Elementalism Crash


#43

The tweaked FiveAlive was given to me by someone who has it. I have no idea where it came from.

ComputerPuzzleHelper


#44

Just thought I’d add: Crystallised Blaze still crashes my client even without any mods installed. Whether I have any mods installed doesn’t seem to have any effect on my client’s stability in relation to this glitch.


#45

My Cabal leader crashes often due to CF. The only mod of consequence that he has installed that I do not is BooBar. He’s a bit worried about losing all of his configuration, so I’m going to install BooBar and see if my crashes increase again. It would make sense since it’s dealing with cast bars and spell effects. If this can be verified to increase CF crash chances then this would definitely be the first mod identified to do so (EffectsUI is still not a sure bet). If so, I wonder if someone in the mod community can make a fork of BooBar on github as a test version heavily modified to provide as much debug info as possible. Maybe I’m too optimistic about this… but something needs done and since FC isn’t doing anything then it’s up to us to attempt to mitigate this I guess.


#46

Just crashed in a PUG Story Mode NYR. I rushed to the birds and took them out before the raid was there. I could hear CF go off on one of the other garage floors below me when I crashed :frowning:


#47

FC Dev 1: “Hmm. Crystalized Flame is causing a significant number of crashes for people. What should we do about it?”

FC Dev 2: “How about we introduce a new signet that makes AoE abilities even more desirable so more people use CF?”

FC Dev 1: “Brilliant!”


#48

Crystallised Blaze is not buffed by the Signet of Nemain–or, if it is, it should not be. The signet is not supposed to buff passive AoE abilities.


#49

Heresy! SWL does not even have two developers!


#50

I’m being told that it is being buffed by the signet. I’m not an Elemental user, so I haven’t tested. When I repeated your words I was told the tooltips show the numbers being buffed.


#51

Tooltip numbers aren’t directly connected with the actual numbers, so it could just be a Tooltip error/typo and not actually the signet buffing the ability. One would have to test it to be sure.


#52

I said I didn’t test it, which implies testing is needed to resolve the dispute. I trust the other source as much as I trust DumbOx in matters of game mechanics and theorycrafting. I’m sure they’ll both test it thoroughly now that the dispute is known.


#53

I know you did, just adding that the tooltip is not directly connected with the actual combat numbers =).


#54

I’d actually heavily disagree here. Do you have any evidence proving your claim? In which case, you can probably bug report something that you notice isn’t working properly in this forum. :slight_smile:

The ability tooltips have been one of the most reliable and consistent features since TSW. The ability tooltips always update dynamically and show the following part of the damage calculation formula of the ability:
(ability’s base damage) x (sum of damage increases applied at that moment to the ability)

I do not recall it ever not working consistently with the numbers actually tested during playing sessions.

So far, the tooltip clearly shows an increase in damage exactly equal to the amount of damage increase the Signet of Nemain gives me.

What DumbOx said probably comes from a confusion. According to my tests (and tooltips also prove my point), the damage increase from the Signet of Nemain does not apply to procs (i’d be curious to know if the increase in the maximum number of targets hit works here on procs @DumbOx, mainly tests with Singularities). But not all procs are passives, and not all passives are procs. This behaviour is consistent so far, because, for instance, the Signet of Nemain buffs the damage of Annihilate, but does not buff the damage of Fractured Existence (Pandemonium’s passive that create a singularity - singularities being treated as procs indeed do not get buffed by the signet).

One of the other confusions might come from the fact that, in our mind, Crystallized Blaze ticks are procs. While it is true, the very first tick of Crystallized Blaze is in fact not a proc (easily testable because this first tick can trigger various effects such as the Destruction weapon affix - procs cannot trigger any other effects being the general rule here). This makes it that the whole Crystallized Blaze ability is treated as a non-proc ability, therefore, it is buffed by the Signet of Nemain.

Anyway, i feel like we’re getting offtopic here, and it’ll be probably wise to create a thread about the signet, because as it stands, the whole existence of the signet in its current state is an heresy. The damage increase makes no sense and exacerbates the domination of rifle builds even in the content unrelated to OD (dungeons, etc…) where the single target DPS of rifles is now boosted even more because of the fact that rifles do single target damage through AoE ability usage…


#55

I’d have to do more digging than i care to at the moment, but there was a patch note at some point where they changed a value of an ability tooltip, and said it didn’t change the actual combat value, and that it was a fix of the tooltip only.

