The Lurker Lounge Forums
Salvation's new trick - Printable Version

+- The Lurker Lounge Forums (https://www.lurkerlounge.com/forums)
+-- Forum: Lurker Games (https://www.lurkerlounge.com/forums/forum-6.html)
+--- Forum: Diablo II (https://www.lurkerlounge.com/forums/forum-8.html)
+--- Thread: Salvation's new trick (/thread-9477.html)

Pages: 1 2

Salvation's new trick - Nightwind - 01-16-2004

simply stated, i was looking at the updates on the stratagy pages, and discovered that the nice trick they had een giving us on resist fire/coldghtning is now also part of salvation... for ever 2 points, you gain one max resist to 85%.

Is that cumilitive? With 60 points spent could you have permant 95% max resistances?

And like i asked, why didn't we notice this before, recent realm side patch?

And also importantly, anybody else here see this as being an important element in the possible evolution of the turtle and vengance paladin builds?

Salvation's new trick - adeyke - 01-16-2004

We have known this for some time.

It has nothing to do with salvation. It's a passive bonus that you get regardless of what aura you have active (including none at all). For every 2 points in a single resist aura, you get +1 max that resist passive bonus. For every 2 points, you also get an addition +1 max that resist when you have the resist aura active.

That means if you max the resist fire/coldghtning aura and don't have any of them active, you'll have +10% max resist fire/coldghtning, so your max resists would be 85/85/85/75. Note that this is the max resists; there isn't any sort of passive resistance bonus.

Salvation's new trick - Kevin - 01-16-2004

No, I think he is talking about this: http://www.battle.net/diablo2exp/skills/pa...shtml#salvation
as posted about on the Areat Summit news page.

Salvation itself provides a passive bonus as well to max resist. The single resist aura's aren't news, but it wasn't public (or common) knowledge that salvation did this. So you can max salvation and have the same 85/85/85/75 max resists without the skill active, just like if you maxed the three individual resist auras. If you have salvation active, the pally's max resists is on a one percent per skill point so you only need 10 points in salvation to have 85% max resist (where it is capped).

This means that the single resist aura's passive bonus has become even more worthless than it was. I beleive Nightwind wants to know how long this has been know.

edit: fixed a few typos

Salvation's new trick - Vash - 01-16-2004

Sigh...after I wasted 4 points in Lightning Resist...goddamn Blizzard and their game "features".

Salvation's new trick - Nightwind - 01-16-2004

still seems useful for the synergy with vengance, and puts me in a mood to test stacking

Salvation's new trick - adeyke - 01-16-2004

I don't believe it.

Salvation doesn't have any such effect, according to both skills.txt and SP testing. If there was such an effect, it would be a server-side patch that did it.

I have a realms character with a single-point salvation investment. I have straight 75 resists in normal without salvation. With salvation active, I still have straight 75s. If it had a max resist bonus from the skill point there, it'd be 76/76/76/75.

Now, if someone with more than single point in salvation could give some data that are different, I'd reconsider, but for now, I'll consider it one of the AS many wrong "fixes."

Salvation's new trick - Kevin - 01-16-2004

No disagreement here, but I too am not in a position to test it at this time, and I suspect that it would have been a server side patch as well if it were true, so it would require realm testing.

Salvation's new trick - Erthshade - 01-16-2004

Having a level 42 realm pally with Salvation, I am in a position to test this. Without Salvation on, my resists are 80/80/79/80 (Darkglow ring mail). With, my resists are all 80's. So unless it's not showing up on the LCS, the AS is in error.

Salvation's new trick - Vash - 01-16-2004

Sweet, so there's a chance that my four points in lightning resist weren't wasted afterall?

Salvation's new trick - LiquidDamage - 01-16-2004

This is totally bogus. I made a paladin whose sole purpose was to have Salvation at slvl 12 in order to make player minions triple immune (poor baal and diablo just didn't stand a chance when the necro also had a thorns merc).

