Warframe Revised: >100% Status Chance / Shotgun Megathread

[.durandle.]

53 minutes ago, rstripn said:

For anyone confused about why status shotgun enthusiasts are upset:

For every pellet-based status shotgun, (old status chance / inherent multishot) * 3 = new status chance.

This seems not only okay but great; average procs per second should go up significantly. And this is true for any shotgun that was modded for less than 100% status chance.

Old system: Status chance was the chance that at least one of the barrage of pellets would proc something.

90% status: on average a single pellet had a extremely low chance of proccing.

95% status: on average a single pellet had a very low chance of proccing.

99% status: on average a single pellet had a low chance of proccing.

So far so good. Here's the problem:

100% status: every single pellet is guaranteed to proc a status.

The game rounded 99.xx% at some point up to 100%. The majority of shotguns could hit that value.

It was super broken for several shotguns, and was just getting worse as more mods came out to increase status chance. And with the new statuses all stacking, it would have become even more insane.

But it was an effective nerf of almost every status shotgun. Once you hit the magic number, the more pellets you shot, the more status effects you got, period. The more pellets it could shoot after reaching 100% status, the harder it got nerfed.

I'm not saying the change was good or bad. I'm not a shotgun enthusiast. I have no horse in this race. I'm just explaining for the several people who have posted saying they don't understand the issue.

no i understand the change but de nerfed the shotguns that could hit 100% to much

if they wanted to nerf shotgun status they should have changed their status chance to about the point where an old 100% status build would get to say a 50% under the new system not a range of 20-40% depending on pellet count

also if they wanted to nerf shotgun status they should have given shotguns real crit mods as that is what stops most shotguns with crit viable stats (if they had access to rifle mods) being crit viable

[(PSN)SEA_TOASTER]

On 2020-03-02 at 1:00 PM, [DE]Bear said:

Greater than 100% Status having meaning:

Years ago we added Orange and Red Critical Damage numbers when you land a Critical with greater than 100%. For years, Status being greater than 100% has done nothing except guarantee Status - which is good, just not an added incentive to go over 100%. We are changing that this update. 

 

When you hit a Status Chance greater than 100%, a single damage instance will be able to create two Status Effects. This means if you have a Shot with 200% Status Chance modded with both Blast and Toxin Damage, that single shot will result in both Status Effects!

 

It is worth noting we are fixing a UI inconsistency that is ‘Display Only’. Right now the Arsenal shows Status Chance affected by Multishot, which makes reading the new >100% value confusing. For example, the Arsenal might say 120% but really the Status Chance is 80%. We don’t have Multishot affect any Critical Stats (Chance or Multiplier), so we are fixing this display inconsistency. Multishot now has its own Stat. 

 

Shotguns have a unique Role here based on a very patch-work history with how they interact with Status Chance. A Shotgun that shoots 99% Status Chance would give you 35% (roughly) status per pellet. 100% Status Gives you 100% Status per pellet. This huge jump in performance happens with just a 1% gain - why? Well, to answer that we have to look at our choice to make what the UI conveys reality. It would feel broken to shoot a Shotgun with 100% Status and not see a perfect spread of Effects. In reality, to make Status consistent we have to treat Shotguns as a special case.
 

Shotguns as a special case means we have buffed the Status Chance of all Shotguns by x3 or greater. The UI now behaves to show the reality that you are determining Status Chance per pellet. 

 

Stacking Status Effects:

 

But wait - THERE’S MORE! In addition to being able to achieve two Status Effects on a single shot with >100% Status,  we are also adding new meaning if you get a duplicate Status Effect on an enemy overall.

 

This section will outline exactly what this means for each Status type, including information on how multiple Status Effects behaved with stacking prior to this Hotfix:
 

 

