Elementalist question (?)

^pretty sure you are wrong about almost everything in that post lol.

converting enemy damage before they hit you is 100% functionally the same as converting it WHEN it hits you lol. As for your DoT nonsense: DoT damage is based on the hit, so if you convert and lessen the hit, you are lessening the DoT too.

The ONLY difference is ground effects that haven't actually hit you, and corrupted blood which you'd have gotten immune to anyway. That's it. But from a "taking damage from enemies" perspective, they are all the same.

"

cowmoo275#3095 wrote:

and corrupted blood which you'd have gotten immune to anyway

Man, you'd laugh so hard if you saw some of the jewels I've equipped early on in leagues just because they had that corrupted implicit. Some of them I just deleted out of shame once I'd gotten an upgrade because I didn't even want to try flogging them for 1c...

^literally a staple of what I do every league. The first, cheapest jewel with corrupted blood implicit is socketed. Even if every single mod is not used.

Corrupted blood is the shittiest DoT there is. It's also the worst designed. There should be a dialysis machine upgradeable that we get in the first act, slowly working towards full immunity. Kinda like the trinket we get from Heist, but only for Corrupted Blood

"

cowmoo275#3095 wrote:

^pretty sure you are wrong about almost everything in that post lol.

Converting prior isn't additive with damage taken

The DoT portion Baumis is talking about is the fact cloak of flame isn't hit based so it converts physical DoT to fire at the same rate - this is very potent as there are very few methods to reduce physical damage over time though it is rare anyway.

This isn't PoE2 so the hit doesn't lessen the DoT unless the base damage is effected, so a monster applying bleed though a physical attack will have its DoT reduced by the relevant portion - It can now ignite as well which has its own consequences. If the same skill applies corrupting blood however that will not be reduced. This ones kinda splitting hairs but as I was tidying up some of the statements here I felt like it needed clarifying that they aren't quite the same.

The reason I mention above is there are some circumstances where converting more of a monsters damage to fire could be detrimental. Enslaver for example always ignites but most of his attacks are only 30-50% fire. If you convert the rest his ramped ignites are higher - this is a pretty weird edgecase though but its nice to ponder mechanics. This does not apply for damage taken as however as the DoT is set prior to conversion for damage taken.

I'm not as excited as everyone else for this node, its decent but unreliable mitigation is pretty meh for HC, gets better the longer your ignite duration is though I guess. Kaom's bindings had this mode the whole time and i don't think i've ever seen someone using it

"

Draegnarrr#2823 wrote:

Converting prior isn't additive with damage taken

The DoT portion Baumis is talking about is the fact cloak of flame isn't hit based so it converts physical DoT to fire at the same rate - this is very potent as there are very few methods to reduce physical damage over time though it is rare anyway.

Not the point I was making. Wasn't saying they were additive or anything.

He said that the CoF mod, and the new ascendancy mod are VERY different. They aren't. My point was that whether the conversion happens to the enemy, or happens to the damage after it hits you, is ultimately irrelevant in terms of defense. In both situations the BASE PHYSICAL DAMAGE is being reduced. And given that monsters aren't likely to have added physical damage, the numerical values should be quite similar.

Sure....an edge case like the one you describe might break this, but 99% of the time 40% of enemy damage converted to fire is the SAME as taking 40% of phys damage as fire. And when it comes to physical ailments, they are ALL (except CB) based on the HIT you take. Lessen the physical damage of that hit, and you lessen the DoT. If the enemy is dealing 40% less physical damage because it was converted to fire, then you are effectively reducing the DoT bleed you might take. Or stun. Or partially poison.

Cloak of flame reducing DoT is only FUNCTIONALLY better in cases of ground effects, non-hitbased physical DoT (which are EXCEEDINGLY RARE), and Corrupted Blood. It is not mathematically any better against the vast majority of enemies and physical damage (and by extension, DoT) you take, when compared to this node from Elementalist.

Or perhaps I misunderstood the point:

Is his post saying that this mod would be entirely ineffective because the bosses own conversion would activate OVER it? Meaning that YOUR post actually meant that multiple sources of conversion on the same target wouldn't be additive: NOT that conversion isn't additive with "damage taken as" which is what you wrote.

That would be new information to me, in which case I'm sorry that I muddled the information pool.


From my understanding:
Boss has an attack that converts 30% of physical to fire
YOU hit him with elementalist node that converts 40% of physical to fire
Boss attack is now 40% + 30% converted to fire for a total of 70% phys to fire.
(which Baumi said was wrong)
Yet.....when we stack conversions it absolutely IS additive up to 100%.

BUT

You wrote that conversion is NOT additive with "damage taken as", which can't be true....

Enemy converts 30% of phys to fire
You have cloak, which grants 40% of phys taken as fire
You TAKE the 30% fire damage, then convert 40% of the remaining physical damage to fire as well. Effectively another 28% converted to fire for a total of 58% physical to fire conversion. This would mean that the two mods ARE additive (really, multiplicative or less effective if fire conversion is the GOAL). One acts on the enemy, one acts on YOU, and BOTH reduce the physical damage taken. (or is this wrong as well?)