I played with and without it active and the only way my max resists were ever raised was from the individual resist auras. I had cold at 1, lightning at 10, and fire at 10, and I had 80/75/80/75 with salvation active, NOT 85/85/85/75, nor did I have 81/81/81/75 with it inactive. This character is dead (hardcore) now, unfortunately, so I cannot reconfirm it. The only way this new information is true is if it was a recent (within the last 2 months) server side patch.

Look at this bogus info right above it:

Salvation recieves an unlisted Synergy bonus from Resist Fire, Resist Ligthning, and Resist Cold. Every 2 points in Resist Fire gives a 1% increase to your Salvation's fire resist maximum up to a max resist of 85. This also applies to Resist Ligthning and Resist Cold. So if I have Resist Fire at 30, Resist Lightning at 20, and Resist Cold at 10, then when I activate Salvation my maximum resists will be Fire 85, Ligthning 85, Cold 80.

Huh? Looks like someone confused the passive max resistance bonuses with a synergy for salvation.

Salvation's new trick - Crystalion - 01-16-2004

LiquidDamage,Jan 16 2004, 08:33 PM Wrote:I made a paladin whose sole purpose was to have Salvation at slvl 12 in order to make player minions triple immune (poor baal and diablo just didn't stand a chance when the necro also had a thorns merc).
Yes, clever thinking... I assume you were providing support in hardcore?

These minion immunity issues were discussed in beta, along with other "flaws" in the new immune system... a pity things weren't done a bit "better" for release.

Things are rather "worse" than even your excellent use of Salvation, however, as you might be able to get Quad++ immunity...

The idea is to look at poison hunting for a fourth possible immunity (vs. Meph this seems to be interesting to investigate at least).

Fade works for poison resist. In theory Iron Golems get Fade. Blood Golems start at 50% resist poison. Oak sages are poison immune. Shadows have native resist plus fade (when they don't annoying insist on BoS).

Necro with slvl 6 summon resist, for 50% resist might apply to poison resist (I don't recall for sure, sadly).
edit: test vs. normal horadrim ancients had them turning my BG green (SR slvl 7, for 52%) so seems it doesn't work.

The "++" part comes from looking at Holy Bolt healing (pretty massive in v1.10 for a dedicated build, and +1 to Salvation, i.e. slvl 1, is enough, at 60% triple, if the necro has 50% summon resist... I don't know the breakpoints to immunize shadows, oak sages etc. but certainly they're at most the slvl 12 you cite) and fade (phys resist) and bloodgolem (instant healing for them at 25% of value of full reds drunk by caster, whether caster injured or not).

If we are talking about necro *solo* vs. Meph, I'd be tempted to test for slvl 6 summon resist with blood golem, IM on meph, and an inventory full of big reds to drink to keep the golem alive. I may have to run off an test this. :) (and no, I don't expect that v1.10 still allows the BG/IM cheese... I'm using BG for the potential poison immunity and red drinking possibilities, with the IM being nasty vs. Meph afaik because other reports suggest they goofed in v1.10 on the actboss/minion penalties with Thorns).
edit: didn't try this, as my other test seems to indicate SR doesn't add to poison resist (nasty!)

The iron golem is potentially the wild case, as, if their fade is still working (did in beta, don't know about release) you could possibly summon them from a special object (unique with phys or magic resist properties, socketed with 30% resist poison) and they already have thorns.

Sadly you'd have to cast faux pvp conviction on a fire golem to restore their fire absorption ability, afaik, so I'm not even considering them as "special" any more.

You've already "owned" diablo/baal. I just thought I'd point out that there are lots of opportunities to consider, some of which might take the ownage to even greater extremes.

For softcore, these extremes probably aren't very important. I suppose Hardcore views higher levels of "ownage" as a useful thing (guessing here, as I don't play hardcore).