Type	Stacking Behaviour when a duplicate Status Effect Occurs:
Slash	Each Slash Status has its own duration, but now we only show a maximum of 10 damage numbers in the HUD, damage is unaffected, but reducing how many damage events we show helps with performance
Impact	Repeat single-target Impact Status Effects will escalate the efficacy of the Impact Status (removed previous change of adding Ragdoll as maximum Stagger consequence).
Puncture	The first Puncture Status Effect has an enemy deal 30% less Damage. Subsequent Puncture Status add +5% weakening, leading to up to 75% (capped). Each Puncture Status has a duration of 6 Seconds.
Cold	The first Cold Status Effect deals 25% slow. Subsequent Cold Status Effects deal +5% slow for a total of 70% slow at 10 procs. Each Cold Status has a duration of 6 seconds.
Heat	No Change.
Toxin	See Slash, plus the base duration of a Toxin Status Effect now matches Slash for 6 seconds.
Electric	AoE Electric Damage that is part of the Status Effect can now reoccur while the target is still under the stun animation of another Electric Status Effect.
Blast	Grants the Blast Status Effect a single target. Blast Status reduces enemy accuracy by 30% base. Subsequent Blast Status Effects add +5% inaccuracy for  for 75% total at 10 stacks. Each Blast Status has a 6 second Duration.
Corrosive	The first Corrosive Status Effect strips 26% Armor. Subsequent Corrosive Status Effects strip 6% more Armor, leading up to 80% Armor removal. Each Corrosive Status Effect lasts 8 seconds. Note: Corrosive was the only Status with infinite Duration and 100% Efficacy toward a defensive stat. This was necessary to some based on how Armor Scaled. We feel our rebalancing efforts need a differently behaving Corrosive Proc to balance out all Status overall.
Radiation	The first Radiation Status Effect has an enemy deal 100% Damage to allies. Subsequent Radiation Status adds +50% damage, leading to up to 550% (capped). Each Radiation Status Effect has a duration of 12 seconds.
Magnetic	New Status Effect entirely: enhanced Damage! First Magnetic Status Effect deals 100% additional Shield damage, subsequent Magnetic Status add +25% for a total of 325% (capped). Enemies under a Magnetic Status Effect cannot regenerate Shields. Magnetic Status Duration is now 6 seconds.
Viral	New Status Effect entirely: enhanced Damage! First Viral Status Effect deals 100% additional Health damage, subsequent Viral Status add +25% for a total of 325% (capped). Note: Before Viral would halve a target’s health pool and simply refresh the duration. Now it deals 2x Damage to Health, and can scale up to 4.5x Damage on repeat Status Effects.
Gas	The base duration of a Gas Status Effect now matches Slash for 6 seconds. No longer does AoE with forced Poison Status Effect (resulting in Poison DoT for enemies in radius), instead it does AoE DoT Gas damage around the target.

Players - aka Tenno - can only have a Maximum of 1 Stack on them - you cannot receive Stacked Status Effects as a player from enemies, fear not!

Why: The inclusion of enhanced or different stacking of Duplicate Status Effects is one to refresh the appeal of Status.

In addition, we’ve removed 0.25x Multiplier for Elemental Status Effects, meaning all Elemental Status Effects are 4x more likely.

Why: Critical has long been king - and while we are leaving Critical as is, our goal is to bring Status into the Arsenals in a new light for all Primary, Secondary, and Melee weapons.Our long-term goal with this change is to build upon this series of changes to eventually allow Status to impact bigger threats like Liches and Eidolons.

 

 

 

Please remember to leave your feedback in a constructive and civil manner! Remember, this thread is for FEEDBACK ONLY. If you have a bug, please make sure you submit your bug on this thread and follow the new guidelines!

I personally did not like the shotgun changes but please buff the Kuva drakgoon it is worse then the normal drakgoon it may have better crit and mag and status but it has 240 less base damage it is my favorite weapon please just give it 11% status and have it equal its predecessor in damage cause we dont have to old 100% status shotgun cause that was powerful but please buf my kuva drakgoon.

Love a upset player.

[rstripn]

5 hours ago, (PS4)Used_microwave said:

I personally did not like the shotgun changes but please buff the Kuva drakgoon it is worse then the normal drakgoon it may have better crit and mag and status but it has 240 less base damage it is my favorite weapon please just give it 11% status and have it equal its predecessor in damage cause we dont have to old 100% status shotgun cause that was powerful but please buf my kuva drakgoon.

Love a upset player.

If you have 25% damage bonus on kuva drakgoon it deals on average the same damage on charged shots as does the regular drakgoon.

If you have 40% damage bonus on kuva drakgoon it deals on average about the same damage on uncharged shots and more damage on charged shots.

41% bonus or higher = pure upgrade across the board, absolutely no negatives. Better in every possible way.

Now add -any- type of crit mod and the kuva drakgoon absolutely decimates the regular drakgoon.

 

P.S. I only know this because at first I was also upset the kuva drakgoon had lower damage, that's why i worked out the numbers in the first place.

P.S. Not only is status chance higher on kuva drakgoon charged shot but on the uncharged shot it's WAY higher, so pretty much any status that directly deals or increases damage will make the uncharged shot better even with only 25% bonus.

