# Warrior Priest: Implacable deals too much damage

Implacable deals too much damage, resulting in an overall 128% damage received.
The reason for this is, that tic damage is not split up into individual chunks to get to the sum of 20%, but deals the full 20% for every tic.

Here is a video to describe the situation: Warrior Priest Implacable Damage - YouTube

Implacable
Damage dealt to Saltzpyre is reduced by 20%. A further 20% of incoming damage is dealt to Saltzpyre over 3 seconds. Saltzpyre cannot be killed by damage dealt by Implacable.

• Health: 150 â†’ (-36) 114 â†’ (-7) 107 â†’ (-7) 100 â†’ (-7) 93
• The stormvermin hits for 36 damage (20% reduced from 45)
• Tics should deal 20% of incomming damage â†’ 36 * 0.2 = 7 over 3 tics â†’ 2,2,3
• Instead they deal the the full 7 damage each tic (as shown in the video)

That means: currently a hit that deals 45 damage (with full strength) results in 36+7+7+7=57 (=128%) damage received.

Correction

Current behaviour

• Stormvermin hits for 60 damage
• Is initially reduced by 40%
• 20% of reduced damage is applied each tic

In numbers:

• Health: 150 â†’ (-36) 114 [60 damage - 40%]
• Health: 114 â†’ (-7.2) 107 [20% of 36 incomming damage]
• Health: 107 â†’ (-7.2) 100 [20% of 36 incomming damage]
• Health: 100 â†’ (-7.2) 97 [20% of 36 incomming damage]

Resulting in a total of 57.6 damage from original 60 (effectively 4% damage reduction).

The statement â€śDamage dealt to Saltzpyre is reduced by 20%â€ť is currently wrong.

Expected behaviour (interpretation)

Implacable
Damage dealt to Saltzpyre is reduced by 20% (and thats gone). A further 20% of (the original) incoming damage is (not dealt directly, but) dealt over 3 seconds. Saltzpyre cannot be killed by damage dealt by Implacable.

In numbers:

Incoming damage: 60
Reduced (by 20%) to: 48, of which 12 (20% of original) is dealt over 3 seconds (4 per tic) and the remaining 36 is dealt directly.

(SV swipe deals 60 damage)
Damage dealt to Saltzpyre is reduced by 40%.
20% of the new damage taken is dealt to Saltzpyre every second for 3 seconds.

Effectively 4% damage reduction. (Or 40% if you activate Shield of Faith before the DoT kicks in)

Current effect: 60 > 36 + 7.2 + 7.2 + 7.2 = 57.6
Worded: 60 > 48 + 3.2 + 3.2 + 3.2 = 57.6
Effective DR is the exact same, just less frontload damage and more tick damage.
This works out in our favour since the tick damage can be mitigated with Shield of Faith.

5 Likes

Ohh thank you very much, i assumed that the initial 20% worked correctly, hence 45 = 100%. Thanks for the clarification! Then i guess a change in the description would suffice.

The description really made me feel like the intent was that it would end up as a total 20% damage reduction after the ticks are done though. As in: 60% of the damage you straight up take, 20% of the damage is straight up ignored, and the last 20% is turned into a DoT tick (that canâ€™t knock you out).

4% total damage reduction feels really weakâ€¦

5 Likes

Aye, on paper.
Implacableâ€™s DoT canâ€™t actually kill you so 36% of incoming damage is non lethal damage & it can be mitigated by Shield of Faith. Itâ€™s deceptively strong e.g a 150 damage hit wont kill you assuming youâ€™re above 90hp. (Though IB just gets a flat 30% DR so you can throw what I just said out the window.)

Personally think it would be better suited on Zealot unless it gets fleshed out more with Shield of Faith.

Iâ€™m 100% sure the wording was meant to mean what @TmanDW said. Itâ€™s bugged, and if Iâ€™m wrong and itâ€™s intentionally like this, it straight up sucks. No negating ticks with your extremely valuable, long cooldown ult does not make it ok. 4% effective DR for non lethal damage is pitiful for a class that has mediocre kill power, arguably less strong support than WHC gets for just existing, and little to no mobility.

Please donâ€™t give FS the idea itâ€™s ok to stay like this for any length of time, that would be a great disservice.

2 Likes

I understand itâ€™s still useful, but Iâ€™m pretty sure itâ€™s not functioning as FS intended if to function, and it still wouldnâ€™t be overpowered at all if it functioned like I think it was supposed to function.

