Always a W to see players do their own testing. Thanks for the follow-up & owning up to it! We need more people like this in the community. Blizzard is actually shadow changing mechanics constantly almost every patch without mention in the patch notes. Always question everything!
Now that you have enough motivation to spend a lot of your time on this matter), let me give you some advice: 1. A new character, preferably not a Sorcerer. (So that later you can compare with your sorcerer, maybe it’s a matter of class, not stats) 2. Small numbers. You don’t have to, I would even say it’s advisable not to have any extra modifiers that will ruin your results. Undress the character, go to hell1, remove points from the paragon and level, and check him like this. 3.Minimum and maximum, you should not make an average damage value, determine a clear minimum damage from your data points and a maximum. This is your ironclad range, if the theoretical values fit into it, then they are correct, if not, there is an error somewhere. 4. Small steps. Change 1 parameter at a time, testing different things. For example, separately damage from item stats, separately from skills, separately from glyphs. Wherever [x] is written must be checked. Yes, it takes a lot of time and a lot of effort. But someone has to do it! There must be a hero who is capable of this! And I believe it will be you!
Regarding small numbers, the game does not handle decimals well so you want there to be at least 4 values to reduce variance errors due to rounding. Also given a large enough sample size, average will drastically reduce in variance and be very reliable. The issue with the minimum and maximum approach is that you might have a really random low/high hit in your sample size if it is too small. A combination of the two should be used, and use average min and max to sanity check your data. Otherwise I fully agree.
Thanks for the hard work. What i like about your builds is that most times they work as described unlike some popular build guiides from some bug websites that promise you perfect guides and dont work as described
okay so i did alot of testing with my sorc i even used a scroll of amnesia on her, slapped on only vulnerable damage and tested for over an hour on the target dummy. i can confirm everything works now, the only thing thats confusing is that you get more additive vuln damage from fridgit fate and shreding blades, but from all my testing this does not increase the damage at all and is 100% bugged and should not be shown this way in the tooltip.
Don't sweat it. Mistakes happen and this stuff is real complicated. The important thing is owning it, which you've done. Overall, I think you put a huge amount of effort into your testing and you aren't afraid to question, which is very valuable to the community. Never stop questioning. We need content creators like you.
No worries man. We all make mistakes, props for coming clean (or at least adding a disclaimer for margin of error). I look forward to the next one and remain a loyal subscriber.
Kudos to you for doing the follow up video. The video came from a good place. I've been playing Sorc the entire D4 lifetime and most of D3, and right now I'm having the most fun I've had in the game, but I'm frustrated because of the lackluster single target DPS of my class. I really can't push that high into the Pit without going completely glass cannon, and I hate that playstyle. I think you and other Sorc content creators feel the frustration of the community. We are STARVING to find a way to do good single target damage and we all see are videos about how things are bugged and you were trying to bring clarity to the situation.
I did some more tests today which are not making a huge sense. 2 Different tests now, dummy and varshan, 200 data points each, I get a base vulnerable damage increase of 10% no matter what additives I pick. Something is super fishy with this whole calculation story. Still gotta collect some more data and also try different ability
@@GoldfarmingGuide w.r.t. diff ability, it would be wise to run some tests on something aspect/node that is trusted in order to verify the methodology that you're using is it safe to assume that you've seen lurkin's latest video where he presents his spreadsheet/tests as well?
It takes guts to admit a mistake. It takes maturity to not just say you'll do better, but to actually work on fixing that mistake. You’re one of two D4 creators we follow on our gaming channel. We follow your content because 99% of the time, you back up everything you say with verifiable data (even if your math makes my head hurt). And 99% of the time, you’re spot on. Neither the community nor I can fault you for a 1% margin of error. If we did, we’d need to crunch the numbers our damn selves and come up with our own builds. Your content isn’t a clone of every other D4 creator. Stay true to that. More importantly, stay true to yourself.
the issues with sorc have been fixed. So there really is new numbers, the calculations all were off because base vulnerable damage was just 10% instead of 20%.
Thinking we know everything is arrogant, knowing what we don’t know is wisdom. Continue your growth bro. Stay together and strong Diablo community ❤️❤️
Hello mate, I have seen your videos and I like how you do your own tests, I like to make my own builds and now I want to make a build similar to the frozen orb, but instead of using orb in the main bar, using blizzard (orb like enchantment) and doing full frost damage, do you think it is possible to reach good numbers (like pit 100?) If you like the idea, I challenge you to make that build, I will try to make it anyway. Thank you very much for your content, greetings!
I’m ready to see how this story unfolds… mainly because I invested +800% vulnerable damage into my gear and trying to still benefit from storm swell and shredding blades
tnx for your efforts m8 ! the class we're playing is really difficult and very complicated and its nice to have creators like you to guide us and inspire us to get better and better , and believe me there aren't many sorc exclusive creators "at all" !
