Burning damage -vs- ignite -vs- fire damage over time -vs- damage over time
|
It used to be all more simple but there was the problem of double dipping ( if you had 200% inc fire dmg with burning arrow, you would get 300% of your damage on the hit, and this would be multiplied by 3 a second time for the ignite because it scaled from the hit and from your increased fire damage at the same time, which was busted ).
GGG decided that splitting the dot modifiers and on hit modifiers was the way to go and added all of those damage over time modifier thingies, they added dot multipliers as passives this year too. As a result, now damage over time only scale of the on-hit base damage and all modifiers are applied after, and if you want to scale the dot you have more increase sources ( as the modifiers to the on-hit only part do not apply to it anymore ). And there we have, with an awefully convoluted system, because this was deemed the best solution against double dipping. SSF is not and will never be a standard for balance, it is not for people entitled to getting more without trading.
| |
|
Well the double dipping nerf and all of that isn't exactly relevant to OP's question, which was "why are these called different things?" And the only answer is, because they are different things.
If you have Blood Rage active, you are taking physical damage over time. If you have a bleed inflicted on you, you are also taking physical damage over time. But having a similar effect doesn't make these two the same as each other; you obviously wouldn't expect a flask that removes bleeding to disable Blood Rage. Fire DOTs work the same way. Ignite is an ailment and is affected by ailment modifiers that do not affect Scorching Ray et al, even though the damage dealt is similar on a surface level. Last edited by ARealLifeCaribbeanPirate#2605 on Dec 4, 2019, 9:45:25 PM
|
|
|
I was merely explaining why we ended up with such a convoluted system.
Burning damage and fire damage over time are the same thing though ( as the wiki page says, Burning refers to any fire damage over time effect. ). Increased burning damage and increase to fire damage over time multiplier are however obviously different, but they could probably just use "increased fire damage over time multiplier" instead of "increased burning damage". So I guess GGG could drop one name or the other, it seems that they want to go for "fire damage over time" since that's what they have been adding recently. SSF is not and will never be a standard for balance, it is not for people entitled to getting more without trading. Last edited by Fruz#6137 on Dec 4, 2019, 10:29:32 PM
| |
|
Also it does seem silly that there is a status ailment that does nothing on its own, except propagate a damage effect that has its own name.
Ignite creates a separate effect called either Burning or Fire Damage Over Time. Other than that, ignite has no impact except as a trigger for certain buffs or debuffs. Are there so many situations where something has Fire Damage Over time that is not an ignite that we really need this? |
|
" - Righteous fire - Scorching ray - Fire trap, and any burning ground effect ( nasty in blights ) SSF is not and will never be a standard for balance, it is not for people entitled to getting more without trading.
| |
|
Righteous Fire, flaming ground, Searing Bond, Scorching Ray: all those are fire damage over time, but same time it is not an ignite damage.
So there are difference instances of fire DoT. |
|
|
I do think they could modify the system, but terminology in this game is very specific and vague at the same time. Some things like “nearby” are relevant to the skill, Ascendency, passive, etc, but that is beyond the scope of this thread. I like trixxar’s suggestion.
All various sources of DoT are not status ailments. They could either give unique names (burning) or generic names (fire DoT). Status ailments do not do damage but cause DoT and cause an additional effect. It would require a massive rework of the system, but if GGG did a DoT league, they could do it. My suggestions: All DoT would have a unique name. No elemental ailment would do damage, and they all scale with increased effect. Ailments will affect all DoT, including those of a different damage type, and may affect other damage as well (i.e. shock) Fire Damage DoT: Burning Ailment: Ignite - Enemies take DoT 25% “more” faster Ailment: Scorch - remains unchanged Cold Damage DoT: Biting Ailment: Chill - remains unchanged Ailment: Freeze - remains unchanged Ailment: Brittle - remains unchanged Lightning Damage DoT: Frying Ailment: Shock - remains unchanged Ailment: Sap - remains unchanged Physical Damage DoT: Bleeding Ailment: Pummel - Moving enemies take 0-10% more hit damage, 100% more DoT Chaos Damage DoT: Decaying Ailment: Poison - Enemies decay for 0-5% physical/elemental hit damage, 50% physical/elemental DoT ...Bah, I’m not happy with those but the likelihood some from GGG even sees this is next to null, so why bother trying to balance it. |
|
" This suggestion is not simple but SOOOO much more intuitive than the present game. Ailments causes status effects, DoTs cause damage. End of Fing story. |
|