 

P.S. The math just based on crit, if anyone cares:

Charged attack comparison at minimum (25)% bonus:

(460*1.25)([1-0.21] + (0.21)(2.5)) = (700)([1-0.075] + (0.075)(2.0))

Uncharged attack comparison at 41% bonus:

(230*1.41)([1-0.21] + (0.21)(2.5)) > (400)([1-0.075] + (0.075)(2.0))

note to other math geeks: I could have simplified the equations but I kept extra detail so they'd make more sense

Edited March 18, 2020 by rstripn

[rstripn]

56 minutes ago, .durandle. said:

no i understand the change but de nerfed the shotguns that could hit 100% to much

if they wanted to nerf shotgun status they should have changed their status chance to about the point where an old 100% status build would get to say a 50% under the new system not a range of 20-40% depending on pellet count

I think that there probably should be some rebalancing; but it shouldn't be completely independent of pellet count. That was the most broken part of the old system. Maybe a shotgun with 4-5 pellets should be able to hit 50% but if you have 8+ pellets there's no way that should be reachable without all the status mods and a god riven. There's too many statuses that stack now, and soon bosses like Eidolons and Orb Mothers become vulnerable to status.

[nslay]

I mean, Leyzar sums up these changes quite nicely using the Strun Wraith:

Spoiler

 

He used to be able to one-two shot stronger enemies (that were nerfed with armor changes) with weaker status effects with the Strun Wraith. Now he can't really do that anymore. So the Strun Wraith is much weaker against weaker enemies using stronger status effects. I don't know how much clearer it could possibly be: status shotguns are completely ruined. That's almost all of them except for around 4-5 that can make do with hybrid builds... like Strun Wraith. The rest have too low of crit chance to use the Hunter Munitions/Viral bandaid (which is what I use on almost all of my hybrid shotgun builds now).

[(XBOX)Rhythm Grey]

7 hours ago, rstripn said:

If you're counting old slash weighting as part of your testing then yeah any high slash weapon just got screwed, shotgun or not. There's no argument there so please stop including it. It's been awhile now. All the complaints have been made. You're hurting your own arguments trying to roll the slash weighting into the overall shotgun status discussion.

 

well... i personally disagree with slash weapons as a whole being screwed, as my dread still 1-2 shots a corrupt heavy bombard at lvl 140 with just over 200% crit and hunter munitions added to it. so it wasnt screwed, many of my other weapons that are slash and crit based were not screwed over by the changes either.

 

hunter munitions helps a lot when dealing with high lvl enemies, as it helps tear through health and such.  even a lvl 140 corpus tech was swiftly taken care of by my hunter munitions dread.  

 

so while on a short term scale, slash was nerfed, on a longterm? not really, all my guns perform either the same as they did, or better after the changes, none of them feel nerfed, and my corinth is getting replaced with its prime counterpart in a bout a week (however far away titania prime is)

[rstripn]

49 minutes ago, (XB1)Neon Lights9212 said:

well... i personally disagree with slash weapons as a whole being screwed, as my dread still 1-2 shots a corrupt heavy bombard at lvl 140 with just over 200% crit and hunter munitions added to it. so it wasnt screwed, many of my other weapons that are slash and crit based were not screwed over by the changes either.

hunter munitions helps a lot when dealing with high lvl enemies, as it helps tear through health and such.  even a lvl 140 corpus tech was swiftly taken care of by my hunter munitions dread.  

so while on a short term scale, slash was nerfed, on a longterm? not really, all my guns perform either the same as they did, or better after the changes, none of them feel nerfed, and my corinth is getting replaced with its prime counterpart in a bout a week (however far away titania prime is)

 

Literally nothing changed regarding Hunter Munitions. The nerf was only in terms of proccing slash as part of a weapon's normal status chance. Your dread now has a fraction of the chance it did before to proc slash. It doesn't mean your weapon is worse, it could even mean it's better, if you prefer other statuses over slash.

Crit didn't get nerfed. In fact, it may indirectly have gotten better for primaries because Hunter Munitions is a much better way of proccing slash than before relative to normal status procs.

Facts: Slash proc chance got heavily nerfed relative to other statuses. Slash status itself got somewhat nerfed because it doesn't go through shields anymore.

Not necessarily bad things, but they are facts.

 

P.S. My wording could have been better I suppose, "any high slash weapon just got screwed" should have been "any high slash weapon just got screwed in terms of its chance of proccing slash instead of other statuses". 😛

Edited March 18, 2020 by rstripn

[Nox_Terminus]

1 hour ago, (XB1)Neon Lights9212 said:

well... i personally disagree with slash weapons as a whole being screwed, as my dread still 1-2 shots a corrupt heavy bombard at lvl 140 with just over 200% crit and hunter munitions added to it. so it wasnt screwed, many of my other weapons that are slash and crit based were not screwed over by the changes either.