Thanks for your honesty! But I’m still confused :/ I’m playing frozen orb too, and I’m a sorceress main since the start of the game, but i just can’t get over pit lvl 70 without having a way to long boss fight. So what do you recommend specializing on ?
Nice work. Good to see someone working through this. Hopefully these sort of results provide Blizz with some feedback. Other classes have WAY better multiplier and they may have planned for a decent multiplier that simply is not working.
Oh one last question - I noticed you updated your build guide to strip out Frigid Fate from the low cost Blizzard build. I made those changes to my build in-game. If you decide put it back in, after your next round of testing, could you let us know?
Thanks for the correction. Keep up the good work. You are making great videos and providing solid information to the community and owning up to mistake clears-up everything.
i believe there is a fixed small value of 0,011x that game increases and something more related to damage skill outputs, with damage being reduced is hard to tell (the damage we calculate isnt going to hit target dummy for that amount)
Goodluck Ser! I can't wait for those proper tests and results 🙏 We do know that Sorc is pretty bugged right now. I mean, most of her Vulnerable multipliers are basically addictive. But I do believe the general Vul (1,2x) and Crit (1,5x) work as intended as shown by some of the other RU-vidrs in testing. But let's see 👌
I understood it this way: Vulenrable damage and Crit damage has specific multipliers on the Paragon board and in the skill tree and even on items ( like meteor/fireball crit damage increase) (EDIT: On sorcerer ) . So vulnerable damage and crit damage is better. And that seems valid. So why the math if we already now what to roll?
idk I am doing a lot of testing have like 1500 datapoints now. So far i figured out frigit fate or vulnerable damage seem to have no correlation to vulnerable damage stat at all. 500% all damage seems to be exactly the same than 500% cold damage or 500% vuln damage, all give me the same damage in the end. It seems like all vulnerable multipliers are just cut in half so far, yet have to test quite a few.
I think Sorc is just really bugged. Far as I can tell Lurkin found similar results with these aspects/ paragon nodes/ etc being limited to damage buckets instead of how they are supposed to be handled/ are handled in other classes. Maybe I misunderstood the results though
idk I am doing a lot of testing have like 1500 datapoints now. So far i figured out frigit fate or vulnerable damage seem to have no correlation to vulnerable damage stat at all. It seems like all vulnerable multipliers are just cut in half so far, yet have to test quite a few.
Thanks for reply to previous vid, however unless somehow not viable please look at this scenario: -min crit dmg, destruction if you think you have to take it -max vuln dmg every piece roll, glyph and board with goal of getting ~1000 vuln dmg on stat sheet which appears doable in builder, Then run ice blade aspect on 2 hander, and storm swell if it can fit (Prob instead of tal rasha) I believe ~3000 vuln dmg is possible if optimized which presents 4x dmg compared to your typical 300/400 each vuln and crit dmg setups with conceited
it doesnt matter its still a good temper. Technically close damage is the best with 85% vs 60% but it's also a way higher chance of bricking your items. So frost temper is still very good since you can get vuln/cold which are both good while if you go for natural finesse, 4/5 tempers will brick your item.
i'm sorry if i dont understand this enouggh but i dont rly think that ur calculations are off but rather ur hits are off since the hits have a damage range from a certain amount to another certain amount depicted on the weapon itself so they can be lower than what u calculated
thats why we take the average of 200 hits which technically would leave us with just a 0.5% error. But of course there is still RNG involved since all skills have significant hit ranges unfortunately
Looking forward to seeing your results after more testing. Regardless of if you are right or wrong with the original video, it is very understandable if it was wrong. There are a lot of people using the tooltip on its own, who would come to the same conclusion. It even makes sense when you think about it. If you were wrong, it just highlights another issue with D4. The tooltips should not be in the game if they don't show you accurate calculations. Or they should give you the formula so you can work it out for ourself. This is unfortunately an issue with most ARPGs..... P.S. Don't beat yourself up about this, most people will understand your reasoning
Credit where credit is due. I looked over the data as well to sanity check it, and some theories that could fit your data: A) Icefall is a true multiplier (theoretics being 2.89% above expected) B) Frigid Fate multiplies with your vulnerable multiplier, and the increase is "added" as additive (so 1.3 x 1.2 - 1 = 0.56). This results in a -0.24% below expected. C) Storm Swell is somehow just a 1.2 multiplier (this combined with B results in a -0.09% below expected calc which is essentially spot on). The theory of C means your Frigid + Storm + 120% vulnerable = -2.62% below expected. This is by no means the only theory, just trying to figure out which passives could be potentially bugged and which could be working as intended. Something is definitely going on though as the other classes are not behaving this way. Good effort on the data!
Do you have a link to the spreadsheet? I would like to take a look at these calculation also. I am curious if (C) is random because of some problem related to barrier uptime during the testing.
Taken down a video because it was wrong? Absolutely based. So few people would admit wrong doing, and honestly, I haven't that enough myself. I look forward to more great content from you. EDIT: commented before actually watching video in full. Regardless, really appreciate the honesty of potentially being incorrect.
