10% spell dmg does not calculate like that. As far as I know it multiplies off the base damage of the spell. Pen reduces the mitigation of the total dmg after spell dmg is calculated. So pen is more effective with the more spell dmg you have where as spell dmg will give a linear increase. So I don’t think that is at all correct. If the mob takes 1000 damage your base damage is not 1000. if your base dmg is 100 and you have 100% increased spell damage the damage on a mob with 0 resist I think would be 1000. Your base damage would be 100.
lets say base dmg is 1000.
and we have 750% spell dmg and elemental dmg combined.
dmg on mob with 0 resist = 7500
dmg on mob with -9 resist.
7500 * 1.09 = 8175
9 pen gave 675 dmg.
now lets add 65% spell dmg.
1000 * 8.15 = 8150. (815% spell dmg)
with 70% spell dmg.
1000 * 8.2 = 8200. (820% spell dmg)
If that is correct they are almost identical, spell dmg being slightly better if the roll is perfect and otherwise pen being better at 9% which is 50% at t5.
I’m just not exactly sure of the backend calculations and how pen works and what default resists mobs have (if having the 9% is a flat 9% for all mobs or not).
You need 85% additional increased spell damage to equal the damage 10% penetration gave in the example above. Assuming my math is correct and the formulas are correct, this could be put in a spreadsheet so numbers could be manipulated to see the relationship between increased damage and penetration.
Yeah I ran some numbers quick based on my previous assumptions. It seems that penetration is really good with high base damage and once you already have alot of spell dmg.
base dmg 1000
going from 200% to 270% gives you +700 dmg. Adding 9 pen instead gives you +270 dmg.
going from 1500% to 1570% still gives you +700 dmg. Adding 9 pen instead +1440 dmg.
base dmg 2000
going from 200% to 270% gives you +1400 dmg. Adding 9 pen instead gives you +540 dmg.
going from 1500% to 1570% still gives you +1400 dmg. Adding 9 pen instead gives you +2880 dmg.
It really depends on the base damage and how much spell dmg you already have. I’m assuming this is why pen doesn’t drop early on. It’s worthless early.
note/edit: for 1000 base and 200% I multiplied by 3 because I think that’s what +200% does and so on and so fourth. Example 1000 * 3 = 3000 and 1000 * 3.7 = 3700 thus + 700 dmg.
adding 9 pen instead is just (3000 * 1.09) - 3000 = 270. and the rest follow the same formula.
If this is correct pen is under-rated endgame. I play a glacier mage and spell dmg on the 3rd hit is added 3.5x. So pen should be really good for me but I wish I knew the base dmg numbers.
For your note/edit: do it like this - 200 + (200 x 2.0). Multiply by the percentage and add the base. If you’re thinking 500%, 200 + (200 x 5) = 1200. If you use your method, 200 + (200 x 6) = 1400. It doesn’t quite come out accurate.
All i’m doing is 200 * 6 which is 1200. It’s the same thing… you’re just making it more complicated. I also don’t get why you changed the numbers. My example was I multiplied by 3 for 200% which is the same thing as multiplying by 2 and adding the base back on.
If the math is wrong use these numbers and show me where it’s wrong.
base dmg 1000
going from 200% to 270% gives you +700 dmg. Adding 9 pen instead gives you +270 dmg.
going from 1500% to 1570% still gives you +700 dmg. Adding 9 pen instead +1440 dmg.
base dmg 2000
going from 200% to 270% gives you +1400 dmg. Adding 9 pen instead gives you +540 dmg.
going from 1500% to 1570% still gives you +1400 dmg. Adding 9 pen instead gives you +2880 dmg.
pen.txt (509 Bytes)
Here’s the chart I made.
The middle 3 numbers is +70% spell dmg and the right 3 are 9 pen, the left 3 are 3 different base spell dmg values (spell dmg on all gear and idols/passives other than ammy) On the middle and right sets you see the added dmg in brackets. The biggest takeaway is that spell dmg is linear and pen is not, increasing in value as you get more spell dmg. It appears that after around 4-500% spell dmg pen starts to be better.
Mobs don’t have resists unless otherwise specified, but they do get % damage mitigation at higher levels, however this is a separate defensive layer that does not interact with resists/shred/pen. This is why mobs take substantially less damage than the dummy at high level.
The relative benefit of pen as an affix compared to increased damage depends on how much of each you have. Higher amounts of existing % increased damage makes more % increased damage less useful. 9% pen will give 9% increased damage assuming zero other sources of pen. That 9% pen will be less useful if you already have a source of pen.
While the numbers Hybria chose to use would never occur in-game, he is correct. You get more of an incremental benefit from a thing when you have very little of it to start with.
i think in that case (9% + 5%) you will be fine. as the math examples hybria demonstrated, the more %increased damage you have, the less each additional increment adds to the overall damage number. likewise, if you have a lot of pen already, adding more will be less valuable. the value of each stat depends on how much of the other you have.
going back to the things i was talking about in my harvest lich build, i can get up to 30% pen from the tree: in that case, it would most likely not be necessary for me to put pen on my amulet, as the increased damage stat would probably give me a better overall damage increase.
i’m not exactly sure where the breakpoint is for the values where one becomes more valuable than the other. that’s the time when you’ve just gotta test things out and see how they feel. the dummy can give you an idea, but assuming llama is correct about the dummy not having the same damage reduction that mobs get, it won’t be a perfect representation of your damage output.
until we have an LE equivalent of path of building, we’ll just have to make do with that approach. or learn to do math. which i refuse to do.
As the damage reduction the mobs get does not interact with resists or pen, the numbers you get from testing on the dummy will be directionally corrrect (ie, if you see a 10% increase on the dummy, you could expect a 10% increase on most mobs) if not numerically correct (if you see a 10k damage increase on the dummy, don’t expect to see a 10k damage increase on mobs).
What are we talking about here?
14% pen vs. ~100% inc Damage on amulet (t7 rolls) best case.
30% pen on tree vs. at least 700% inc Damage (stats/tree/gear)
800% * 1,3 = 1040
A) 800% * 1,44 = 1152%
B) 900% * 1,3 = 1170 %
The breakpoint is ~800% Base … 900% inc / 30 pen = 800% inc / 44 pen
There is no way to upload a excel and pasting it kills the Format
you could make a spreadsheet on google sheets and share it, but don’t trouble yourself if you’d rather not. just having that info gives me a reference point.
dude you pretty much repeated what I said earlier, which is why I was confused I thought you were trying to make a new point. Did you read the thread or just post? Also the increments you are using is 100% instead of 60-70 which is what a spell dmg mod would be on an amulet and would compare it to 8-9% pen. the threshold for pen being better I think is low enough that and end game mage would be well over it so I didn’t bother looking for the exact number. I think it’s around 500% though which I’m well over. So no it’s not obvious by the numbers you posted.
