[Guide] Electrical Burn and its contribution to damage output

[DeputyChuck (Sheriff)]

EB can proc more than once on a given shock DoT

Are you sure about this ???

[Wingsday]

the EB damge bit is one if the things I really need to fix. For now, this will have to do:

If you look at the first table, basicaly, the more ranks you have in EB, the higher your median damage is, because you have a higher likelyhood of procing a Fire DoT and a higher likelyhood of having that fire DoT up for longer.
The “damage” I refer to in this thread is the average amout of fire DoT damage you get from a very large sample of shock DoTs.

Good point about the slag, I totaly forgot about that with all of the DoT stuff, Thanks.

Thanks! I apreciate that!

Regarding the multiple procs:
(@Chuck80, Ping!)

The multiple procs thing is based on a few of the things Ada said in the EB chance thread, specificaly:

Electrical Burn chances%

(including once where it fired twice in one set of six).

and

Electrical Burn chances%

What I think I’m seeing is that if Electrical Burn re-triggers while burn DoT is still active from the original source, the first set of burn DoT will be canceled, and a second set will simply start anew (instead of getting dual instances of burn damage or double damage values).

He decribes the observed behavior much better than I would have, so here’s his discription:

Electrical Burn chances%

For example, If I trigger Electrical Burn with Shock and AGGH!, and in the middle of that burn DoT, Electrical Burn triggers again, I will not see 32 burn damage ticks (nor will I see the damage numbers combined); I’ll see like maybe 20 standard-damage ticks, depending on when the second instance of Electrical Burn triggered.

---

(this part is partialy a note-to-self)
However, there was a bunch of stuff in there that I havn’t dealt with (yet), including the following:

Electrical Burn chances%

Still, I’m seeing some low initial numbers, and could use some peer review. First, I don’t think the burn damage is the same as the initial shock damage; it’s some fraction thereof (the individual burn damage ticks are less than the shock, but there are more, so the total DoT is a bit higher). I’m checking this in case subsequent Electrical Burn instances simply double the damage shown (which is not what I see… I think the ticks have to fire at exactly the same time for that).

and

Electrical Burn chances%

If I trigger burn damage with a weapon, then proc Shock and AGGH! which triggers Electrical Burn before the burn DoT from the weapon ends, I will see 32 damage tics (two full sets of burn DoT, one from each source).

[DeputyChuck (Sheriff)]

If you look at the first table, basicaly, the more ranks you have in EB, the higher your median damage is, because you have a higher likelihood of procing a Fire DoT (…) The “damage” I refer to in this thread is the average amout of fire DoT damage you get from a very large sample of shock DoTs.

Ok that makes sense, thanks

and a higher likelyhood of having that fire DoT up for longer.

Higher proc chance mean more chance to apply, and more chance that EB procs sooner in the Shock dot’s life (making the process of re-applying faster, resulting in higher damage over a long period of time)

But Burn DoTs are always 5 seconds
…Or I misunderstood you somewhere

[cioran (Don't. Call. Me. 'Dude'.)]

Bookmarking to see what you guys reason out. Wonderful job, Wings.

It’s way too late in this timezone for me to think straight, but is there a clear formula for the synergy with anarchy and its boost to WDT?

I was on Discord earlier with a random question about it now that the electrocute damage of WDT is (supposedly) fixed, but that probably made little sense…

As will this if I keep it up. G’night.

[DeputyChuck (Sheriff)]

It’s way too late in this timezone for me to think straight, but is there a clear formula for the synergy with anarchy and its boost to WDT?

I was on Discord earlier with a random question about it now that the electrocute damage of WDT is (supposedly) fixed, but that probably made little sense…

Anarchy doesn’t affect DoTs (except when using the Storm) so the fix brings nothing new to Anarchy-focused builds.

[DeputyChuck (Sheriff)]

The thing that bothers me is that when you have EB active, there is an EB icon that appears above the xp bar, suggesting a limit on it. (though it doesn’t necessarily mean anything)

I have tested EB a lot and have never seen a dual proc on one target…

He decribes the observed behavior much better than I would have, so here’s his discription:

That sounds like EB can proc again on a target that already has it, but they don’t stack…it simply resets the timer (and the icon’s duration)

As for the last part, it’s pretty strange… almost as if EB will not stack with any burn DoTs…even those from other sources. Maybe it’s in the way it was coded, so as not to be abusable…but it just applies to all burn DoTs.

