About Resilience

[Naljs]

So I wonder if resilience is working correctly. I noticed in a duel that my crit damage of Exorcism barely was any higher than hit damage, so we started testing it out. On an average I did 2200 hit and 2500 crit.
Now, as most people know, spell crit damage is +50% of hit damage. In this case, 50% of 2200 = 1100, and 2200+1100=3300.
My target had enough resilience for 23.5% damage reduction, which I know is about 25% additional crit damage reduction.

So we take the 3300 crit damage and count in the 25% crit damage reduction (this is where I'm not sure if it's working and would like clarification).
25% of 3300 (the total amount of damage) is 825, 3300-825=2475. Very close to my 2500.
25% of 1100 (only the crit damage increase) is 275, 3300-275=3025.
I am not sure, but how I understand it, the second calculation should be the correct one and the result should be around 3k damage and not 2.5k.
The first calculation seem to be present atm however, which makes crits look like they're double dipping into resilience.

Any comments on this would be appreciated.

[Vaen]

The first calculation is used. It would make no sense for just the additional damage from a crit to be reduced by resilience. The tooltip clearly states "Reduces the effect of mana drains and damage from critical strikes by X%."

In order for -just- the additional damage due to a crit ocurring to be reduced by resilience, it would have to read just that. One can further check this by noticing the wording of the last sentence in the resilience tooltip: "Provides an additional Y% damage reduction against all damage done by players and their minions." This suggests that the previously mentioned critical damage reduction is plain damage reduction of all critical strikes done against the player.

[Naljs]

Ok thanks for clearing that up. The tooltip wasn't that clear to me, as talents usually states "Increase critical strike damage bonus by 100%" which makes crits go from +50% to double damage, and I was thinking that maybe the resilience part worked the same. But that's nice then, thanks!