After parsing for some time, I found that the pet critical chances are not as high as they are supposed to be. It appears (for the most part) that the swarm pet critical chances are accurate. However, the actual pets are not. Balwen (Shadow Knight) Current Rank 27/130: Pet Name: Mictlantecuhtli This passive ability increases your summoned pet's chance to score a critical melee hit by 18%, the damage of its critical hits by 63%, and its chance to perform a flurry of attacks (up to two additional attacks upon a successful primary slot double attack) by 6%. Fizzlebop (Magician) Current Rank 91/202: Pet Name: Diddles As a passive effect this ability increases your summoned pet's attack power by 100 points, its chance to score a critical melee hit by 28%, the damage of its critical hits by 111%, and its chance to perform a flurry of attacks (up to two additional attacks upon a successful primary slot double attack) by 70%. Phantasmus (Necromancer) Current Rank 70/156: Pet Name: Incognito This passive ability increases your summoned pet's attack power by 100 points, its chance to score a critical melee hit by 31%, the damage of its critical hits by 111%, and its chance to perform a flurry of attacks (up to two additional attacks upon a successful primary slot double attack) by 73%. Bromo (Beastlord) Current Rank 68/142: Pet Name: Bromo`s warder As a passive effect this ability increases your summoned pet's attack power by 100 points, its chance to score a critical melee hit by 26%, the damage of its critical hits by 111%, and its chance to perform a flurry of attacks (up to two additional attacks upon a successful primary slot double attack) by 76%. Vikulriz (Shaman) Current Rank 12/113: Pet Name: Awoo This passive ability increases your summoned pet's chance to score a critical melee hit by 3%, the damage of its critical hits by 63%, and its chance to perform a flurry of attacks (up to two additional attacks upon a successful primary slot double attack) by 6%. Balwen (Mictlantecuhtli): Expected: 18% Actual: 13.21% Fizzlebop (Diddles): Expected: 28% Actual: 20.63% Phantasmus (Incognito): Expected: 31% Actual: 20.76% Bromo (Bromo`s warder): Expected: 26% Actual: 19.86% Vikulriz (Awoo): Expected: 3% Actual: 1.97%
This isn't intended as a "nothing is broken" response, but it's important to recognize that "increased by N%" is not the same as "increased to N%." If your pet's base crit rate is 10%, "increased by 18%" would result in an 11.8% crit rate, not an 18% crit rate. At 202/202, my pet's crit rate is definitely not 50%. Working the provided numbers backward, here are the "base" crit rates for the pets, which may or may not be intended: Balwen (Mictlantecuhtli): Base: 11.19% Effective: 13.21% Fizzlebop (Diddles): Base: 16.12% Effective: 20.63% Phantasmus (Incognito): Base: 15.85% Effective: 20.76% Bromo (Bromo`s warder): Base: 15.76% Effective: 19.86% Vikulriz (Awoo): Base: 1.91% Effective: 1.97% It's also important to control for buffs. The fact that none of those numbers are round suggests there might be additional buffs on the pets that are independently modifying the base rate. What's most interesting (to me) here is that swarm pets have an evidently and consistently higher crit rate than main pets across your parses.
No. Your pet's melee critical chance is equal to your SPA 218 value (conferred by Companion's Fury and Glyph of Ultimate Power). 18% is 18% melee critical chance. There is no base critical chance. You're not parsing this correctly. Companion's Fury modifies your pet's melee critical chance. Your pet's total critical chance will also include procs, which pets can never crit. Therefore, the total critical chance displayed in a parser will be lower than the melee critical chance. Swarm pets have fewer or no (depending on the pet) procs and therefore their overall critical chance will be closer to the Companion's Fury value (or equal if they have no procs). This is not a bug.
On the contrary, even when splitting out the melee and removing the procs, the crit chance is not where it is supposed to be. So, yes, this is a bug.
From a spectator... ...you might not want them to dive too deep into pet dps, especially swarm pet dps. You never know what they might find ... or do.
