Look at how Freeze Mine works to get a clearer picture.

"

anubite wrote:

They don't increase the chance, they add the chance.

If you have 15% chance to ignite, every time you cast a spell, it (probably) rolls to see if it got a number <= 15 out of 100. If so, it ignites the target, the duration determined by the fire damage done to said target.

"

From the Mechanics thread in the Beta General Discussion forum
Burning lasts 4 seconds, and the amount of damage over time is 1/3 of the fire damage dealt per second. So a total of 4/3 of the original damage, over 4 seconds.

"

anubite wrote:

No, what I described works perfectly with what you just described.

Nothing personal, man. . .but this combined with the fact that you use the word "probably" leaves me with little faith in your reply. Seriously, not trying to piss anyone off. . .just trying to get an answer.

Does anyone have any information on this mechanic??

edit: format

"

Ladderjack wrote:

Nothing personal, man. . .but this combined with the fact that you use the word "probably" leaves me with little faith in your reply. Seriously, not trying to piss anyone off. . .just trying to get an answer.

Does anyone have any information on this mechanic??

edit: format

His answer was also the only one that makes any sense. Notice those passives flat-out say they give your spells a chance when doing damage (not critical) with that element to cause their effects. This would clearly indicate criticals are unimportant to the calculation. If you can build a 20 percent chance, that means 20 percent of your non-critical attacks with that element would cause that affect. Not only is it the fairly obvious answer, based on its wording (I'm not sure I see how they could word it more clearly in this particular case, there are more vague passives and mods out there)... it was also the correct one.

"

Mark_GGG wrote:

"

anubite wrote:

They don't increase the chance, they add the chance.

If you have 15% chance to ignite, every time you cast a spell, it (probably) rolls to see if it got a number <= 15 out of 100. If so, it ignites the target

This is correct (with the additional stipulation you must do at least some fire damage for chance to ignite to take effect, same for the other elements).
Duration of burn is always 4 seconds base, and damage is determined by the percentage fo target's life dealt as fire damage. All the other elemental status ailments have duration determined by damage.

If I am understanding this correctly, this is double jeopardy. There is one chance to get a status ailment with critical strikes and then another chance to get a status ailment with the skills.

Example: I am attacking with a weapon that gives a 7% chance for critical strike and I have taken the passive skills in the Assassination hub near the Shadow home on skilldrasil, giving a total of 100% chance for critical strikes, making the total chance for critical strike 14%. I am attacking with Frenzy and I am altering Frenzy with the Chance to Ignite skill at lvl 1, giving a 25% to cause a burning status ailment. This would give two chances for the status ailment: one at 14% and one at 25%, meaning if you run the stats on the two events happening independently, you have a 35.5% chance of achieving a burning status ailment in this scenario.

(crit*no skill)+(skill*no crit)+(skill*crit)=total chance
(.14*.75)+(.25*.86)+(.14*.25)=total chance
(.105)+(.215)+(.035)=.355

Is this correct??

If it crits, you will always attempt to inflict a status elemental effect, provided it does the minimum necessary elemental damage.
If it doesn't crit, then you have a chance to still inflict the status effect.

If you have a 10% chance to crit, you have a 10% chance to inflict an elemental effect.
If you have a 10% chance to inflict a status effect, you also have another 10% chance to inflict said effect.

If you attack once, your actual chance to inflict a status effect is I think is 19%.

It's not the case that you can strictly add probabilities together, though the events here are dependent upon one another. We can imagine the possibility is that strictly, you have a 10% chance to crit on every hit. If you crit, the second part isn't checked.

If you fail to crit, then you have a second 10% chance to inflict the status element. But the chance that you won't critically hit is 9/10 times. And so 9/10 times, your 10% chance to inflict a status effect is evaluated.

0.9*0.1 = 0.09

I believe we can now add the two chances to crit - 0.19 is your chance to inflict a status effect.

Let us suppose that you have a 95% chance to crit and a 95% chance to cause an effect. Using my same reasoning,

0.05*0.95 = 0.0475
0.0475 + 0.95 = 0.9975 I believe this is a reasonable answer, for two high chances (95%). Though probabilities sometimes make me see stars, so do correct me if I'm wrong.

I'm not sure what you're arriving at, but "double jeopardy" I think is the wrong word. Yes, there is a "second chance" to fall back on, should your crit not inflict a status effect, but unlike a "double jeopardy" - there's nothing illicit or bad about this. The strength of a status effect is determined by the damage done, so if you don't crit, your status effect is inherently weaker than someone who does crit, making design like this fairly balanced.

If you have a 50% chance to cause shock on hit, but spam spark, the shock lasts such a short amount of time, it's strong - don't get me wrong - but it's nothing like having 50% chance to crit. Even with base multiplier, your shock is lasting about 50% longer because it's doing 50% increased damage per critical strike. Meaning, it has more opportunities to stack and lasts longer.

Yeah, we are saying the same thing, technically. When an event is dependent on a preceding event like this and success is the same in both event outcomes, the probabilities are the same as if they are independent events.

Regarding the outcome of status ailments, it's clear that a status ailment will be less effective if you hit for less damage (which is the case by definition if you fail to crit but get a status ailment anyway). However, this is less relevant with fire damage, since the burning status ailment always hits for 4 seconds and the ailment is simply additional fire damage. Would we like an extra 33% fire damage on a critical strike?? Of course, but I will take an extra 33% fire damage on a normal hit if that is all I can get.

Regarding double jeopardy, I never said that double jeopardy is bad. =) It's a terrible principle in a legal context but there is nothing wrong with testing for an outcome twice like this in a game. It does make the number crunching more complex but if GGG says this is how it will be done, this is how it will be done. Now if we can just get a verification when the sun shines on our friends in New Zealand. . .

edit: spelling