Certainly, after DC was very hard for me to kill the first time (I died many times), I considered such issues for my equipment (and the next two times I faced him, I didn't die).

edit: ah ha! I finally see my way clear to a simple mod/test to finally answer, empirically, the old question about what level shadows get for their slvl on skills... my standard faux pvp testing with shadow warrior resists zero'ed, regen off, hitpoints constant and fade changed to a linear +10% per level (and a couple sorc skills changed to do constant damage). I'll report in the workshop when I finish this. In any event, Shadows do seem to be able to be quad++ immune, iirc, from testing (the warrior might have a slight "edge" here, as you can force them to use only fade).

Salvation's new trick - LiquidDamage - 01-17-2004

Yeah, I was providing support in hardcore. Loved that character. Died because of how much damage a boss pack of Horadrim Ancients do with those magic blasts, combined with what I think was an ES cursed boss (I know it was cursed).

Apparently, I believe according to Jarulf if I remember correctly (could have been Ruvenal), Summon Resist is handled separately from normal resistances, this is why you MUST have slvl 12 salvation to make them fully triple immune. Summon Resist is not added to other resist sources, it is calculated either before or after, so 50% res all from summon resist and 50% res all from another source = 75% res all, not 100%. This is probably why your blood golem was not immune to poison, as I am pretty sure summon resist applies to poison as well.

I believe Jarulf has said that the fire absorb on a fire golem is not like player fire absorb either-- it is not related to the golem actually taking damage. I am pretty sure he is right, as I have seen my fire golem get healed nearly instantly from big fire damage sources.

What is this about Fade on an iron golem? What level is it? When is it active? Where did you learn about this?

Salvation's new trick - Crystalion - 01-17-2004

Quote:I am pretty sure summon resist applies to poison as well.
A quick mod test, making slvl 1 summon resist start at 100% shows poison is included (pvp poison nova, before summon resist known, after summon resist known but before new summon, after known and new summon... no/no/yes, confirming summon resist is applied at time of summoning and that poison is included).

Quote:Summon Resist is handled separately from normal resistances, this is why you MUST have slvl 12 salvation to make them fully triple immune
Well, you can't rely on the LCS™ (e.g. my immune to poison golem above did not cursor as such). I've not done a Iron Golem from paly resist or diamond shield lately, but my recollection is that those indeed factor in the summon resist (i.e. it does add, unlike what you're saying here).

However this is easy to test, so I've done so. v1.10 3 player lan, -act 5 clvl 33 paly, necro, sorc, unmodded. necro with 39% summon resist partied with 60% salvation paly produces a blood golem that does freeze to slvl 20 ice blast, but only briefly, taking very little damage. 44% summon resist and the BG does not even blink blue or pause and takes no damage.

So a more likely theory as to the 50% poison resist for the base BG in monstats.txt not adding to summon resist for immunity would either be that I make a mistake, or that, perhaps, summon resist sets the initial resist, overwriting the base 50 stat from monstats completely. An obvious way to test this would be to make blood golems, like andarial, have -50% resist, and summon resist 100% and test for non-SR extra vulnerability and SR immunity (i.e. the expected result if monstats.txt is used, but SR overwrites it).

Unfortunately I've been doing overmuch testing today, so I don't feel like doing this simple test, atm.

Quote:I believe Jarulf has said that the fire absorb on a fire golem is not like player fire absorb either-- it is not related to the golem actually taking damage.  I am pretty sure he is right, as I have seen my fire golem get healed nearly instantly from big fire damage sources.
Interesting. I'll have to tack this onto the end of my testing "to do" list. Not what I'd have expected from reading numerous posts about the v1.10 FG nerf.

Quote:What is this about Fade on an iron golem?  What level is it? When is it active?  Where did you learn about this?
I played during v1.10 beta, when it was obvious, because the IGs were ethereal. The fade ref. is still in the mpq, but I'm not sure it is still active (i.e. not sure if they disabled it completely, or just the appearance of ethereality). It should be easy to test, as I can set the power of the fade to make the IG immune if he is indeed getting it (just not the appearance).