Question about this - isn't that assuming the OP did not have spellhold on? Shouldn't that stop all the procs so that all pet attacks are melee and thus critable?
If it did, that would be awesome because of a long outstanding bug that Sancus has been MVP on getting addressed by Dev. Alas, no. The only thing spell hold blocks is the pet's innate spell.
If your not casting proc buffs on your pet and not giving it proccing weapons, whats left? In the case of parsing, shouldn't it just be the innate haste buff (like burnout) and thats it? No innate spell casts or weapons and such?
No, it isn't a bug. There are really three possibilities: The overall pet critical chance is lower because of the procs/direct damage/DS/etc. (non-melee hits that cannot crit) in the parse. You're using a very old parser version (that still has the green theme) and it isn't parsing something correctly. You're fighting mobs that are locked or that are using /shield and therefore hits don't display the critical tag. Download an updated version of Kizant's parser and post your pet's DPS breakdown. Here's a parse of a pet with Companion's Fury 91/202 (28%) without any of those variables:
You're incorrect in assuming that I did not test ONLY melee. I used multiple parsers. You're also clearly not testing on Mischief server.
Additionally, you're only testing a mage pet. I have 5 pets listed here and all are missing the amount of crit they are supposed to have.
So, as you can see the melee crit is not where it fully needs to be. I will admit that mages and beastlords seem to be, but the other three are not. Also note, this does not include any enchanter testing. Additionally, the findings uncovered that Flurry is not correctly functioning. The base flurries are listed and the bard flurry from aura/song adds an additional 20-23% depending on which is used. Incognito: Expected Flurry: ~73-96% Actual: 27.99% Diddles: Expected Flurry: ~70-93% Actual: 30.09% Bromo`s Warder: Expected Flurry: ~70-93% Actual: 33.25% Mictlantecuhtli: Expected Flurry: ~6-29% Actual: 21.17% Awoo: Expected Flurry: ~6-29% Actual: 21.6%
This is what those parses show for the main forms of damage for each pet (other forms of damage will have much lower hit rate, thus higher RNG): In aggregate, things look to be working just like we should expect. With RNG, sometimes your crit rate is higher and sometimes it is lower. I agree the Necro pet's crit rate is a bit lower than I would expect, but sometimes bad RNG does happen (as do mobs /shielding each other, as it seems pretty likely this parse is from a play session). Flurry is functioning fine, you're just, again, misunderstanding what the parser is telling you. On every primary hand swing, a pet can perform: A primary hand hit A double attack A triple attack (base triple attack rate is 0%) An additional hit (SPA 498) A flurry hit A second flurry hit The pet only rolls a chance to flurry when it performs a double attack, which it does not have a 100% chance to. Further, if all hits were primary hand hits, you had no triple attack/SPA 498 chance, and 100% flurry chance, the highest the parser displayed flurry rate could be 50%. That's because you would have two non-flurry hits and two flurry hits on the swing. In actuality, your double attack chance is not 100%, your flurry chance is not 100%, and a notable portion of your hits are from your secondary hand, which cannot flurry. Those parser displayed flurry rates are well within what would make sense. Questioning why parser displayed values are deviating from your expectation is fine - a lot of people learn how mechanics work that way. Coming here and declaring things are broken without taking the time to ask that question is imprudent and would waste dev time if the "bug" was actually researched when something is not broken.
Even based upon your response, if the statements are true, then it still is argued that, at minimum, the necromancer pet is underperforming in all categories. They all have identical pet foci. The necromancer pet has higher critical chance and higher flurry chance than the magician, and a higher critical chance, but lower flurry chance than the beastlord. The necromancer is lower in both categories when compared to either the beastlord or the magician. Also, the beastlord and magician pets *are* within their scope of critical chance +/- 1%, then necromancer is >3.5% variance. For clarification and to negate RNG being an issue, this is hundreds of fights in one parse to account for RNG variances.