 

hunter munitions helps a lot when dealing with high lvl enemies, as it helps tear through health and such.  even a lvl 140 corpus tech was swiftly taken care of by my hunter munitions dread.  

 

so while on a short term scale, slash was nerfed, on a longterm? not really, all my guns perform either the same as they did, or better after the changes, none of them feel nerfed, and my corinth is getting replaced with its prime counterpart in a bout a week (however far away titania prime is)

In the case of pure status weapons, slash was indeed nerfed by a reduction of proc consistency.

In the case of hybrids (which use Hunter Munitions), and crit weapons (which use Hunter Munitions), slash was not nerfed.

If you can't notice the difference in consistency, that's fine I suppose, but that doesn't change reality.

Edited March 18, 2020 by Nox_Terminus

[(XBOX)Rhythm Grey]

1 hour ago, rstripn said:

 

Literally nothing changed regarding Hunter Munitions. The nerf was only in terms of proccing slash as part of a weapon's normal status chance. Your dread now has a fraction of the chance it did before to proc slash. It doesn't mean your weapon is worse, it could even mean it's better, if you prefer other statuses over slash.

Crit didn't get nerfed. In fact, it may indirectly have gotten better for primaries because Hunter Munitions is a much better way of proccing slash than before relative to normal status procs.

Facts: Slash proc chance got heavily nerfed relative to other statuses. Slash status itself got somewhat nerfed because it doesn't go through shields anymore.

Not necessarily bad things, but they are facts.

 

P.S. My wording could have been better I suppose, "any high slash weapon just got screwed" should have been "any high slash weapon just got screwed in terms of its chance of proccing slash instead of other statuses". 😛

ah, i misinterpreted what had been said, as i thought when you mentioned slash weapons, i assumed it meant any source of slash procs as well.  

[(XBOX)Rhythm Grey]

16 minutes ago, Nox_Terminus said:

In the case of pure status weapons, slash was indeed nerfed by a reduction of proc consistency.

In the case of hybrids (which use Hunter Munitions), and crit weapons (which use Hunter Munitions), slash was not nerfed.

If you can't notice the difference in consistency, that's fine I suppose, but that doesn't change reality.

a fault on my part,  i had assumed that when they mentioned slash procs being changed, that all slash procs were affected.  

[rstripn]

6 minutes ago, (XB1)Neon Lights9212 said:

ah, i misinterpreted what had been said, as i thought when you mentioned slash weapons, i assumed it meant any source of slash procs as well.  

Understandable misunderstanding. 🙂

My wording could definitely have been more specific.

[Andele3025]

8 hours ago, rstripn said:

But it was an effective nerf of almost every status shotgun. Once you hit the magic number, the more pellets you shot, the more status effects you got, period. The more pellets it could shoot after reaching 100% status, the harder it got nerfed.

Slight correction, its not just about 100% status, its that DE didnt actually buff shotguns by 3x status chance since proc probability isnt a sum of all the pellets.
This in turn means that the average proc per second for the stats a shotgun had proportionally dropped down the more pellets a shotgun had compared to its status.

Or in slighty different terms, im guessing a nice chunk of the complaints wouldnt be there if Tigris Prime and Boar Prime had the 25% they should have had, Sobek the 28 or at least 25~26% (if balancing more by full build), etc since then the in practice output of status shotguns would have been on a similar curve as of non-status and lower pellet count shotguns.

Edited March 18, 2020 by Andele3025

[rstripn]

2 hours ago, Andele3025 said:

Slight correction, its not just about 100% status, its that DE didnt actually buff shotguns by 3x status chance since proc probability isnt a sum of all the pellets.
This in turn means that the average proc per second for the stats a shotgun had proportionally dropped down the more pellets a shotgun had compared to its status.

Or in slighty different terms, im guessing a nice chunk of the complaints wouldnt be there if Tigris Prime and Boar Prime had the 25% they should have had, Sobek the 28 or at least 25~26% (if balancing more by full build), etc since then the in practice output of status shotguns would have been on a similar curve as of non-status and lower pellet count shotguns.

_{I apologize for how rude this will sound, but: Correction not accepted.}

(Old status chance / inherent number of pellets) * 3.0 = new status chance. I checked it for every shotgun with a status chance higher than 10%. Status shotguns got nerfed. But the way in which it happened was mathematically very simple and made perfect sense in general.