There has also been reports of some weapon tooltips showing strange numbers on the french client … while not an ability its the same idea behind it.

EDIT: found easier than expected. So here is the Tooltip fix from the patchnotes

  • Fixed an issue which caused the damage displayed in the tooltip for Ice Beam to be modified by the wrong types of bonuses. This only affects the tooltip damage and not the actual resulting damage.

And since i mentioned it, here is the gear tooltip error in french

So i stand by my assumption that the tooltip does not affect the damage directly. The two are likely calculated separately, and that is where tooltip errors happen. One would have to check with actual damage outputs to be sure.


#56

I didn’t exactly specify that both tooltips and the actual damage are calculated from the same source, i just pointed out that tooltips were generally reliable (relatively speaking, with the number of bugs this game has, it’s something that’s worth pointing imo).

Also, i won’t “necessarily” go out to test a damage increase of something in the field, because if i were to test every single source of damage increases in the game for every single ability, and compare the result of it to the tooltips, it would take me years (so it’s not possible), and for 2, the logic is rather the following:

  1. DumbOx states that the signet does not work on passives, without further specifications, so i conclude this is an assumption rather than a test based on data or something like that.
  2. I check his statement ingame on tooltips of not only 1, but 2 passives (Blaze, and Annihilate). Both are correctly increased by the signet. 2 tooltips being dynamically updated basically validates for me that there most likely are no bug related to one accidental tooltip improperly written - here, “most likely” is enough for most of people (otherwise, i’d spend days testing stuff in the game, and at that point, i’d like to get paid for that :smiley: ).
  3. It’s pretty annoying to test stuff like this in the field, because the value of the signet is rather small for now (have only a blue lvl 20, so it’s an extra 5%), so this requires a big-enough data pool, and the results are still prone to interpretation mistakes, RNG deviations or any other human data collection common mistakes! To me, tooltips are more reliable than collected data (only exception is when data is brought by DumbOx, most of the other people aren’t testing things properly or accurately enough).

At this point, i just stop going further since the game already tells me that DumbOx’s assumption is not valid. I won’t always start assuming that the tooltip updates are wrong based on one historical bug that has been fixed at some point (that i honestly have forgot about) when for the rest, tooltips have been reliable (as reliable as taking into account some exotic interactions like journeyman or ele-specific power ability signet increasing the damage of Voltaic Shunt procs, that’s something!). Also, had no clue about the French client, so won’t comment about that, i don’t play with non-English clients.


#57

The history of that one bug that was fixed, supports that the two ain’t directly affecting each other. Would be strange if one ability had a direct connection between tooltip and actual value, and another didn’t.

I provided you with the evidence in the patch notes, as you asked for. Just to cover everything, no bug report to be made, couse i don’t look into the exact numbers of abilities nearly close enough to notice a mismatch ;).

“could just be a tooltip error/typo” is really the keywords in the above. That is not to say that is the case though, but it could be.

Tooltips are generally reliable, as they should be, but error and miscommunication happens. We just can’t know that without testing, but as you said, hard to test in the field. It’s really for the devs to look into =P.

As for DumbOxs post, it was mentioned during testing that passives should not be affected by the signet. With that said, thats beta info, and that can easily have changed. My only point was that Tooltip and Actual Value can be mismatched, and that is all i am defending and standing by =P.


#58

My assumption of how the Signet of Nemain was supposed to interact with passive abilities, such as Crystallised Blaze, was borne on good authority from Funcom, but, because the signet was not present until late into the closed beta, I had no opportunity to test it for myself. I would have dispelled all doubts I myself had if I was given the chance to. What I was told, however, seemed clear enough. I’m sorry that I was spreading misinformation.


#59

Anyone remember if these Crystal Blaze crashes happened before they fixed the damage being calculated with ele weapon’s power regardless of it being active?


#60

Yep, crashes already existed back then.


#61

Ok so that removes the possibility of the crash being related to that fix