4 Likes

So basically the expected interpretation, that differs from the current behaviour (and that people suggested here), is:

Implacable
Damage dealt to Saltzpyre is reduced by 20% (and thats gone). A further 20% of (the remaining) incoming damage is (not dealt directly, but) dealt over 3 seconds. Saltzpyre cannot be killed by damage dealt by Implacable.

In numbers:
Incoming damage: 60
Reduced (by 20%) to: 48, of which 9.6 (20%) is dealt over 3 seconds (3.2 per tic) and 38.4 (80%) is dealt directly.

1 Like

Aye Iâ€™m with ya. Frankly I think WP is hot garbage of a career.
Just trying to find a saving grace other than the dopamine hit of Cometâ€™s Gift.

Iâ€™d bake Righteous Fury into Shield of Faith (Ranged knockback immunity too) and replace passive Fury with some kind of CD reduction mechanic e.g cooldown reduction on kills.

Itâ€™d satisfy a lot of the control/uptime complaints, offer a little more Implacable synergy while retaining the same kills = Fury feeling (Just change the ult bar to orange )

Not quite.

For 100 damage attack for simplicity:
60 damage dealt up front, 20 damage negated, and 20 damage dealt as dot. This is how I assumed it worked from reading the description.

3 Likes

Ah so incoming damage is still based on the unreduced 100%?

Alright then:

Implacable
Damage dealt to Saltzpyre is reduced by 20% (and thats gone). A further 20% of (the original) incoming damage is (not dealt directly, but) dealt over 3 seconds. Saltzpyre cannot be killed by damage dealt by Implacable.

In numbers:
Incoming damage: 60
Reduced (by 20%) to: 48, of which 12 (20% of original) is dealt over 3 seconds (4 per tic) and the remaining 36 is dealt directly.

*Added as a correction to my original post

3 Likes

Yeah, all in all I understood it as â€śyou take 60% of incoming damage directly and an additional 20% of that same original incoming damage over 3 seconds.â€ť In numbers :

Thatâ€™s a flat 20% reduction at worst, and a potential 40% if you ult. I think this was the intention behind the wording.

Whatâ€™s happening right now, if Iâ€™m not mistaken, is â€śyou take 80% of incoming damage directly and an additional 20% of that reduced damage over 3 secondsâ€ť, which results (for 100 damage) in :
80 damage dealt up front, and 16 (20% of 80) dealt over 3 seconds, for an overall negation of 4 damage.
I doubt that is how it was intended to function.

3 Likes

Almostâ€¦
You only receive 60% damage initially (40% reduction), and then 20% of that value for each tic.
Which results (for 100 damage) in: 60 damage dealt up front, and 12 (20% of 60) for each tic (in total 60 + 3* 12 = 96, for an overall negation of 4 damage.

The end result is the same, as you described (init damage and tic damage is different), but:

This.

1 Like

Huhâ€¦ That is even worse because of how itâ€™s worded (â€śA further 20% of incoming damage is dealt to Saltzpyre over 3 seconds.â€ť), but oddly enough

actually no. The end result is that, instead of having

20% DR at worst and 40% at best (how I understood it would work),

you have

4% at worst and still 40% at best

Whereas my understanding of the current implementation was

4% at worst and 20% at best

Edit : @TheEmeser Fair, I know I had read that somewhere but there are so many WP threads atm that I didnâ€™t even bother scrolling up to see if it was in this one

1 Like

Thats right! @James pointed that out in the first response. The wording is off, and there is no 20% reduction anywhere. Guess the idea was -40%+20% = -20% overall

2 Likes

Itâ€™s ambiguous wording.
â€śDamage dealt to Saltzpyre is reduced by 20%. A further 20% of incoming damage is dealt to Saltzpyre over 3 seconds.â€ť

If the incoming tick damage was based on the initial value and dealt that 20% over 3 seconds rather than per second. Yeah it would be 40% at best, 20% at worst.

Currently 40% DR and the tick damage is 20% based on the final value.
(They could just change that 20% to 11% and it would retain â€ś20% DR at worst and 40%â€ť)
This plays nicely with other sources of DR.

So apparently they fixed it. Anyone know which version is official now ?
Also whatâ€™s the interaction with barkskin ? If it reduces initial and tick damage, we might be looking at some heavy DR there, no ?

I havenâ€™t tested this explicitly, but one run I was using barkskin and looked at my buff bar a few times while the dot was going off and did not see barkskin proccing. Unless Iâ€™m blind or otherwise mistaken, I think Boon is the play for WPoS.

1 Like