EPTMan, I hope they don't go with Fixed Famine for the signature. At least go for Turbo Fixed or Onslaught Fixed Famine.
Path of Exile - Page 848
| Forum Index > General Games |
Guild invites: Message any of EvoSenseOfPride, ScionViableORly, neophyteWham, TheTouchOfGOLD in game OR post your character name in the thread and ask for an invite Private league ladder (finished): https://www.pathofexile.com/private-leagues/league/TeamLiquid and friends | ||
|
TheTenthDoc
United States9561 Posts
Man, I hope they don't go with Fixed Famine for the signature. At least go for Turbo Fixed or Onslaught Fixed Famine. | ||
|
Sn0_Man
Tebellong44238 Posts
I also really hope the signature race event isn't over 100 mins cuz I hate long-ass races. I'm also glad they are thinking about fixed seed again simply because maphackers are so bullshit in racing. Also looking forward to the announced prizes :D | ||
|
Miragee
8716 Posts
On October 07 2014 06:20 TheTenthDoc wrote: Preliminary race season info is up. Man, I hope they don't go with Fixed Famine for the signature. At least go for Turbo Fixed or Onslaught Fixed Famine. Well, if GGG announces something like that it's like 99% a sure thing. : / I'm curious about the prices... I hope they don't go down with them and don't go casual with them. Also: They remove masters from racing but let corrupted areas and shrines in? Things that are asked to be removed since their introduction? huh? Masters in their current state won't even be a mess-up to racing. At least not anywhere near the other two. | ||
|
Sn0_Man
Tebellong44238 Posts
| ||
|
Daumen
Germany1073 Posts
Im trying to use Kaoms primacy with Herald of Ash burn like in this Build of the week video for leveling (i am lvl 58 now so i can use the weapon). This is the Guide. In the Guide, the creator says that he does insane Burn dmg by having his physical dmg converted by Avatar of Fire, Molten Strike and Pyre. But I dont get why Avatar of Fire is any good, doesnt it basically reduce the Physical dmg that he does by 50%, resulting in a hit that does less damage, therefore less OVERKILL damage, therefore less BURNING Damage ? Also: Isnt mixed damage preferable so you can deal with HIgh armored & fire resistant enemies? Im playing in Beyond and never actually had a high lvl char (meaning never had a char over 66). | ||
|
Ota Solgryn
Denmark2011 Posts
On October 07 2014 16:36 Daumen wrote: Can someone explain the benefits of Avatar of Fire to me? Im trying to use Kaoms primacy with Herald of Ash burn like in this Build of the week video for leveling (i am lvl 58 now so i can use the weapon). This is the Guide. In the Guide, the creator says that he does insane Burn dmg by having his physical dmg converted by Avatar of Fire, Molten Strike and Pyre. But I dont get why Avatar of Fire is any good, doesnt it basically reduce the Physical dmg that he does by 50%, resulting in a hit that does less damage, therefore less OVERKILL damage, therefore less BURNING Damage ? Also: Isnt mixed damage preferable so you can deal with HIgh armored & fire resistant enemies? Im playing in Beyond and never actually had a high lvl char (meaning never had a char over 66). Well, isnt it becuase the build takes a lot of ekstre fire/ele damage and burning damage nodes in the tree? So it will in the end be more effektive with fire dmg. Also becuase of the flamabilty curse? | ||
|
Miragee
8716 Posts
On October 07 2014 16:36 Daumen wrote: Can someone explain the benefits of Avatar of Fire to me? Im trying to use Kaoms primacy with Herald of Ash burn like in this Build of the week video for leveling (i am lvl 58 now so i can use the weapon). This is the Guide. In the Guide, the creator says that he does insane Burn dmg by having his physical dmg converted by Avatar of Fire, Molten Strike and Pyre. But I dont get why Avatar of Fire is any good, doesnt it basically reduce the Physical dmg that he does by 50%, resulting in a hit that does less damage, therefore less OVERKILL damage, therefore less BURNING Damage ? Also: Isnt mixed damage preferable so you can deal with HIgh armored & fire resistant enemies? Im playing in Beyond and never actually had a high lvl char (meaning never had a char over 66). Convertion works like this: 1. If you have phys dmg, all dmg modifiers counting on phys are applied. 