Damage Over Time Changes - Part 2
|
Why do people say double dipping will be removed? Technically, if elemental damage increases fire skill damage and ignite damage, that is in fact double dipping. Just because global generic damage increase doesnt double dip anymore doesnt mean double dipping is removed.
I came back to this game after several years break and had to learn the mechanics of the game again. I can only speak for myself, but i didnt expect increased elemental damage to both increase the skill and the ignite. The ignite is already based off the skills fire damage, so why would it get increased one more time? Same with poison. This doesnt make logically sense and is a mechanic that never should have been in the game. But im guessing the developers like to have the game be cryptic and more complicated than it has to be. Then again, double dipping is already in the game and you now suddenly want to make it much weaker and kill build diversity? Poison/ ignite is not even top meta, so why should it be nerfed? If you are gonna nerf damage mechanics you should do it across the board. Just look at the ultra strong builds that doesnt even use poison/ ignite. Last edited by Synergy1337#6251 on May 6, 2017, 7:14:41 PM
|
|
" People say double dipping is being removed, because you won't be double dipping. Yes, there are stats that will effect both parts of an attack, but you're not double dipping with it. An example of double dipping, is +fire damage with Ignite. Where currently, if you had I don't know, 20% more Fire damage on a skill that deals 100 Fire damage the following would occur: Initial hit would be boosted by 20%, up to 120 Fire damage. Ignite would be based off this (Increased) number dealing a base of 96 damage, then would itself be boosted by the 20% so would end up doing 115 damage. So that's double dipping. Since you're getting this 20% more fire damage, twice, on the Ignite because the initial hit and any boosts it has gets transferred to the DoT, then boosted by things that boost the DoT. Meanwhile, the new system with the same 20% more Fire damage on the same skill would have the initial hit doing the same 120 damage, but the Ignite is based on the base damage of the hit, so would be doing 80 damage base, which is then affected by the boost up to 96. As you can see, while the boost will affect both parts of the attack, it only increases them a single time each, rather than boosting the ignite twice effectively (Well, actually, a bit more than that since 80 * 1.4 is 112. In this scenario this 20% more fire damage is actually boosting the Ignite by 44% due to the effects of double dipping) |
|
|
As someone who loves playing ED I now must ask few things about it that may or may not be in Oriath update.
a) will there be another +1 or +2 radius increase to contagion because it feels super clunky to play now after AoE nerf. (Or generally a lot more AoE from quality/level) b) because passives wont scale other DoT inflicted by ED aka decay weapon and consuming dark I must ask how badly will the damage on the gem gonna be increased to make skill actual end-game viable? Its not gonna be glacial hammer type of buff right?... right? c) and finally does poison inflicted by consuming dark can be scaled by any passives/gear etc? |
|
" In my mind, that is not changing double dipping, only changing how it works. If increases to fire damage will still affect the fire skill hit and ignite, that is technically double dipping. Nerfing it so the ignite will only be based of the base damage is not removing double dipping. Why would an ignite by itself be affected by any damage increases when its already affected by the hit (base damage multiplied by increased damage)? I dont think its normal for mechanics in other RPGs to let increases to fire damage affect both the hit and the ignite seperately. Thats what increases to burning damage is for. What i propose is to let an ignite be only based of the initial hit multiplied by increases to damage. Thats it. Then increases to fire damage will only dip ONCE. Last edited by Synergy1337#6251 on May 7, 2017, 7:13:10 PM
|
|
|
Dont make DOT mandatory! Dont buff base dmg It will be same broken mandatory as now (just slightly weaker).
Also physical damage not scale any DOT, while mines, traps, etc will DD? Why so hate phys dmg? Settlers master craft service Settlers My IGN TreeOfDead https://www.pathofexile.com/forum/view-thread/2037371 Vouch Settlers veiled crafting all service all crafts mods Settlers SC master craft service Settlers SC craft mod! Veiled crafting Service Settlers craft PM: TreeOfDead Last edited by TreeOfDead#4438 on May 8, 2017, 7:38:10 AM
|
|
" Excuse me ?!! The phy close and long range builds is the most OP in POE fellow. if You are looking for OP build - this definitely is a phy build / converter phy to ele.. With the "1h 6L wipe" the PoE turns to a joke now.
There is no sane reason for one to play it any further. |
|
|
Since it is almost a complete overhaul.
I was wondering if: Conditional modifiers works with DOT now? that is, previously mods like " increased Damage against Hindered Enemies" or "more Damage against Chilled Enemies" will not work on DOTs. Is that going to be the same case in 3.0? |
|
" This is probably not going to be fixed for a long time, since this would require recalculating player damage dealt for every single dot tick, causing severe lag. It'd be nice if they made an equivalent of ele pen for dots, but my expectations are pretty low at this point, seeing as they basically gutted bleed and made poison only useful on pure chaos builds, mines/traps/minions, and viper strike :/ . |
|
" Technically, they could just make DoTs ignore resists. I mean, many people are complaining about how low damage DoTs will be due to scaling off the base damage of hits and requiring magnitudes of %increases to become something considerable at all. Ignoring resists would be a way of significantly upping their damage without needing so many huge modifiers. Make it a keystone passive and you can prevent it messing with PC's (Thus killing RF builds). Throw in some penetration on some DoT passives too and you can hit some negative resist values like some elemental hits can (Via Pen gem + 2x resistance curse + EE = -170% resists without even any +curse effectiveness) Only issue would be Bleed since it already ignores armour and there's no way to make it do more... (Other than make the bleeding targets move, but that's not particularly feasible in all scenarios. Especially for melee, who ironically, get the most support for making things bleed...). I suppose maybe a passive could work to get bonus Bleed damage somehow. Maybe to make it useful, give it some percent health damage? Bonus damage for bleeds applied to already bleeding targets? IDK. As a side note, ignoring Resists would also make ED not so heavily reliant on playing Witch (Given Occultist has monopoly on pretty much the only Chaos Resist debuff) |
|
" They should. Increased damage is the most generic modifier and should work on DOT. Putting a conditional modifier on top shouldn't matter. DOT just doesn't inherit the attack/spell specific modifiers such as AOE, Projectile, etc anymore. |
|
