Damage types and Resistances

[Kel'Thuzad]

I want to make sure my understanding of these is still up-to-date, given that Magic/Spell resistance was reworked at some point.

Ward Save: Reduces all damage by X% regardless of type.

Missile Resist: Reduces non-magical missile damage by X%

Physical Resist: Reduces non-magical melee (and missile?) damage by X%

Spell Resist: Reduces magic damage by X% .. (but NOT magical melee/missile attacks?)


So I guess my two questions are;
1/ Do Physical/Missile resistance stack against missile attacks? Or does one supersede the other?
2/ Spell Resist now only reduces damage from actual spells? (e.g. Fireball, Spirit Leech).

For bonus points: Where/how do flaming attacks fit into this picture?

[Yannir]

Originally posted by Tunguska:

Originally posted by Kel'Thuzad:

Missile Resist: Reduces non-magical missile damage by X%

No. It reduces all missile damage, doesn't matter if it's magical or not. It might even reduce damage from some projectile/type spells, but don't quote me on that.

Missile resistance also works against any spells that say they are "Magic Missiles" like Shem's Burning Gaze and Fireball.

[SomeGuy1]

For reference:

https://www.totalwar.com/blog/ff2-damage-1/

[Dou B Jin]

Missile resistance applies to all missile damage. Physical resistance is applied on top if the attack is non-magical. Ward Save is added on everything.

Magic resistance only affect spells. If an attack has fire the fire resistance is added on top of the physical resistance (assuming its not a magic attack in which case only fire resistance is counted).

Basically unless otherwise specified its breaks down to

Is it Melee/Missile/Spell? Melee = no resistance / Missile = add missile resistance

Is it magical? Yes = ignores physical / No = include physical resistance.

Is it Fire damage? Yes = Add fire resistance / No = No fire Resistance

Is it a spell? Yes = Add spell resistance / No = No spell resistance.

Always add ward save.

I also remember there being a hard cap on total resistance. I think it was 80% back in WH2 but Its been awhile since I checked.

[Kel'Thuzad]

Thank you gentlemen.

[KoboldUtopian]

Also, I'm pretty sure resistance can't go negative. So applying -20% spell resistance to something with no spell resistance doesn't increase damage.

[Grinch]

Fire resistance can go negative, granting the appropriate damage modification (-20% res = +20% damage) apparently it's the only damage type that can go under 0% resist.

[Kel'Thuzad]

Originally posted by Grinch:

Fire resistance can go negative, granting the appropriate damage modification (-20% res = +20% damage) apparently it's the only damage type that can go under 0% resist.

That's fortunate, since I use the Kindleflame debuff quite pro-actively (before using dragon breath etc). I also combine it with the Warpflame debuff if playing Tzeentch.

[KoboldUtopian]

Originally posted by Grinch:

Fire resistance can go negative, granting the appropriate damage modification (-20% res = +20% damage) apparently it's the only damage type that can go under 0% resist.

Yeah, I think that's because "increases fire weakness" is a specific thing that increases fire damage, rather than "reduces fire resistance".

[Pönnukaka]

Originally posted by Kel'Thuzad:

Originally posted by Grinch:

Fire resistance can go negative, granting the appropriate damage modification (-20% res = +20% damage) apparently it's the only damage type that can go under 0% resist.

That's fortunate, since I use the Kindleflame debuff quite pro-actively (before using dragon breath etc). I also combine it with the Warpflame debuff if playing Tzeentch.

All good. Dropping my own 5 cents. The only thing I would sometimes not apply is the flame-attack standard. Some lords/heroes/units have surprisingly a lot of fire resistance. Unless you're slaying Undead or Nurgle, it's usually not a good idea to have it on, if possible, I prefer poison and/or magic attack. Especially magic attack standard can be useful against ethereal or high physical resistance units.

[(Steelclaw)]

Originally posted by Pönnukaka:

All good. Dropping my own 5 cents. The only thing I would sometimes not apply is the flame-attack standard. Some lords/heroes/units have surprisingly a lot of fire resistance. Unless you're slaying Undead or Nurgle, it's usually not a good idea to have it on, if possible, I prefer poison and/or magic attack. Especially magic attack standard can be useful against ethereal or high physical resistance units.

Flaming attacks aren't universally beneficial, but I think you're wrong to say they're generally a net negative. The fact that they apply a debuff which halves healing received is, IMO, enough to make them worth it by default. You'll want to specifically avoid them vs some factions (Chorfs, Knights of Caledor; some individual units from dwarfs and high elves can also cause issues but AI rarely recruits them), but they're helpful far more of the time than they hurt.

So IMO you should use the banner, just be ready to unassign it if you come up against a stack full of phoenixes or something.

You're not wrong that the other attack types are universally great, though. Flaming is the only one with potential downsides (other than letting ranged units do more friendly fire vs physical-resistant allies, I suppose).

[AurumHawke]

Originally posted by Dou B Jin:

Magic resistance only affect spells. If an attack has fire the fire resistance is added on top of the physical resistance (assuming its not a magic attack in which case only fire resistance is counted).

Spell Resist tooltip specifically mentions "and Abilities". There is no backend distinction between a Spell and an Ability, and the only real difference is costing magic or which command wheel it ends up on.
Direct Damage is always Spell damage regardless of its source.

Originally posted by Dou B Jin:

I also remember there being a hard cap on total resistance. I think it was 80% back in WH2 but Its been awhile since I checked.

90%, including TWWH2. Might have been increased at some point in TWWH2, but can't confirm.

[Elitewrecker PT]

Originally posted by AurumHawke:

Originally posted by Dou B Jin:

Magic resistance only affect spells. If an attack has fire the fire resistance is added on top of the physical resistance (assuming its not a magic attack in which case only fire resistance is counted).

Spell Resist tooltip specifically mentions "and Abilities". There is no backend distinction between a Spell and an Ability, and the only real difference is costing magic or which command wheel it ends up on.
Direct Damage is always Spell damage regardless of its source.

Originally posted by Dou B Jin:

I also remember there being a hard cap on total resistance. I think it was 80% back in WH2 but Its been awhile since I checked.

90%, including TWWH2. Might have been increased at some point in TWWH2, but can't confirm.

I think his goal was only to specify that normal attacks (melee and ranged) arent affected by it.

[AurumHawke]

Originally posted by Elitewrecker PT:

I think his goal was only to specify that normal attacks (melee and ranged) arent affected by it.

Maybe. My goal was making sure "Spells and Abilities" wasn't missing. Also Direct Damage.


Magic Resist -> Spell Resist was the most notable change to resistances between TWWH2 and TWWH3, so Magic-imbued basic weapons no longer interact with Magic Resist.