2. After that the phys dmg is converted to fire. 3. All dmg modifiers applying to fire are then applied. Benefits: - If 100% of your phys is converted to fire then 50/50 phys/fire modifiers have 33,33% more effect than only phys nodes or only fire nodes. Basically, if you deal 100 phys dmg with 100% convertion, 100% extra fire+100% extra phys would result in 400 dmg while 200% phys or 200% fire would only result in 300 dmg. The latter would also apply if you had no dmg convertion and only used physical. - Penetration works wonders. Fire pen, Flamability, Ele Weakness are all insane flat dmg increases to fire dmg. - I'm not entirely sure about this but I would assume, with Herald, all fire nodes double dip on your dmg because they count for both, the fire dmg you do (aka the potential overkill dmg) and the burning dmg | ||
|
vndestiny
Singapore3475 Posts
On October 07 2014 17:58 Miragee wrote: Convertion works like this: 1. If you have phys dmg, all dmg modifiers counting on phys are applied. 2. After that the phys dmg is converted to fire. 3. All dmg modifiers applying to fire are then applied. Benefits: - If 100% of your phys is converted to fire then 50/50 phys/fire modifiers have 33,33% more effect than only phys nodes or only fire nodes. Basically, if you deal 100 phys dmg with 100% convertion, 100% extra fire+100% extra phys would result in 400 dmg while 200% phys or 200% fire would only result in 300 dmg. The latter would also apply if you had no dmg convertion and only used physical. Common misconception, this is wrong. All increase modifier works additively. In this case if you have 100% phy to fire conversion with base 100 phy dmg & 100% increase phy dmg & 100% increase fire dmg, it would results in 100+100=200% increase in end result damage, thus 300 fire dmg. Therefore, it is the same as 200% increase phy dmg or 200% increase fire dmg. Another example with 100 base phy dmg, 60% physical to fire (i.e molten strike ). 50% increase phy dmg & 100% increase fire dmg. Now calculation would be - 100 physical -> 40 phy + 60 fire - 50% increase physical -> 60 physical dmg - 60 fire previous exist in physical form, thus also benefits from increase physical modifier. Total increase modifier for this portion is 100+50=150% increase. Thus 150 fire dmg. End dmg would be 60 physical + 150 fire. Unrelated, another common misconception is elemental dmg node do not double dip cold to fire dmg or any of the similar. It only check once ( "does this dmg ever exist as fire/cold/lightning dmg in the chain of conversion ?" -> "if yes, increase, additively with any other form of increase modifier for the dmg )". Basically same as AR&EV hybrid node with IR, it's only increase once. | ||
|
Miragee
8716 Posts
On October 07 2014 19:50 vndestiny wrote: Common misconception, this is wrong. All increase modifier works additively. In this case if you have 100% phy to fire conversion with base 100 phy dmg & 100% increase phy dmg & 100% increase fire dmg, it would results in 100+100=200% increase in end result damage, thus 300 fire dmg. Therefore, it is the same as 200% increase phy dmg or 200% increase fire dmg. So this is wrong in the wiki? Someone should rework it, so much failure. No surprise that many comon misconceptions take place. | ||
|
vndestiny
Singapore3475 Posts
On October 07 2014 20:01 Miragee wrote: So this is wrong in the wiki? Someone should rework it, so much failure. No surprise that many comon misconceptions take place. The final example from this wiki page on damage conversiont seems to get it right ( I only checked the cold portion because I'm lazy but the rest should be the same ) | ||
|
Miragee
8716 Posts