[Wingsday]

I interpreted the multipule procing as a timer reset as well, and I’m fairly certain that the way I moddled the EB damage allows for the extension fof DoTs, but not stacking. However I’m not 100% sure, I was messing around with a few different models, including one where, in this sheet:

on the bottom row, instead of just adding up the column above it, I multiplied them together using the %chance stacking formula (1-(1-0.2)^n). My first instinct was that it worked like this, but I couldn’t find a way to work that by adding up each row first, so i decided I must have been doing something wrong and went with the adding method I have now.

I would apreciate a second on that actually, the more I think about it, I think i might have been right in the first place.

[DeputyChuck (Sheriff)]

I would apreciate a second on that actually, the more I think about it, I think i might have been right in the first place.

I’m pretty sure you were right the first time: chances can get asymptotically close to 100% but they will never reach it.

[DeputyChuck (Sheriff)]

@Adabiviak, we need you in here

[cioran (Don't. Call. Me. 'Dude'.)]

Anarchy doesn’t affect DoTs (except when using the Storm) so the fix brings nothing new to Anarchy-focused builds.

I mentioned I was tired, right? Sorry if that made no sense.
Anarchy affects splash a very great deal, which ties into the above about reapplying DOTs where applicable and resetting the timer.
I clearly need to re-read Ab’s post to make sure I understand the process he describes of burn damage ticks being lower than the shock ones, since I’ve frequently seen the opposite.
That probably means there’s context I’m missing since I doubt I’ve been as thorough.

I would apreciate a second on that actually, the more I think about it, I think i might have been right in the first place.

I’m pretty sure you are as well.

Now I really will be quiet and go to bed.

[Wingsday]

Awesome, glad to see that I wasn’t crazy at first, I’ll be updating the OP in a bit.

Also I highly recomend checking out ada’s posts in the other EB thread, it’s some good stuff.

[DeputyChuck (Sheriff)]

I mentioned I was tired, right? Sorry if that made no sense. Anarchy affects splash a very great deal, which ties into the above about reapplying DOTs where applicable and resetting the timer.

You really are tired
Splash damage may increase from Anarchy, but DoT, even proccing from splash, will not change.

I clearly need to re-read Ab’s post to make sure I understand the process he describes of burn damage ticks being lower than the shock ones, since I’ve frequently seen the opposite. That probably means there’s context I’m missing since I doubt I’ve been as thorough.

I too see the opposite, but that’s probably because the targets are flesh and/or we have DoT boost.
The base value however may be lower.

For example, let’s say that EB damage is …60% of the base shock damage…for example, and that our source creates 100dmg DoTs

100 dmg shock
Gets boosted through catalyst COM to 150 (so it displays 150 dmg)
EB procs, creates a 150 * 0.6 = 90 dmg fire DoT
which recieves the catalyst bonus too (so it’s now 135)
and then it gets the fire-on-flesh multiplier 135 * 1.75 = 236
So it displays 236 fire damage for 150 shock damage

At 68% or more, you would get higher fire damage even on a target that isn’t weak to fire, just based on the DoT boost from the Catalyst com… let alone other boosts.

Another factor is shield:

Create a shock DoT
It gets boosted by *2.5 (because shock on shield)
EB procs, based on that value
Shield is now depleted
EB’s damage is based on the shock on shield value…but is now fire on flesh, compounding both matching element bonus.

Add in a few other bonus from a Bones, WDT (now) and Slag and you can truly transform a small number into a big one.

[Wingsday]

I’ve got the new screenshots up, I haven’t fixed the text yet, but that should be reletively straight forward.

Also, here’s a link to the google doc, feel free to mess around with it a bit if you want, I have a local copy.

[Adabiviak (Guajiro Pandoreño)]

Hey everyone… just got off work and am getting settled in. I’m not sure what the current question is?

[DeputyChuck (Sheriff)]

Less a question, more of a rewording of your findings so we’re all on the same page.

What percentage of the shock dot is the burn one based on ?
You said it was lower than 100%

[Adabiviak (Guajiro Pandoreño)]

Ok (clears throat for a heck of a Scooter impersonation)

Let me throw some numbers at you! 5! 26! 812!