_{You're not talking about a simple process. You're talking about some form of curve so that shotguns are relative to each other as good or bad at status effects as they used to be. If it was a "good" status shotgun before you feel should still be better than the ones that used to be "bad" status shotguns. Should they have done that? Maybe. But they did exactly what they said they would.}

I have no intention of getting involved in the math arguments so many people have been posting in this thread. For one I don't use shotguns; I prefer weapons that don't shoot bullets. Also, while I'm extremely skilled at mathematics, I don't enjoy it - so I won't argue it unless I care about a subject.

I do like things to make sense and promises to be kept. If they don't or they weren't, then I agree there's a problem.

(Old status chance / inherent number of pellets) * 3.0 = new status chance. If you agree that calculation is correct, then we may not agree about the shotgun changes, but at least we agree on fundamental mathematics.

Edited March 18, 2020 by rstripn

[Andele3025]

1 minute ago, rstripn said:

Correction not accepted.

(Old status chance / inherent number of pellets) * 3.0 = new status chance.

Except its old status *3 /pellet count. Steve said himself they will buff total status chance by 3 on the devstream multiple times.

Confusion might arise since the math for the current broken pellet nerf works in either order, but doesnt when you recalc probability (iirc there was a table a few pages ago that shows it off). Tigris 90% requires 25% chance across 8 pellets to be hit.

1 minute ago, rstripn said:

You're not talking about a simple process like they promised and delivered. You're talking about a complicated curve so that shotguns are relative to each other as good or bad at procs per second as they used to be.

No, im talking exactly about the promised process from the devstream. They stated that they dont want a huge nerf, which it was; that they are going to buff status chance (aka per shot probabiliy, not per pellet one) by "3xing it on all shotguns in the game", which they didnt; the graf DE used even used status probability per shot, not per pellet as demonstrated by the red and blue lines, the blue "buffed" x coordinate was literally 3x y coordinate value). In fact even Steves yahtzee comparison kicks in here since multishot for shotguns is indeed much more like fire rate for other guns (and inverse for fire rate), EXPLICITLY NOTED THAT ITS ABOUT TOTAL PROBABILIY and multiple times stating that you could proc twice with the same instance/pellet.
Or in much simpler, if you were confused and thought buffing per pellet chance 3x of e.g. the tigris was a buff to status chance by 3x, no, its a status chance buff of like 2.05~06ish.

P.S. there was no complicated curve, its a basic multiplication chain/chance to the power of events, quite literally grade school stuff.

[rstripn]

10 minutes ago, Andele3025 said:

Except its old status *3 /pellet count. Steve said himself they will buff total status chance by 3 on the devstream multiple times.

Confusion might arise since the math for the current broken pellet nerf works in either order, but doesnt when you recalc probability (iirc there was a table a few pages ago that shows it off). Tigris 90% requires 25% chance across 8 pellets to be hit.

No, im talking exactly about the promised process from the devstream. They stated that they dont want a huge nerf, which it was; that they are going to buff status chance (aka per shot probabiliy, not per pellet one) by "3xing it on all shotguns in the game", which they didnt; the graf DE used even used status probability per shot, not per pellet as demonstrated by the red and blue lines, the blue "buffed" x coordinate was literally 3x y coordinate value). In fact even Steves yahtzee comparison kicks in here since multishot for shotguns is indeed much more like fire rate for other guns (and inverse for fire rate), EXPLICITLY NOTED THAT ITS ABOUT TOTAL PROBABILIY and multiple times stating that you could proc twice with the same instance/pellet.
Or in much simpler, if you were confused and thought buffing per pellet chance 3x of e.g. the tigris was a buff to status chance by 3x, no, its a status chance buff of like 2.05~06ish.

P.S. there was no complicated curve, its a basic multiplication chain/chance to the power of events, quite literally grade school stuff.

I accept that your argument is not as complicated as I thought. And I accept that the stream may have showed something different than what was implemented.

I think we agree on both these statements:

1) They said status would be buffed by 3x to make up for the change in multishot

2) There is a simple equation that shows a clear intent to increase status per pellet by 3x

If we agree on those then nothing else matters to me, and I leave you to your infinite math argument where most of the numbers are right but the meaning of words can't be agreed upon for some reason.

[TRPBWhite]

1 hour ago, rstripn said:

(Old status chance / inherent number of pellets) * 3.0 = new status chance.

29 minutes ago, Andele3025 said:

Except its old status *3 /pellet count.

I don't see how the difference is meaningful here. The result is exactly the same.

What i don't agree with is:

1 hour ago, rstripn said:

But the way in which it happened was mathematically very simple and made perfect sense in general.

How does using the "at least once%" as an "average proc%" make "perfect sense" when one is the result of possibly multiple events? The only time when the two are exactly equal is when there is exactly 1 event. (well, possibly and probably not really, but... yeah.)

