Get the Desktop App for Battle.net Now
- All your games in 1 place
- Log in once
- Automatic game updates
Not quite. A speed coefficient means the spell/effect does scale with APS. Speed coefficient of 1 specifically means that one attack/tick at 1 APS takes 1 second to finish. So the number of ticks/attacks per second is equal to your character sheet APS. As opposed to a skill with a speed coefficient of 2 which would take half a second for one attack/tick at 1 APS (effectively being twice as fast).
Frozen Storm on the other hand has a completely fixed tick rate. So it's not affected by your attack speed at all and deals damage solely based on your raw damage stats, not based on "DPS".
Ignite has a chance to apply, equal to the proc coefficient of the respective skill. So on average that's APS * speed coef * number of hits on any number of targets * proc coef
Assuming a single target for unruned Electrocute and all 3 unruned Shock Pulse bolts hitting that's
(1) 2 * 2 * 1 * 0.25 = 1
(2) 2 * 1 * 3 * 0.93 = 5.58
dolynick was faster
Edited by apo#2677 on 5/8/2014 10:03 AM PDT
It looks like it is multiplicative. Just tested. With only 20% CDR from Evocation, I took shrine and it went to 59,96% CDR.
Hope this helps.
Could anyone do some testing on what runes/spells Teleport - Fracture's decoys benefit from as opposed to Mirror Images? There are some slight differences, likely because Fracture's decoys don't deal any damage. From my own testing, I notice the following, but it would help to get a complete list and others to confirm:
- Frost Nova will not work at all with Fracture decoys, or any freeze mechanic (Blizzard's Frozen Solid rune, Glacial Spike, etc.). It will work with Mirror Images.
- Blizzard's slow does work with Fracture decoys.
- Slow Time does work with Fracture decoys, as well as the runes Stretched Time and I think Time Warp (need others to test this debuff). However, Point of No Return does not stun enemies entering the Slow Time field like it does with Mirror Images.
- Black Hole will not vacuum enemies with Fracture decoys. However, Event Horizon rune from decoys will clear elite affixes.
Right now, the best use I've found with Fracture decoys is Slow Time - Time Warp or Stretched Time, especially for melee wizards, or the popular MM/Conflag + Explosive Blast builds. You can teleport in to a pack, your decoys will immediately put up Slow Time, putting up a 10% damage debuff and the protection it affords. With Illusionist, you can easily cover an entire field with Slow Time bubbles. I can drop Sparkflint familiar finally and have a more defensive build with the same 10% damage bonus.
I may be wrong though on the 10% debuff from decoys, but from about 30 min of testing with a white weapon, it seems to take effect.
If I hit a large target with all three Magic Missiles from Mirrorball and Magic Weapon: Ignite, will the target burn for 86% x3 over 3 seconds? I'm thinking it should, but since MM only procs LoH etc once now days, I was thinking if this was affected. The reason I'm asking is that I considering Ignite over Force Weapon on my MM/Conflag build, since Ignite could do a lot of damage. 170% + 86% per MM that hits could be quite nice.
And I assume +% fire dmg has no effect.
Edited by Allor#2190 on 5/13/2014 7:50 AM PDT
I don't have a Mirrorball, so I can't tell you much about that. From what I heard, the original proc coefficient of the MM rune is just split across the three missiles.
In any case, Conflag only has a 0.5 proc coefficient so you have a 50% chance to apply the Ignite DoT per Missile (without Mirrorball)
I haven't tested it specifically, but I don't see why % fire damage wouldn't work on the Ignite DoT.
So 50% chance to apply 86% wpn dmg DoT. That means 43% extra weapon dmg in average per cast.
Ignite: 170x1.1 + 43 = 230%
Force Weapon: 170x1.2 = 204%
But with Mirrorball and all three missiles hit;
Ignite: 170x1.1x3 + 43 = 604%.
Force Weapon: 170x1.2x3 = 612%.
Even with +100% fire dmg, it only adds a flat 43% extra damage, and it is also less reliable and requires the mob to live for the full 3 seconds, and that all missiles hit.So unless you need the fire dmg from Ignite to proc Tal Rasha's meteors or EE, it's likely not worth it.