But I'm afraid, despite doing hours of testing today, that my "to do" list for testing is longer than when I started the day. I'd kinda like to play a bit instead. :D

Salvation's new trick - lemekim - 01-17-2004

Crystalion,Jan 17 2004, 03:44 AM Wrote:So a more likely theory as to the 50% poison resist for the base BG in monstats.txt not adding to summon resist for immunity would either be that I make a mistake, or that, perhaps, summon resist sets the initial resist, overwriting the base 50 stat from monstats completely. An obvious way to test this would be to make blood golems, like andarial, have -50% resist, and summon resist 100% and test for non-SR extra vulnerability and SR immunity (i.e. the expected result if monstats.txt is used, but SR overwrites it).
Doesn't blood golem have 20% Poison Resists? (at least this is what was said when the patch first came out from, I think, skills.txt) Maybe that explains the non-immunity (and perhaps shorten your "to do" list) =)

Salvation's new trick - Crystalion - 01-17-2004

lemekim,Jan 17 2004, 06:30 PM Wrote:Doesn't blood golem have 20% Poison Resists?
To answer this question...

I'm doing tests that involve modding. The version of the .txt that I have is 50%. I believe this version is the release version (since I made the .txt files by extraction after I got the release version). In any event, when I do a test, it certainly is using my modded versions, in which 50, not 20, is the number.

Unfortunately I still am burned out on testing (I have a backlog of about 6 misc. tests I'd like to do, and I'll wait until the mood strikes me and try to do all of them at once... which takes hours, fyi).

I will, of course, post back if I can shed further light on the mystery. But it wouldn't surprise me if BG have 50% resist to poison if Summon Resist isn't known at all, and only 28% resist if slvl 1 SR is known/active (e.g. by wand/head). It wouldn't surprise me if, as has been claimed, v1.10 fire golems are hosed, not being able to absorb fire because they're totally resistant. Etc. Inquiring minds want to know! ;D

Salvation's new trick - lemekim - 01-18-2004

Well, the current version monstats.txt has blood golem at 20% poison resist. You didn't mention that your diablo version was modified in the first test though, which was why I suggested the difference =)

Salvation's new trick - LiquidDamage - 01-18-2004

Crystalion,Jan 16 2004, 07:44 PM Wrote:lots of stuff disproving everything I said
I'm so glad you are around, you know that? I'd totally test this stuff but... I'd rather be playing, myself. :P

The fire golem thing may have been a fluke-- I might have been partied with someone with a prayer merc, and not realized it. Here is what Jarulf said, that suggests Fire Golems may still heal from fire:

Quote:At least in older versions, the fire golems absorbtion was handled through a completely different (and unique)system than normal absorbtion.

It is true however that they have changed quite a lot in regard t the whole skill system which has implications for how attacks are handled too. I think it is still the same for fire golems though.

From:

http://www.lurkerlounge.com/forums/index.p...&linear=1&st=40


I'm thinking about making a necromancer designed entirely around supporting an iron golem. I definately wanted him to be quad immune (they are immune to poison no matter what, according to the LCS), and knowing that summon resist does add to regular resists is valuable info. (I swear I read Jarulf or Ruvenal saying they didn't, but I also have a vivid memory of watching Jamie Lee Curtis telling David Letterman that she was a genetic male. This never happened.) I would really be interested in knowing if they still have fade, as it would make a huge difference in what I could make the golem out of. I'd much rather make it out of a Bloodtree Stump and still get the quad immunity than be stuck with a 4 diamond pally shield that did nothing for his damage.

Yeah, I know iron golem uses thorns for his damage, but I will be using much life tap to keep him alive, and the more damage the better :)

Salvation's new trick - Crystalion - 01-18-2004

LiquidDamage,Jan 18 2004, 12:48 AM Wrote:I'm thinking about making a necromancer designed entirely around supporting an iron golem.
Wait until v1.10++, is my advice. The Iron Golem will vanish on you, just because you walked a little ways and didn't realize its pathing was stuck (mercs don't have this problem--they warp--so I know blizz could have fixed this if they considered it as serious a bug as I do).

I've always loved toying with Iron Golems.

