Jump to content


Photo

Upcoming Affliction Simplification


  • Please log in to reply
212 replies to this topic

#201 Kana

Kana

    Von Kaiser

  • Members
  • 31 posts

Posted 17 March 2009 - 11:54 AM

Because you gain nothing from refreshing a DoT early. Curse of Agony for example, has increased damage at the end, but it isn't the only DoT you shouldn't refresh early. Remember that a DoT only ticks once every three seconds, and refreshing early doesn't only waste a potential extra tick, it will actually reduce your DoT uptime. Imagine this model: A DoT has 0.5 seconds left in its duration when you refresh. At the exact moment you refresh, it has already been 2.5 seconds since it has ticked, and won't tick for another 3 seconds, creating 5.5 seconds of downtime on that DoT. An optimal situation of early refreshing would occur if you refreshed the DoT exactly three seconds before it expired, but you are still better off letting the duration expire to gain more filler time.


I assume you were responding to me, but I don't understand the point you're making.

#202 Xeephran

Xeephran

    Von Kaiser

  • Members
  • 26 posts

Posted 17 March 2009 - 12:03 PM

Heeno is, correctly, saying that clipping dots will decrease the amount of time you have for casting filler spells, in this case shadow bolt. you are also artificially decreasing the spells DPCT, plus you are wasting mana.

#203 PSGarak

PSGarak

    Bald Bull

  • Members
  • 1,390 posts

Posted 18 March 2009 - 04:08 AM

Currently, you want to get as close to clipping a DoT as possible while making absolutely sure you don't clip it. Conversely, if you do clip it, you want to clip it by a lot and not a little. It's discontinuous and rigid. From a purely gameplay, not balance, perspective, affliction would be smoother and more flexible if refreshing UA .001 seconds early was only a .001% DPS loss, the way that refreshing it late is a .00001% DPS loss. More abstractly, the goal of a DoT is simply to protract the damage and have it be pro-rated by duration, but the quantization of it is on the scale of spellcasts, so that the granularity has real and non-trivial impacts on play decisions and that deviate from the intention of pro-rating.
Posted Image

#204 valheran

valheran

    Von Kaiser

  • Members
  • 27 posts

Posted 18 March 2009 - 08:54 AM

Assuming unlikely proposition that it would be decided the dot refreshes WILL change, and that it would be YOU (and I mean all of you) who will decide how, which option would you prefer:

1) Tick like corr/EA: every time you refresh a dot, its duration is reset, while ticks happen completly unchanged at 3sec intervals, their coeff recalculated with stats taken at the moment refresh landed. CoA is unchanged

2) Tick like corr/EA with a tick queue: same as above, only remaining (old) ticks will tick with old amount, new coeff is recalculated when refresh hits, but it doesn't come to play untill old duration runs out.

Example CoA, no refresh

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 <- tick count
WWWWM MMM S S SS 0 <- actual ticks, every 2 sec

With refresh 7 seconds before CoA ends:

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8R9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
WWWWM MMM S S S S WWWWMMM M 0

W- weak tick M- medium tick S- strong tick 0-CoA has expired already, no tick R- refresh hits

3) tick more often - for example every 1 or 0,5 or 0,25 sec. This will just lessen impact of accidental fractionally early refreshes (such as because of eradication). The problem is with some "on tick effects".

4) refresh slack - if you refresh dot early by a set amount (ie 0,5 sec or even OPed 1 sec) refresh hit will get delayed by server, and hit precisely at 0,00000 mark - this will of course >require< you to refresh dots within that window (as far optimal dpsing goes), mess with dot timers, but completely remove any negative aspect to eradication procc.

5) tick stack - as long as refresh hits between last tick and one before that, ticks will be stacked. That means dot will be refreshed early but at refresh +3 sec (or 2 with CoA) there will be ~2x tick (or 4x if pandemic proccs). ~ of course refers to variance to tick power betwen different casts. This again will force all to refesh within "2/3 sec to end" window, but should help immensely with eradication and cast queueing.

6) yet someting else - do tell

7) I do not want any change at all

#205 VenomByte

VenomByte

    Von Kaiser

  • Members
  • 68 posts

Posted 18 March 2009 - 09:54 AM

I would take option 3. Tick every second. It's simple and effective. Not only would it make the rotation far more forgiving in terms of clipping, but it would also significantly improve burst damage since damage will hit that much sooner. When a mob dies in less than ten seconds, waiting 1 second for a tick as opposed to 3 is a big difference.

All 'on tick' effects can be reduced in chance or magnitude by a factor of three to keep it balanced.

#206 phulshof

phulshof

    Von Kaiser

  • Members
  • 35 posts

Posted 18 March 2009 - 09:58 AM

I'd go for:
6) duration stack
When a dot gets refreshed, the left over duration is increased by the dot's duration, up to a maximum of 2x the dot period. Ticks continue at the expected time. That way you lose no casting time and no DPS under any circumstance.

#207 Eruantien

Eruantien

    Glass Joe

  • Members
  • 22 posts

Posted 18 March 2009 - 12:17 PM

I'm not really clear on why everyone thinks refreshing dots early being a dps loss is a problem. Why shouldn't it be a dps loss? Other classes and specs have to be able to prioritise their spells/shots/attacks, so I'm not sure why affliction/warlocks should be any different. Isn't it one of the things that helps differentiate good players from bad?