I was thinking it would double-dip if the ignite was procced by a fire spell, but that does not matter on the DoT, so scratch that, % fire damage should work of course. Thank you for information by the way.
So tusday I brushed up my serpent's sparker to try double mammoth hydra, since I'm fire now and I started to be owned by electrified elites: every one I encountered was showering me with their shock pulses, impossible to mitigate on t5 even with 2300 lightning resist and 10000 armor. That made me rage in my ignorance, so after a day of been wiped like a carpet, I found this post yesterday:
now in this thread mammoth hydra's mechanichs is described as follows
Hydra - Mammoth Hydra
and that confirms what I thought: this means that those 10 ticks/s matter for something at least XD
I think I won't summon them against electrified elites anymore :P
Has anyone ever expirienced something similar?
P.s.: for those interested this is my wizard
Edited by Nisciunu#2822 on 5/15/2014 12:33 AM PDT
apo, this is absolutely amazing what you've done / been doing here. Thus far, the most frustrating, aggravating part of Diablo 3 has been its complete lack of any official source of detailed information on game mechanics. Not only a lack of information, but too many unclear or even misleading tool tips in the game itself. In my mind there is no excuse for this, especially when every bit of this information is completely vital to effective build design. I love Diablo 3, and despite all the endless criticisms that people so often hurl at Blizzard, i think they have been doing a truly outstanding job with this game. That being said, i feel that their lack of official info is the one place where they have royally screwed up, and have placed a ridiculous burden on the players themselves. Especially in a game where extensive and challenging theory crafting is obviously an intended appeal of the game, it is deplorable to force the players to guess about the mechanics. I am sick of spending hours pouring through forum posts full of baseless conjecture, conflicting conclusions, and the results of peoples private experiments that one hopes one can believe. It does nothing but get in the way, and destroy the fun that theory crafting is suppose to have. In all honesty, thank you (and to your collaborators) for trying to provide the info that Blizzard should be providing themselves. I hope that Blizzard will realize the importance of this, and come to do this themselves.
Also, a small note on one of the skill mechanic descriptions. Seems you have a consistent format to the way your describing the skill mechanics. For the skills that tick and crit and work with apoc you seem to say specifically that they give apoc. I saw though for energy twister you didn't say that. I went and tested it and after dying a dozen times i see it does benefit from apoc, which i'm sure you already know. Soooo, i was wondering if you would add that to the energy twister description. Only reason i say this is because it was part of the answer i was searching for that lead me to this compendium to begin with :D
Yeaaah... I copy&paste a lot, but I wouldn't really call it a consistent format ;)
You are right, for some or even most spells I specifically list APoC. In the case of ET I only wrote that ticks can crit. It has a proc coefficient, so that implies it also procs APoC.
I'll try to make it more clear.
Lol yes, consistent! :P But seriously your use of the same wordings for the same mechanics does make your list far more simple and understandable... and for a large list communicating a bunch of complicated mechanics that is very helpful. I think that's a very good idea.
For me the fact the ticks could crit implied APoC would happen, but after so much confusing and misleading density in the game itself as well as many games in general, i have adopted the habit of never assuming anything. So i guess really this is best placed as a suggestion to continue with your consistent language, cut and paste or not. Because like i said, where you have done that has made this all so much more strait forward.
Only posting this next part because you asked people to post about pretty much anything we see skewed. Under the mechanic for Familiar you say about the horrible bug with AS, and that recasting MW will fix this. I think you meant Familiar not MW.
You call it consistent, I call it redundant. Well, I have to be redundant to a certain degree, because I can't expect anyone to read the whole thread.
But the general idea behind the skill specifics chapter is "everything is working as expected, unless stated otherwise". Because if I wanted to list everything, it would become even less readable than it already is.
It's a fine line. I agree consistency is good and I did include a note on APoC for ET as you mentioned. But in general I want to focus on the actual specifics, not the regular mechanics.
Oh, thanks, will fix that. MW has the same problem that's why I confused it.
Threats of violence. We take these seriously and will alert the proper authorities.
Posts containing personal information about other players. This includes physical addresses, e-mail addresses, phone numbers, and inappropriate photos and/or videos.
Harassing or discriminatory language. This will not be tolerated.