Guild Wars 2

When entering DS, you lose 4% LF per second, no matter how much LF pool you have.
Because of this, your LF pool takes 25 seconds to empty (from 100% to 0).

The thing is, when you invest some points in Soul Reaping, lets say 30, you should have more LF (i.e. 130%), but the green bar takes the same 25 seconds to empty( from 130% to 0).

This means only one thing. The 4% degen turns into 5.2% degen, just for invest 30 points in SR.

The logic says, if you have more LF, it should take more time to deplete.

I really hope this is not working as intended.

You can trait for Vital Persistence, which does slow down LF degen.

You get 25 seconds max (31 with Vital Persistence), decreased by how much damage you take. 30% more LF means damage shortens your DS time by 25% less than it otherwise would.

Increasing your total life force pool does not make the total 130%. It’s still 100%, it is simply 30% larger then it once was, so each percentage is greater then before. Just because you have points in vit you don’t say you have more then 100% health, do you?

By the same coin, increasing LF pool by 30% increases LF generation by 30%.

What I think needs addressing is LF generation from MH and OH weapons, because it’s really hard to generate appreciable LF using scepter and Staff (without the marks grant LF trait) on sPvP.

I noticed this as well, and was very disappointed.

The only thing the bigger pool does is make your life force more resistant to damage from enemies. Useful, but not worth the trait points.

vicious.5683:

When entering DS, you lose 4% LF per second, no matter how much LF pool you have.
Because of this, your LF pool takes 25 seconds to empty (from 100% to 0).

The thing is, when you invest some points in Soul Reaping, lets say 30, you should have more LF (i.e. 130%), but the green bar takes the same 25 seconds to empty( from 130% to 0).

This means only one thing. The 4% degen turns into 5.2% degen, just for invest 30 points in SR.

The logic says, if you have more LF, it should take more time to deplete.

I really hope this is not working as intended.

You Sir have failed at basic arithmatic. Perhaps you should read up and educate yourself on how percentiles work.

LastDarkness.7390:

vicious.5683:

When entering DS, you lose 4% LF per second, no matter how much LF pool you have.
Because of this, your LF pool takes 25 seconds to empty (from 100% to 0).

The thing is, when you invest some points in Soul Reaping, lets say 30, you should have more LF (i.e. 130%), but the green bar takes the same 25 seconds to empty( from 130% to 0).

This means only one thing. The 4% degen turns into 5.2% degen, just for invest 30 points in SR.

The logic says, if you have more LF, it should take more time to deplete.

I really hope this is not working as intended.

You Sir have failed at basic arithmatic. Perhaps you should read up and educate yourself on how percentiles work.

*arithmetic

make the math and tell your correct answer. You sir, have failed at reading and orthography

You definitely got a contradictio interminis going on there, vicious.
- When entering DS, you lose 4% LF per second, no matter how much LF pool you have.
This is correct and says it all. You lose 4% per sec whether you have 0 or 30 SR.
“+30% Life Force Pool” is pretty misleading though. In reality it’s more like toughness than vitality. I’d prefer to just see the life force bar increase in length by 0-30%.

Yea I’d agree that the 30% is definitely misleading. It doesn’t make your LF bar go from 100% to 130%, rather it adds 30% of your current LF “health pool” to your total. It’s pretty much the same thing as increasing your vitality to increase your LF bar, but the two stack, and all it really does it increase the amount of damage you can soak up in DS.

I’d definitely prefer that it actually made our bar read 130% though. It would take longer to fill but you would have more overall time in DS. The extra LF it would take to get to full won’t matter much anymore either since Gluttony will be fixed/buffed in a few days

The OP’s math is not as shoddy as people are jumping in to point out. You always have to keep track what a percentage is relative to.

Assuming a 100-point pool that depletes in 25s, it is correct to label that as a 4% degeneration. That’s 4% of the 100 points, per second.
Assuming a 130-point pool that still depletes in 25s, it is correct to label that as a 5.2% degeneration, where the percentage is relative to those 130 points, per second.

It is also correct to say that you lose 4% of your lifeforce per second no matter how much lifeforce pool bonus you have. That percentage is relative to the 100% of your lifeforce. The relation between the 130-point pool and “100% of your lifeforce” is that of course when traited for +30% lifeforce pool then 100% of your lifeforce pool is 130% of your untraited lifeforce pool. Another way to frame that is to say that you always lose 4% of your lifeforce pool, but that percentage can represent up to 5.2 points (not percentage) of your untraited lifeforce pool.