On October 07 2014 20:30 vndestiny wrote: The final example from this wiki page on damage conversiont seems to get it right ( I only checked the cold portion because I'm lazy but the rest should be the same ) No, the final example does it the same way I did. Cold says: 80 + 30 + 15% = 125% increased damage 30% more damage 70% more damage 32.5 * (1 + 0.8 + 0.3 + 0.15) * 1.3 * 1.7 = 161.6 Cold Damage If it would be like you said and the after conversition dmg modifiers are in the direct multiplier it would look like this: 32,5 * (1+0,8+0,3+0,15+0,3+0,7) = 105,6 Cold Damage | ||
|
Sn0_Man
Tebellong44238 Posts
under ur idea, it would go (110 increase phys) * (15 increase cold) *(30 mroe) * (70 more) which is wrong of course. The point is the cold and the phys add not multiply so there's no difference between "125 increased phys", "125 increased cold", or anything in between. Ur most recent post somehow assumes vndestiny thought that "more" reads "increased" which is patently wrong as well. @Daumen: Most people use avatar of fire to proliferate burns. Because the damage of a burn is based on the FIRE damage of the initial hit, most people simply want the biggest fire hit they can get. Which with weapons is always a very high phys hit converted to fire, but it can be hard to convert ALL the damage to fire without the keystone. Other damage conversion tools include a unique quiver (blackgleam) that obviously not every build can use. The keystone is often the simplest way, with limited drawbacks if your intention is simply to hit them with a big fire hit. | ||
|
Hoosegow
United States139 Posts
| ||
|
Sn0_Man
Tebellong44238 Posts
| ||
|
Miragee
8716 Posts
On October 07 2014 23:14 Sn0_Man wrote: Mirage is a nice person but he's never right on mechanics, ever. ;( I'm learning. I now get that "more WED" affects the dmg after conversion calculation while increase modifiers don't. So 200% phys/ele increase results in the same regardless how much of it are ele and how much are phys modifiers. But WED counts afterwards, so ir works like I originally assumed ele increase would work. Example: 100 phys dmg (100% to fire) 1. 50% increased phys, 50% increased fire, 100% more WED 100*(1+0,5+0,5)*2=400 2. 100% increased phys, 100% increased fire, 0% more WED 100*(1+1+1)*1=300 Am I still wrong with this? What I still don't get is why % more phys dmg is a multiplier after the dmg convertion in the wiki example. It also multiplies with the cold modifiers which shouldn't be the case? | ||
|
Sn0_Man
Tebellong44238 Posts
With a WED gem, you get "More WED" the same way with a Melee Phys gem u get "More Phys". Ur cold damage that you get CONVERTED FROM PHYS is affected by ALL PHYS MULTIPLIERS including the "increased" (which adds with any cold increases) and the "More" which always multiplies with everything. Technically you could say that the "more" phys occurs before conversion but as we all know 1*2*3 = 3*1*2 the order doesn't matter with multiplication. So you can't compare "200 increase 0 more" with "100 increase 100 more" cuz all u learn is that more is better, which we always knew. More is just a very difficult thing to get. It's got nothing to do with "increased cold is better than increased phys" or w/e. Yes, technically the ability to have extra "more" multipliers is a reason to convert damage, but I'd argue it's rarely worth the effort for that alone. This is why crown of eyes + pain attunement was so OP and why GGG removed any "More" effects from the CoE damage application. | ||
|
vndestiny
Singapore3475 Posts
On October 07 2014 23:39 Miragee wrote: ;( I'm learning. I now get that "more WED" affects the dmg after conversion calculation while increase modifiers don't. So 200% phys/ele increase results in the same regardless how much of it are ele and how much are phys modifiers. But WED counts afterwards, so ir works like I originally assumed ele increase would work. Example: 100 phys dmg (100% to fire) 1. 50% increased phys, 50% increased fire, 100% more WED 100*(1+0,5+0,5)*2=400 2. 