It is simple. Using the original "At least once%"/Npellet that they tried before looking at it and saying "mmm, that's too much of a nerf" (Slight paraphrasing from the devstream) makes things simple. But the way that the +%status mods worked changed to be on a per pellet basis, so it might have been completely unnecessary to even change what the per pellet was as a base to begin with, and prehaps multiplying the previous per pellet chance could have made "perfect sense" too.

Again, i'm not a dev, and i can't say i know about it. I don't know the reasons behind the choice of one system over the other. It just doesn't "make perfect sense" to me. At all. Prehaps you can explain. Again, i'm not that good at maths. My biggest gripe is not really accepting things as they are - things change, next prime weapon is a shotgun, might be a good one. Other changes might come in the future. The sky isn't falling as it wasn't falling when there were other updates. It's just that i can't wrap my head around "why". And it bothers me a bit. A bit more than what it should. Ok, a lot more than what it should :D.

Also, quarantine, lots of time, yadda yadda.

Edited March 18, 2020 by TRPBWhite
Addendum.

[Andele3025]

4 minutes ago, rstripn said:

I accept that your argument is not as complicated as I thought.

Not my argument, but the entire point why the thread has over 20 pages instead of just 3-6.

4 minutes ago, rstripn said:

1) They said status would be buffed by 3x to make up for the change in multishot

No, they said it would be buffed 3x because direct conversion to burst calc instead of per shot probability would be a massive nerf to shotguns in general.

4 minutes ago, rstripn said:

2) There is a simple equation that shows a clear intent to increase status per pellet by 3x

Again, no the graph and wording was that the status per shot was to be buffed 3x

4 minutes ago, rstripn said:

If we agree on those then nothing else matters to me, and I leave you to your infinite math argument where most of the numbers are right but the meaning of words can't be agreed upon for some reason.

The part i agree on is that the current numbers are #*!%ed either way. If shotguns are to be treated as rifles and didnt want to do the probability proper, then DE should have just picked new numbers that seem appropriate as a "status weapon" with 12% status chance and 9 fire rate is not a status weapon. In fact its worse than the stats hybrid weapons have yet its around the point most status shotguns fell to.

[Andele3025]

11 minutes ago, TRPBWhite said:

I don't see how the difference is meaningful here. The result is exactly the same.

Because the old status chance wasnt a flat number but a probability sum, thus you are dividing the net probability part by part a amount of times equal to pellet count.

e.g. if its its 30% chance total divided across 10 instances, its circa 3.5% chance per instance, thus if you multiply by 3 later you get 10.5% chance per pellet. if you multiply the actual total chance (90% chance total across 10 instances), you get circa 20.5% chance per pellet (since its chance for event to not happen to the power of instances, aka 0.795*0.795*0.795*0.795*0.795*0.795*0.795*0.795*0.795*0.795 = 0.10% of the event not happening, thus 90% chance of the shot to proc).

Or, if you just want the principle of the idea, its why 8:2*2*2 is 16, but 8:(2*2*2) is 1.

Edited March 18, 2020 by Andele3025

[rstripn]

@Andele3025

Which is higher?

1) Old status chance correctly broken down to a per-pellet status chance instead of simply divided.

2) Old status chance divided by pellets then multiplied by 3.

If #1 is higher, then there is absolutely no argument from me that they screwed up badly. But I don't think it is.

If #2 is higher, then I think what they did was fair even if it wasn't what the stream indicated. Fair does not mean right.

If they did what you say they indicated they would do - breaking down the pellet chance via probability calculations and then multiplying that value by 3 - I'm certain that shotguns would be too powerful in the new status system. My big misunderstanding was I thought the 3x was in place of a back-calculation, not in addition to it; I never even considered that they would do both. Sorry for the confusion.

It's possible they realized that the proposed changes were too powerful after the stream and changed the calculations. It's possible there was a miscommunication and what the stream said was never what was coded in the first place. They should probably explain.

At least I finally understand "your argument" (see below): What was said and shown would be done was not what was actually done. That's crummy and it should be addressed somehow. But I'm glad they didn't overpower shotguns, even if they said they would.

 

1 hour ago, Andele3025 said:

Not my argument, but the entire point why the thread has over 20 pages instead of just 3-6.

It's still the side of the argument that you're taking, which colloquially is referred to as "your argument".

This thread has over 20 pages because it was poorly titled. Shotgun changese and perhaps multishot in general should have been an entirely different topic than status changes in general.