Let’s stop bickering about percentages and focus on the core of the OP’s point, which is:

vicious.5683:

The logic says, if you have more LF, it should take more time to deplete.

Mickk.6875:

The OP’s math is not as shoddy as people are jumping in to point out. You always have to keep track what a percentage is relative to.

Assuming a 100-point pool that depletes in 25s, it is correct to label that as a 4% degeneration. That’s 4% of the 100 points, per second.
Assuming a 130-point pool that still depletes in 25s, it is correct to label that as a 5.2% degeneration, where the percentage is relative to those 130 points, per second.

It is also correct to say that you lose 4% of your lifeforce per second no matter how much lifeforce pool bonus you have. That percentage is relative to the 100% of your lifeforce. The relation between the 130-point pool and “100% of your lifeforce” is that of course when traited for +30% lifeforce pool then 100% of your lifeforce pool is 130% of your untraited lifeforce pool. Another way to frame that is to say that you always lose 4% of your lifeforce pool, but that percentage can represent up to 5.2 points (not percentage) of your untraited lifeforce pool.

Let’s stop bickering about percentages and focus on the core of the OP’s point, which is:

vicious.5683:

The logic says, if you have more LF, it should take more time to deplete.

Thank you. Let’s try to focus on the actual issue, people.

The game tells us we get “more” LF. We actually don’t. Our LF just becomes more resistant to damage.

Khristophoros.7194:

Mickk.6875:

The OP’s math is not as shoddy as people are jumping in to point out. You always have to keep track what a percentage is relative to.

Assuming a 100-point pool that depletes in 25s, it is correct to label that as a 4% degeneration. That’s 4% of the 100 points, per second.
Assuming a 130-point pool that still depletes in 25s, it is correct to label that as a 5.2% degeneration, where the percentage is relative to those 130 points, per second.

It is also correct to say that you lose 4% of your lifeforce per second no matter how much lifeforce pool bonus you have. That percentage is relative to the 100% of your lifeforce. The relation between the 130-point pool and “100% of your lifeforce” is that of course when traited for +30% lifeforce pool then 100% of your lifeforce pool is 130% of your untraited lifeforce pool. Another way to frame that is to say that you always lose 4% of your lifeforce pool, but that percentage can represent up to 5.2 points (not percentage) of your untraited lifeforce pool.

Let’s stop bickering about percentages and focus on the core of the OP’s point, which is:

vicious.5683:

The logic says, if you have more LF, it should take more time to deplete.

Thank you. Let’s try to focus on the actual issue, people.

The game tells us we get “more” LF. We actually don’t. Our LF just becomes more resistant to damage.

Correct. It’s almost like getting more toughness in DS only. The only way for it to really give us “more LF” is for our LF bar to change from a percentage value to a numerical value.

Or course this would take a lot of work, considering they would have to change the way we gain LF and how much we lose per second. It would benefit us immensely though, we would be gaining more “health” in DS against condition damage, as people have pointed out that conditions drain our LF much faster due to ticking in percentages, instead of tiny hits of 100 or so

vicious.5683:

*arithmetic

make the math and tell your correct answer. You sir, have failed at reading and orthography

You couldnt find anything better to counter my argument about flawed math other then a minor grammatical error with a single vowel.

Logic says how can you and everyone else here base a opinion on flawed assumptions?

Cognitive Dissonance

You do take less damage from all sources other then the mechanics own built in time limit of -4%. The maximum time you can be in DS is 25.5 seconds or 32 with Vital Persistence trait.

I suggest reading this post https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/professions/necromancer/Death-Shroud-HP-Pool

Which has already discussed this and tested it out.

Don’t forget that a larger LF pool also increases damage through Life Blast. That’s one of the bigger bonuses to the trait line in my opinion.

Your life force pool is directly = to your hp is it not? (that’s disregarding the 30% increase through traits) If that is true, would it then be correct to say that lifeblasts damage increases with more hp?

I’ve never tested if Lifeblast hits for more with a larger LF pool, but I definitely haven’t noticed it and I have 30 points in Soul Reaping.

I’m pretty sure it just does more damage at >50% LF

From some testing on dummies in SPvP, Life Blast does the same amount as long as you’re above 50% LF, and switches to a lower damage version when you’re below 50% LF.