100% increased phys, 100% increased fire, 0% more WED 100*(1+1+1)*1=300 Am I still wrong with this? You're correct What I still don't get is why % more phys dmg is a multiplier after the dmg convertion in the wiki example. It also multiplies with the cold modifiers which shouldn't be the case? Because the cold dmg that got converted was physical at some point in time, and thus get modified by it. It's simple if you think this way: - Each elements of dmg is calculated separately. - Look at end result cold dmg, separated into components: pure cold, phy -> cold directly, phy -> fire -> cold, etc... - Pure cold get modified by all increase & more cold modifier. Phy -> cold get modified by all increase & more modifier from physical & cold. Increase all additive disregards of where it's from. More is inherently multiplicative, also disregards of source ( note: increase elemental dmg node ( see templar node ) do not double dip ) - Same for each element of physical, cold, fire, lightning & chaos. - Sum up, got end result dmg. | ||
|
Miragee
8716 Posts
On October 07 2014 23:46 Sn0_Man wrote: You can never ever compare "increased" to "more". With a WED gem, you get "More WED" the same way with a Melee Phys gem u get "More Phys". Ur cold damage that you get CONVERTED FROM PHYS is affected by ALL PHYS MULTIPLIERS including the "increased" (which adds with any cold increases) and the "More" which always multiplies with everything. Technically you could say that the "more" phys occurs before conversion but as we all know 1*2*3 = 3*1*2 the order doesn't matter with multiplication. So you can't compare "200 increase 0 more" with "100 increase 100 more" cuz all u learn is that more is better, which we always knew. More is just a very difficult thing to get. It's got nothing to do with "increased cold is better than increased phys" or w/e. Yes, technically the ability to have extra "more" multipliers is a reason to convert damage, but I'd argue it's rarely worth the effort for that alone. This is why crown of eyes + pain attunement was so OP and why GGG removed any "More" effects from the CoE damage application. But more "more" effects aren't always better. Complete balance with increased modifiers are the optimal effeciency. If you have 100% more dmg but 0% increased dmg in a dmg conversion then a 10% increased dmg mod should do more than a 10% more dmg mod. That is, until both reach 100%. But that's pure theory, ingame you will never have more "more dmg" mods than you have increased effects. Added a third example to demonstrate: 3. 0% increased phys, 0% increased fire, 200% more WED 100*(1+0+0)*3=300 //It's just for clarifcation when min maxing and having the choice between picking more dmg vs increased dmg depending on both values. I also realised that my question about the "more phys" modifier was completly stupid. -.- | ||
|
vndestiny
Singapore3475 Posts
On October 07 2014 23:58 Miragee wrote: But more "more" effects aren't always better. Complete balance with increased modifiers are the optimal effeciency. If you have 100% more dmg but 0% increased dmg in a dmg conversion then a 10% increased dmg mod should do more than a 10% more dmg mod. That is, until both reach 100%. But that's pure theory, ingame you will never have more "more dmg" mods than you have increased effects. Added a third example to demonstrate: 3. 0% increased phys, 0% increased fire, 200% more WED 100*(1+0+0)*3=300 Yes it is, because 'more' modifier is always equal or better than an 'increase' modifier of the same value. The equal part only happen when there's absolutely no other increase modifier, which is ofc, problem only happen when you're lvl 1-5. Dmg = base * ( 1 + 'increase' modifier 1 + ' increase' modifier 2' + ...) * ( 1 + 'more' modifier 1 ) * ( 1 + 'more' modifier 2 ) * ... As you can see, when increase mod 1 = more mod 1 ( let's say 30% increase vs 30% more ), only case it's equal is when there's no increase modifier 2. | ||
|
Sn0_Man
Tebellong44238 Posts
So basically in ur "200% more" scenario, you'd probably have something like "50% more wed" "120 % more wed" "30% more wed" so u end up with 1*1.5*2.2*1.3 = way more than 3. | ||
| ||