I do wonder though how many actual boss attacks (that you wouldn't already be dodging) this really matters for though. Actual, tangible, in-person effect being essentially the same across the board.

Your example there is written correctly but they aren't additive, your maths is right that another 28% is converted in your example but that is multiplicative, if you say its additive players will think if an enemy has 60% converted to fire, and you wear cloak of flame (40%), you don't take any phys damage. They are different categories and don't actually interact with each other specifically.

Also your post above that is pretty spot on. If that is what you meant previously I got the wrong end of the stick but it was worth rambling just to have a better summary in the thread for people to read as really we agree

You are right also its fairly academic except for situations where you get hit by enemies you haven't ignited which will be pretty common hence my scepticism. Phys DoT is what GGG use when they want to have a fairly unmitigated DoT too which is a nice thing to reduce - basically i'm sticking with cloak of flame lol bollocks to the new notable!

^that's why its sometimes unhelpful to convolute the issue by saying they are different when.......for most intents and purposes, they really aren't.

Better to just say "essentially, yes" and move on. There was never any need to get into things like additive, multiplicative, minute differences on operation order, etc. Ultimately, it is CORRECT to say that this mod will function basically as a CoF effect. For 99% (or more) scenarios.

The post I was responding to offered information totally irrelevant to what was being asked, and convoluted the issue to the point of being wrong. Which is why I wrote what I wrote.

You used that whole post to show the opposite of what you are trying to say? Really? lol.

I already admitted to the other guy's example that, in rare situations (very very VERY rare), this mod can add fire damage where you don't want it. But in typical builds that convert phys to fire in ANY way....you have overcapped max fire resistance to begin with. They'd have to be doing a LOT of base damage (aka a 1hko pre-converted fire boss attack) for that situation to even matter in the least. Even if you weren't immune to ignite, having overcapped fire resistance, or even really 75% is going to render most ignites meaningless, even if they were coming from a source that hit you with 100% fire damage.

The "multiplicative" diminishing returns effect is seen on Cloak of Flames, NOT this conversion node. Because the conversion is acting on the ENEMY. The mods that convert the physical damage in this way are ADDITIVE together: meaning an attack that the ENEMY gives itself (30%) and the conversion that you are "granting" the enemy (40%) add together to reach a total conversion of 70%. The only time this would be not true is if the conversion goes above 100%.

Meanwhile, CoF works on the fractional amount of physical damage you ultimately end up taking. Less physical damage taken means less physical converted. Less "powerful" defensively, if your goal is converting physical damage to fire.



Do you not realize that you are explaining the opposite point you lead with? Nor do you refute the fact that your initial post in here was completely meaningless to the previous discussion being had. Nor does your conclusion functionally matter.

You fail to grasp the point, both mine AND your own.


What you said partially right: conversion doesn't inherently reduce DoT dps. EXCEPT in this case for physical DoTs, because its reducing the physical hit that would inflict that DoT. It would INCREASE the DoT of ignite, but that was never a part of the conversation.



I'll repeat: the only UNIQUE scenario that CoF has is CB (get immunity), ground effects (super rare), and non-hit physical DoTs (super rare). But against monsters, it functions practically the SAME as conversion. Perhaps a little more or less here or there but FUNCTIONALLY the same in your build.



The condescension and impatience comes from a long history of posts from you being very inaccurate and often misleading: when I specifically remember your name and how you post, and you go and fall into the same pattern I'm not going to waste my time being courteous. That ship sailed a year ago.

I even gave the benefit of the doubt and offered a preemptive apology a few posts back, but turns out I wasn't wrong in my initial observation.

no although I guess thats why I haven't seen him post in a while.

I am well aware of the order of operations thank you, but it simply doesn't matter. Penetration would hardly ever factor into this conversation, again a rarity that doesn't matter in the overall conversation. Perhaps I should have included that in the CoF benefits, but ultimately it doesn't matter.

I don't make a habit of talking about every little thing as if they matter to every conversation. I actually read what I'm responding to and respond to what is being asked.

You, however, want to boast about the depth of your knowledge. An act which has frequently thrown yourself into hot water. Frankly, no one cares.

The question was: will this work with totems and does it function similar to CoF. The answer to both is yes. You wrote no because you wanted to get into the semantics, which as I already mentioned several times DON'T MATTER in 99% of your gameplay. Not only that, but your post didn't say all the things you are NOW saying re: penetration and other things, which frankly would have been better suited in your first post instead of "because it interacts with arctic armour".

And you were wrong about "priority" because it doesn't apply, yet you felt the need to bring it up.



Fact is: this node reduces physical damage taken by a lot. CoF ALSO reducs physical damage taken by a lot. Both convert the damage to fire, which means you mitigate it as fire. End of discussion.