1 hour ago, Andele3025 said:

Again, no the graph and wording was that the status per shot was to be buffed 3x

The equation they used took some version of a per pellet status chance and then multiplied it by 3. The intent was there even if the execution was poor and did not match previously stated goals.

1 hour ago, Andele3025 said:

The part i agree on is that the current numbers are #*!%ed either way. If shotguns are to be treated as rifles and didnt want to do the probability proper, then DE should have just picked new numbers that seem appropriate as a "status weapon" with 12% status chance and 9 fire rate is not a status weapon.

In general this I continue to agree with. I think shotguns need to have their status chance rebalanced weapon by weapon (mostly based on pellet count * fire rate) so that shotguns that aren't good at status now and used to be are viable status weapons again. 

Edited March 18, 2020 by rstripn

[rstripn]

1 hour ago, TRPBWhite said:

How does using the "at least once%" as an "average proc%" make "perfect sense" when one is the result of possibly multiple events? The only time when the two are exactly equal is when there is exactly 1 event. (well, possibly and probably not really, but... yeah.)

I was just saying it was a simple mathematical operation which could be done as an alternative to an actual back-calculation to the original status chance per pellet, which made perfect sense to me because I assumed 3*(status/pellet) > (actual old status per pellet).

1 hour ago, TRPBWhite said:

Also, quarantine, lots of time, yadda yadda.

Amen.

[nslay]

3 hours ago, Andele3025 said:

Slight correction, its not just about 100% status, its that DE didnt actually buff shotguns by 3x status chance since proc probability isnt a sum of all the pellets.
This in turn means that the average proc per second for the stats a shotgun had proportionally dropped down the more pellets a shotgun had compared to its status.

Or in slighty different terms, im guessing a nice chunk of the complaints wouldnt be there if Tigris Prime and Boar Prime had the 25% they should have had, Sobek the 28 or at least 25~26% (if balancing more by full build), etc since then the in practice output of status shotguns would have been on a similar curve as of non-status and lower pellet count shotguns.

This isn't to justify DE's weird calculation, but you can view DE's weird calculation (P ~ S/N) as an estimation of the per-pellet chance with a first order Taylor expansion. Here P is per-pellet chance, S is per-shot status chance, and N the number of pellets. Why they use this is beyond me! Unless they balance around the Binomial distribution's mean (P*N = average numberof pellets that proc). But then picking a mean of 3*S doesn't make obvious sense, does it?

Here is some old math about Taylor series I wrote on this weird shotgun calculation:

Spoiler

And the first 3 Taylor approximations simplified from this formulation (why they would need this... ???):

P ~ S/N
P ~ S/N + (1/2) * (N-1) * S^2 / N^2
P ~ S/N + (1/2) * (N-1) * S^2 / N^2 + (1/6) * (2*N-1) * (N-1) * S^3 / N^3

And a plot of these approximations. You can see that P ~ S/N always underestimates the true per-pellet chance... and by quite a lot. I've plotted out to 40% which is Strun Wraith's old status chance (highest in the game for shotguns):

Spoiler

Anyway, the takeaway is one of these two:

• DE used an approximation of per-pellet chance, the calculate new status as 3*P where P ~ S/N
• Or DE decided to balance around the mean number of pellets proccing status where P*N is the mean. They chose base shotguns to proc 3*S pellets on average.

[TRPBWhite]

3 hours ago, Andele3025 said:

Or, if you just want the principle of the idea, its why 8:2*2*2 is 16, but 8:(2*2*2) is 1.

Except that it is not the case this time, since it was not written as a (in my opinion terrible) notation of linear math that requires a specific order of operators to work. It had a clear parenthesis already included.

(Status/pellet)*3 bears the exact same result as (status*3)/pellet. Or status*(3/pellet). If you take a number and multiply it and then divide it, or divide it an multiply it, the result doesn't change.

3 hours ago, Andele3025 said:

Because the old status chance wasnt a flat number but a probability sum, thus you are dividing the net probability part by part a amount of times equal to pellet count.

That's not really the issue i was raising, however :D. It was a simple "it's not really necessary to point out that difference, the result is exactly the same regardless of how they approached it - by multiplying the status or the new value".

2 hours ago, rstripn said:

I was just saying it was a simple mathematical operation which could be done as an alternative to an actual back-calculation to the original status chance per pellet, which made perfect sense to me because I assumed 3*(status/pellet) > (actual old status per pellet).

Gotcha. The assumption is true, at least for the base line.

[Andele3025]

1 hour ago, rstripn said:

@Andele3025

Which is higher?

1) Old status chance correctly broken down to a per-pellet status chance instead of simply divided.