Perhaps your build idea would be less frustrating in sp, where either the item or the whole char save could be restored when a game misfeature (politespeak for "bug") eats your golem.

Note my post reply on the 20/50 poison resist issue however, as I may have some tainted results when I tested things.

Salvation's new trick - Crystalion - 01-18-2004

lemekim,Jan 18 2004, 12:12 AM Wrote:Well, the current version monstats.txt has blood golem at 20% poison resist. You didn't mention that your diablo version was modified in the first test though, which was why I suggested the difference =)
Thanks for the heads up.

I thought I'd carefully segregated my beta and release .txt files but I see I've made a mistake with monstats.txt at least. This is probably because I didn't immediately extract it when release came out, and likely selected the older patch.mpq when I did.

Naturally I've gone and corrected this by re-extracting all the .txt files I have/use fresh.

Most of my tests on various things are unlikely to be tainted, because every test I do I wipe the D2 data directory clean and xfer only those .txt files that I currently tweak/test (letting D2 grab all the .bins).

But this may be one of those "mold in the petri dish" luck-outs... since my test almost certainly was using the 50% value (unless there is an "outdated" code reject for .txt files, in any way, ever), I may have stumbled onto something odd I would not have thought to test for otherwise.

I'll add re-doing the tests with the correct .txt files to my "to do" list.

Isn't peer review wonderful! :D

Thanks again.

Salvation's new trick - Crystalion - 01-18-2004

LiquidDamage,Jan 18 2004, 12:48 AM Wrote:The fire golem thing may have been a fluke-- I might have been partied with someone with a prayer merc, and not realized it.
Got around to the first wave of misc. golem oddities testing (with proper monstats.txt--my skills.txt was previously okay)...

Contrary to what I've seen people post, I did see some damage to my necro from my Blood Golem being injured. However it seemed less than the 10% I expected, from looking at the skills.txt data. I didn't take the time to nail this down.

The base resists from monstats for golems plus whatever salvation/resist paly aura going 100+ will cause the LCS™ to display immune. However the LCS™ is not to be trusted!

Summon Resist doesn't get factored into the display but does add. Indeed *negative* passive aura resists (from mod test, trying to revitalize fire golem absorb) can cause the display to show "immune" when the critter is not!

In short, you should mentally add the base resists (monstats.txt info for golems), Summon resist (passive aura thrown onto the golem when they are created, at the then current slvl for summon resist), and any other effects (like Salvation or iron golem from a resist object) to arrive at the actual resists/immunities.

As a side note, in trying to get the fire absorb to heal the fire golem, when I cracked his resist, he actually died from the fire! I was surprised. I suspect this means fire golem absorption (item absorb property) is actually nerfed for pvp (this was done a long time ago, to prevent some fun tricks) even when it's really pvpminion.

In any event, with the base FG 100 fire resist, plus Summon Resist, plus the FG skill 100 - dm12 resist, its pretty much hopeless to crack a FG enough to heal them from fire.

Certainly I couldn't achieve it (I'd have to mod away the 100 base resist to zero, for starters, to really have a go at it... then only the summon resist would be hurting higher slvl FG from absorbing properly, afaik).

Revelant to the prior speculations, Iron Golems start poison immune, so getting one to be quad immune isn't tough at all. That makes them (and the Metal Grid ammy) rather "boss" vs. certain act bosses (say if you're a paly singing Salvation slvl 12 with metal grid IG who you are holy bolt healing vs. Duriel, with the IG thorning).

I'm now inclined to believe the fade ref. (fade 16) is actually not doing anything (perhaps it mods the visual appearance of the IG--the fade skill has fade 2, for comparision). Didn't take time to play with it.

I didn't get around to testing that you can (apparently) leech off a Blood Golem (drain 100). Nor did I test if, like LifeTap, BGs can leech off of anything (or are limited the way LL is, by the drain etc. nerfs). And I didn't verify that IM etc. no longer helps BG leech (for release, iirc I tested that this was turned off in beta).

I also forgot to test if FG does a CE like effect when it dies.