#208 North

North

    Glass Joe

  • Members
  • 7 posts

Posted 18 March 2009 - 01:30 PM

Other classes and specs have to be able to prioritise their spells/shots/attacks, so I'm not sure why affliction/warlocks should be any different.


Perhaps you can elaborate on which classes/specs you are describing here. In my experience with other classes, priorities are governed by waiting for abilities to come off cooldown or for the GCD to complete. In both cases, once a priority is set the given ability can be spammed until it may be activated. Conversely, dots must be timed precisely and, for non-instant-casts, must be timed prior to completion of the prior DoT keeping in mind cast times per ability (which change, of course, with haste procs).

I'm not saying I do not enjoy the challenge of Affliction, something I am new to, but it is vastly different from other classes / specs I have played.

Edit: typo

#209 valheran

valheran

    Von Kaiser

  • Members
  • 27 posts

Posted 18 March 2009 - 01:30 PM

There were plenty reasons mentioned above, and it's not as if dot cliping will not be penalized - you will still be doing less filler, and that's to corresponds to other classes problems. Losing dot ticks because of refreshing them is something unique to dotters.

Anyway, this discussin would not start if not for a fact that wow devs obviously felt change was required (see immo/UA change).

#210 Lothiron

Lothiron

    Glass Joe

  • Members
  • 18 posts

Posted 18 March 2009 - 02:47 PM

I'll take option 6 - something entirely new.

Make it so that DoT effects continuously do damage over their duration - every 1/10th of a second 'ticks' or something of that nature. If anyone ever played Guild Wars, and was familiar with necromancer life drains, I'm referring to something similar to that mechanic.

In doing this, they could actually allow your haste rating to reduce the total duration of the DoT spell, so it would do the same amount of damage over a shorter period of time. It would be nice if we actually scaled with all of the caster DPS stats directly, as opposed to only some of our DoT's scaling with crit, only really getting the GCD lowered from haste, etc.

Wishful thinking, but damnit Martin Luther King Jr. had a dream, so I can have one too.

#211 Galanna

Galanna

    Von Kaiser

  • Members
  • 52 posts

Posted 18 March 2009 - 04:29 PM

I'll take option 6 - something entirely new.

Make it so that DoT effects continuously do damage over their duration - every 1/10th of a second 'ticks' or something of that nature. If anyone ever played Guild Wars, and was familiar with necromancer life drains, I'm referring to something similar to that mechanic.

That's option 3.

In doing this, they could actually allow your haste rating to reduce the total duration of the DoT spell, so it would do the same amount of damage over a shorter period of time. It would be nice if we actually scaled with all of the caster DPS stats directly, as opposed to only some of our DoT's scaling with crit, only really getting the GCD lowered from haste, etc.

Wishful thinking, but damnit Martin Luther King Jr. had a dream, so I can have one too.


If I remember correctly, they said they won't do that because that means higher haste rating make the 'rotation' more complex. MMO-Champion BlueTracker - WotLK 8 weeks away....

If we made haste effect DoTs it would have to reduce the duration of the DoT, which would be a nightmare for DPS rotation/gameplay. Haste still benefits the affliction warlock because of Shadow Bolt, Haunt, UA, and the global cooldown reduction.

It was before WotLK, so they may have changed opinion, but the goal is still to simplify the 'rotation'.

#212 Ele'

Ele'

    Piston Honda

  • Members
  • 107 posts

Posted 18 March 2009 - 05:10 PM

Do we really need to number options and whatnot ? The idea that dot clipping is one of the major problems of affliction was made quite clear by this thread, numerous peoples exprimed ideas about how this could be fixed, but I don't think that a "vote" will add anything to the debate.

If the peoples at Blizzard understand someday that clipping is a problem, they will fix it with the solution that's the easier for them to implement anyway...
You can clip our wings, but we will always remember what it was like to fly.

#213 valheran

valheran

    Von Kaiser

  • Members
  • 27 posts

Posted 18 March 2009 - 07:18 PM

In before infraction, it's not really that dot clipping is a problem that REQUIRES serious game mechanic change. It's just GC expressed his dissatifaction with timers reliance when UA+Immo died, and as I'm sure all of us know, thats a non-solution - immo was riding on UA back, and only eradication etc. ever caused problems, tiny ones at that.

That's why I'm unenthusiastic about 3) type option - it will not help with issue that sparked this whole mess much. For example extending no penalty zone (Im not talking about less filler time part ofc) to at least 1 sec / 1 tick would mean simple UI change might be sufficient for play without any dot timers. Consider Xperl's timers on target's dot icon - if you would be required to only refresh dot within such huge no penalty time, there would be no need whatsoever for dot timers. "So my UA icon shows me big 4, that's about time when I might start to consider recasting it"

So do not treat the list as "I wanna whine to GC, so I need a poll to justify being obnoxious", I would rather want to know what direction (if any) would be acceptable to community. And it was actually quite enlightening even with only few posts. For sure no one leans towards extreme measures.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users