Pet damage cap ignoring Rathe line?

Anything EQ related that doesn't fall into another category goes here.
Post Reply
User avatar
YawnGod
Trial Member
Posts: 4
Joined: Fri May 17, 2013 9:11 am

Pet damage cap ignoring Rathe line?

Post by YawnGod »

So, I'm level 90, using EM XIV, water pet.

The pet hits max normal 891 without Rathe/Arcane Distillect, and 891 with the buffs.

Basically, there is no change.

Is there a reason for this? Is pet damage capped based on level or something?

EDIT: I'm going to slightly correct myself here, though the question remains. The damage does go up, from 891 to 897. Still, 6 damage...certainly not a 15% increase of 891, which would be 133 added damage. So, I was wrong, there is a change, but not as advertised 15%, and so the question remains. Are there diminishing returns based on an overall damage cap for the pet per the EM? Or per the expansion?
User avatar
Fleiss
Conjurer
Posts: 143
Joined: Tue Dec 13, 2011 5:44 pm

Re: Pet damage cap ignoring Rathe line?

Post by Fleiss »

Your burnout pet line buffs have the same effect (the higher the level this higher % you get from burnout). It will use the higher of the two, thus you won't see an increase.
User avatar
YawnGod
Trial Member
Posts: 4
Joined: Fri May 17, 2013 9:11 am

Re: Pet damage cap ignoring Rathe line?

Post by YawnGod »

Fleiss wrote:Your burnout pet line buffs have the same effect (the higher the level this higher % you get from burnout). It will use the higher of the two, thus you won't see an increase.
Thanks for the reply.

Unfortunately, I'm not using Burnout. I know how notorious EQ is with stacking (or not stacking) buffs, and I wouldn't expect Shaman Mammoth's or Druid Strength or Mage Rathe or Burnout to stack, not at all.

The aura may be useless, indeed, but I'm wondering if its limited because of diminishing returns in relation to pet damage or something, because it isn't increasing damage on a non-buffed attacking pet at all as advertised. 6 damage is...6 damage. Even level 10s are shaking their heads.

You replied almost exactly the same way as the guy on the EQ forums. Nifty.
User avatar
Sillaen
Arch Convoker
Posts: 523
Joined: Mon May 18, 2009 12:34 pm

Re: Pet damage cap ignoring Rathe line?

Post by Sillaen »

At lvl 90, you are more than likely using Burnout IX which has a 14% "All Skills Dmg Modifier". So with AD, you are only getting a 1% increase to your main pet. If you are using Burnout IX Rk2, then you wont see a difference at all since they have the exact same modifier.

The main benefit of using AD/Rathe is that your swarm/temp pets get the benefit of the 15% increase.
Image
User avatar
YawnGod
Trial Member
Posts: 4
Joined: Fri May 17, 2013 9:11 am

Re: Pet damage cap ignoring Rathe line?

Post by YawnGod »

Sillaen wrote:At lvl 90, you are more than likely using Burnout IX which has a 14% "All Skills Dmg Modifier". So with AD, you are only getting a 1% increase to your main pet. If you are using Burnout IX Rk2, then you wont see a difference at all since they have the exact same modifier.

The main benefit of using AD/Rathe is that your swarm/temp pets get the benefit of the 15% increase.
Oh, I see now.

Thanks a bunch, guys.
User avatar
Fleiss
Conjurer
Posts: 143
Joined: Tue Dec 13, 2011 5:44 pm

Re: Pet damage cap ignoring Rathe line?

Post by Fleiss »

YawnGod wrote:
Fleiss wrote:Your burnout pet line buffs have the same effect (the higher the level this higher % you get from burnout). It will use the higher of the two, thus you won't see an increase.
Thanks for the reply.

Unfortunately, I'm not using Burnout. I know how notorious EQ is with stacking (or not stacking) buffs, and I wouldn't expect Shaman Mammoth's or Druid Strength or Mage Rathe or Burnout to stack, not at all.

The aura may be useless, indeed, but I'm wondering if its limited because of diminishing returns in relation to pet damage or something, because it isn't increasing damage on a non-buffed attacking pet at all as advertised. 6 damage is...6 damage. Even level 10s are shaking their heads.

You replied almost exactly the same way as the guy on the EQ forums. Nifty.
You probably got the same reply because this is a commonly seen thing and misunderstood. Just clarify what you mean by normal and buffs by lining out all your buffs and you will get clearer responses. The more info you provide, the better answer you will get. Leave assumptions and you make an... out of you and me :)
Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 18 guests