Tooltip is a thing but more importantly the other paragon and aspect doesn’t affect tooltip at the beginning . Are those global multiplier to final damage or ….
The tooltip is only affected by "unconditional damage". So if it says 30%[x] Cold damage, the tooltip wont show it, because the tooltip just shows vulnerable damage. For example storm swell will show in the tooltip when you activate your barrier, and frigit fate / shredding blades will also show up in that tooltip. That being said, storm swell, shredding blades and frigit fate are 100% not 30%[x] global multipliers. I will yet find out what they really are though.
Thanks for your work! Even if the Tooltip is correct and the vuln damage is as intented, Blizzard needs to change the intention! Because Sorc is way worse then all the other classes.
I saw both your orriginal video and MacroBoiBoi's video. I agree with Macro that crit is multiplicative, but he didn't address your main points about how certain '%X vulnerable damage" bonuses work. Also I went and did my own test of Conceited Aspect and Storm Swell Aspect, and their damage bonus seem to be similar, which suggests that Storm Swell is a 30% damage multiplier. So my tests aren't that in depth, and the point I want to make is: It might be best doing an indepth video showing all the situations on the training dummy. Show 100% bucket damage with 100% crit. Then go to 1000% bucket with 100% crit, and what increasing crit damage does to the numbers. Then do the same for vulnerable, and then show how the Paragon nodes interact (with up to 1000% vulnerable damage is possible). Of course this would be a long video, but a short summary of the findings at the beginning should get a fair bit of views. Or splitting them into a summary video and a detailed guide might be good too, and hopefully worth 2x the revenue.
@@simonspits6691 so after another ~8 hours of testing, it seems like there is no interaction between crit/vuln damage and any multipliers at all. So technically, the highest damage stat with highest uptime will be the best. In that case probably damage to close if you dont have crazy high crit chance like 90%+ Vuln and crit are still fine though, I guess technically damage to close will be best
Even if the numbers are right, you really need to test these things with other characters and more basic stat changes instead of specific aspects before you make conclusions for the general formula. I think at this point nobody doubts that the sorc aspects and glyphs are bugged, but people have tested the old formulas on a regular basis with different characters and builds, me included, hell I even wrote a whole open-source damage calculator to predict Barbarian HotA damage, that has proven to be very accurate in seasons 2 and 3. Especially the crit damage stuff is very easy to verify. Nevertheless, it's good to see that you double-check your numbers again and share your results!
you should know that the part where you were calling out other creators for using busted nodes and aspects on sorc was great and pretty funny. the rest doesn’t matter keep it up!!
please test crit / vuln multipliers on class other than sorc specific if you really think it is local additive multiplier as a sanity check. Unless blizzard says sorc is not bugged and they don't intend to fix it, people have already done these tests and reported them as bugs on the forums / twitter.
What would AI spit out for you for the break off point for multipliers or diminishing returns? How effective is the mana per cast vs attack speed correlation?
I found it hard to believe that everyone else in the world was wrong and that you were the only correct one. Regardless, you're a smart guy and articulated your rationale for your opinions which is commendable. Also, you're essentially a theory crafter and make the game better for everyone else. Not everyone can be correct 100% of the time. I'm sure the community apprrciates your work on a lot of these videos.
I've just quit sorc and switched to barb and my level 85 barb killed tier 66 boss faster than my mage with 0 mechanics (zero 2xga items only one and lvl 15 glyphs) :DDD
im sure you'll figure this out even tho it shouldn't have been your job if the devs actually cared about our class :) seems like only necros nd barbs are their favs as always ! only s2 we rulled aoz nd then nothin .. but there must've been some issues with v dmg everybody said then why else would they ?
WTF is going on? Why is there so much blame? Have anyone of you made some research and calculations on that? Everyone of you made mistakes every day, that is our life, made mistakes and do it better next time. Stop blaming people for things you do as well every day. Blizzard made this problems and we need to figure it out. We all in the same boat and try to make the best out of it. Keep that in mind when you comment on a video that will just help you with the that game that was not as expected at the beginning ….
Who cares about spreadsheet or character sheet. What it matters is the number flashes in game. With blizzard, I bet even those numbers are wrong. It’s not the first time
It depends on the uptime of the damage, if you have 10% crit chance and loads of crit damage but you have vulnerable uptime of 90% but less damage to this, when vulnerable procs it will be better. And the reverse is also true, if you have a low proc rate of vulnerability but your sitting at a crit chance if 60% then your crit damage is way more important. That's the general rule regarding those two.
I would like to support you more but you pretty much blatantly put shade on other content creators in the last video. Even if you turn out to be correct in the calculations it wouldn't excuse that.
@@zoolzoo4434 fanboy trying to come to the rescue? I respect the work he put in and I'm actually using some of his sorc tech in my own build but still doesn't excuse the way he tried to drag other content creators to prove a point. Also, calling random people "kid" is something only a manchild or a brat would do. You're actually making his viewers look bad instead of actually defending him
