Damage Over Time Changes - Part 1

"

suszterpatt wrote:

"

Pathological wrote:

"

suszterpatt wrote:

As a semi-professional gameplay programmer, this solution seems to me... unnecessarily complicated.

What I would have done:

1. As you collect the modifiers that apply to the initial Hit, build a list of those that could possibly apply to DoT (i.e. Fire Damage and Area Damage may or may not apply, but Attack Damage definitely cannot).
2. If the Hit causes a DoT, pass this list to the calculation that applies modifiers to the DoT.
3. The DoT calculation is not allowed to apply any modifier that exists in the list.


In short, if a modifier was used to scale the initial Hit, it cannot scale the DoT as well. But modifiers that could have scaled the initial Hit but didn't, can still scale the DoT. E.g. "Fire Damage" cannot scale the Ignite from a Fireball (because it already scaled the initial Hit), but it can scale the Ignite from Ice Spear if wearing Hrimburn.

But what do I know about PoE's internals, eh?

That's no less complex than what they are doing. Your way requires comparisons of applicable terms, while theirs does not. They require only the base damage, the game intrinsically knows which multipliers to apply based on the damage type.

Pretty much all this change means is that instead of parsing 20% of the multiplied base damage, they are parsing 40% of the non-multiplied base damage.


~100 fire damage, ~20 added fire damage, 40% more spell, 35% more fire, 30% more elemental, 100% increased fire, 50% increased spell, 20% inc duration

Current system:

120*1.2*1.4*1.35*1.3*2.5 = 884.52 damage per cast
884.52*0.2*1.35*1.3*2*1.2 = 4470.7 ignite dps

New system

120 base fire damage
120*1.2*1.4*1.35*1.3*2.5 = 884.52 damage per cast
120*0.4*1.35*1.3*2 = 168.5 dps ignite

Your proposal:

120*1.2*1.4*1.35*1.3*2.5 = 884.52 damage per cast
884.52*0.2*1.2 = 212.3 dps dot


The above numbers make the change seem more extreme than it already is - the change is a massive nerf, but it required a massive nerf to reach any semblance of balance. Double dipping was far more broken than most people know.

What I'm saying is, if you want to remove double dipping, my solution is how you do it. What we have here is a complete and arguably unnecessary redesign of DoT mechanics which will incur a whole lot of balancing. I'd rather these efforts went into more pressing issues, like the abysmal melee-ranged balance. As if.

"

Kastmar wrote:

"
To compensate for the loss of damage from the removal of "double dipping", the damage of player Ignites, Poisons, and Bleeding have been doubled."

What about us? who doesn't use those mechanics. How we will be compensated?

"

YesImEvil wrote:

"

Kastmar wrote:

"
To compensate for the loss of damage from the removal of "double dipping", the damage of player Ignites, Poisons, and Bleeding have been doubled."

What about us? who doesn't use those mechanics. How we will be compensated?

If you don't use ignite, poison, or bleeding, you don't "double dip" anyway, and therefore need no compensation to aid your damage.