Seriously though, this should be easy to approximate? The variable to account for will be the difference in elemental damage against a fleshy target (since we’re all going to be lighting up the target dummy, I imagine) between fire and shock.

Assuming (grain of salt here, but I think the numbers for this are correct) the wiki is corect, shock has a multiplier of 1 against flesh (no alteration), where fire has a 1.75 multiplier against flesh. If I hit the target dummy for 100 shock damage, and the fire from Electrical Burn is hitting for 175, we would know that the fire is hitting for 100% of the value of the shock damage (and getting the buff due to the target’s health type). We could confirm against the stationary turret in Opportunity to observe a burn damage of 40 against the armored target.

Let me re-run some tests here.

edit - short version, I think the fire damage is one third of the shock damage that spawned it. If I go to Normal mode, burn damage is about half the electrocute damage that triggers it. Because the target is flesh, the fire damage gets a “free” 1.5 multiplier; if I back that out to derive the value of the original fire damage value, I get a value that’s about a third of the electrocute damage.

If I bring this to Ultimate mode, the fire damage is lower at like 26% of the electrocute damage, which I’m guessing is from the damage scaling (I’m at OP3). I’m not sure how to factor that in. Also, in UVHM, Electrical Burn against armored targets is super low… I was hoping to use this to check my method here, but 51103 electrocute damage was triggering 330 fire damage. Anyway, does that seem like a sound way to calculate this?

[Wingsday]

Hey, so I rewrote most of the OP, hopefully it’s a little more clear now. Let me know if there are any parts that are still unclear.

I have a few things I need to add (including your testing Ada), but it’s late so I’ll do them later.

I confirmed that you can have multipule procs of EB for a given shock DoT:
With 10/5 EB I had a a few fire DoTs with up to 20 procs (ranging from 15-20), as expected based on the model I’m using in this thread.

Finaly, with WDT fixed, I’m thinking it is proably at least a little bit superior to run EB builds with a fire bone, since a shock bone would add with WDT. But that is only with regard to EB procs (not the actual raw damage whatever you’re using to proc the DoT with) and I haven’t tested or run the numbers so… ¯_(ツ)_/¯

It’s too bad flame flare’s chance dosen’t scale up with level, I think Krieg would have been able to do some really filthy stuff with his DoTs, that said, it does have a ~91.3% chance to reproc, so mabye there’s still hope. I’ll have to try it out.

[MidnightNova ([In Memories Delusional - Got Snivy'd])]

Bookmarking this to read later today!

[cioran (Don't. Call. Me. 'Dude'.)]

You really are tired Splash damage may increase from Anarchy, but DoT, even proccing from splash, will not change.

Well, I wasn’t quite that tired As I said, I was referring to the opportunities for resetting the EB timer by way of getting more electrocute DOT procs going.
That’s strictly a ‘field test’ thing since it ties into DPS and thus kill skills.

I too see the opposite, but that’s probably because the targets are flesh and/or we have DoT boost.

Yes, that’s what I was assuming I needed to adjust the quote for, and which @Adabiviak gets into below.

Anyway, does that seem like a sound way to calculate this?

I have some free time, but if I say I’ll use it to try and duplicate this I will (without fail) end up farming for rare skins or something. Sometimes I have the attention span of a gnat.
Thus: it seems good, and (less good Scooter impersonation) I definitely won’t try to test it, probably.

Although it sounds like a grind, the best way to test against Marcus’s dummy would probably be in co-op with a low-level Axton whose turret can be killed in a duel. Or something.

If I bring this to Ultimate mode, the fire damage is lower at like 26% of the electrocute damage, which I’m guessing is from the damage scaling (…)

I was switching between OP0 and OP8 yesterday and testing on Bullymongs for examples of flesh enemies and damage reduction but with kill skills active, I’ll see if I can go over those recordings.
I wish the ruddy things would stand still and get tested on, this is for science after all.

[DeputyChuck (Sheriff)]

Finaly, with WDT fixed, I’m thinking it is proably at least a little bit superior to run EB builds with a fire bone, since a shock bone would add with WDT

If you only consider the burn damage yes, but otherwise a shock bone will also increase the shock DoT damage (all 6 ticks) and the damage of the weapon/skill that created it. Overall, when you consider all the damage you deal around an EB proc, a shock bones is still better.