2) Old status chance divided by pellets then multiplied by 3.

If #1 is higher, then there is absolutely no argument from me that they screwed up badly. But I don't think it is.

If #2 is higher, then I think what they did was fair even if it wasn't what the stream indicated. Fair does not mean right.

I believe that extremely swings depending on modding and base stats of a shotgun. Quick vague napkin math guess gives me that its around +280~290% status chance from mods on a high pellet status shotty that correctly breaking down by pellet gets better results (since a 50% status per shot increase on a 20% 8 pellet shoty increased its per pellet status chance by circa 57% while its just a +50% with them now working as burst making modding/full build or not a big factor).

1 hour ago, rstripn said:

If they did what you say they indicated they would do

Then shotguns would be just slightly less efficient at status on the high end assuming new mods and just buffed in the mid point.

1 hour ago, rstripn said:

- breaking down the pellet chance via probability calculations and then multiplying that value by 3

If they did what you just said because most shotguns would be just barely better than what they currently are (like 20% better if we napkin math and round up) or in other words go up to some 2-6 procs (which would still be a nice buff, just still not very competitive), unless we return status chance mods to calculate off total status probability.

1 hour ago, rstripn said:

- I'm certain that shotguns would be too powerful in the new status system.
It's possible they realized that the proposed changes were too powerful after the stream and changed the calculations.

By the logic of proper probability conversion being OP post 100%+ status changes, loads of guns that have 10+ fire rate, can achieve 2x multishot at least and are at 30%+ fire rate should have gotten nerfed. In fact a nice bunch of weapons now sit in the 70~80 status procs a second range sustained reliably (mostly cloud effects like pox and mutalist cernos, but some regular rifles too, the rifles being the ones that on some extremely iffy gameplay and quality builds can RNG themselves into 100 procs in around a second). The more sane status weapons with overall good/regular status builds are in the 40-60 proc range (which would be right around 3x buffed status then calc per pellet from it for all but the Kohm if it didnt nerf itself as it spooled up which would be slightly above the curve... or just at around the top depending on what we take as the kohms true MS and status value).

Hell even old/outdated status rifles and hybrid guns currently have better status chance than what used to be status shotguns.

1 hour ago, rstripn said:

In general this I continue to agree with. I think shotguns need to have their status chance rebalanced weapon by weapon (mostly based on pellet count * fire rate) so that shotguns that aren't good at status now and used to be are viable status weapons again. 

Sure, i just wanted to make the point extremely clear, the 100% point isnt the crux of the issue, its that status shotguns other than exergis and pre spool kohm got nerfed to no longer be status weapons.
As in, nothing personal against you and even just doing proper division first and then multiplying the old status per pellet correctly as you are using as a ballpark would at least not be a randomly bigger nerf to high pellet guns for no reason (still a net multi pellet nerf but one that could possibly be justified even if not what what stated).

[Andele3025]

7 minutes ago, TRPBWhite said:

Except that it is not the case this time, since it was not written as a (in my opinion terrible) notation of linear math that requires a specific order of operators to work. It had a clear parenthesis already included.

(Status/pellet)*3 bears the exact same result as (status*3)/pellet. Or status*(3/pellet). If you take a number and multiply it and then divide it, or divide it an multiply it, the result doesn't change.

Why i said principle.

The properly written difference is 1 - (1 - 3 * 0.sc)^1/spp (what was said) vs (1 - (1 - 3 * 0.sc)^1/spp)*3 (what would have been a nerf as you arent converting status mods, just base stats, but still ok) vs sc/spp*3 (which is just a nerf by pellet count)

Despite P 0.30 not actually being a 30% (but the compound probability of a much smaller chance across events), most people still write it as such for simplicity and in cases without a lot of other variables, almost identical functionality, much like how people can write 1/3 as 0.333* despite the r1 being important part and pi as 3.141. Its why for a relic radshare rare P = 0.34 instead of 40% despite individual 10% chance per rare.
Hope you get what im at and sorry if i sound preachy by now.

[rstripn]

31 minutes ago, Andele3025 said:

Sure, i just wanted to make the point extremely clear, the 100% point isnt the crux of the issue, its that status shotguns other than exergis and pre spool kohm got nerfed to no longer be status weapons.
As in, nothing personal against you and even just doing proper division first and then multiplying the old status per pellet correctly as you are using as a ballpark would at least not be a randomly bigger nerf to high pellet guns for no reason (still a net multi pellet nerf but one that could possibly be justified even if not what what stated).

Understood. 100% status is a huge part of the overall nerf but it certainly is not the only issue.