Damage Over Time Changes - Part 1

"
Unagi604 wrote:

I believe it's not technically double dipping, because you're dipping with a 2nd chip now.


"
Emphasy wrote:

Well it is not double dipping anymore, because the mods don't make themself more valuable. They just work on both parts (Initial Hit and DoT) but don't influence each other. But there is a big issue with that.


its still double dipping, you take 1 damage passive and it works on the hit and on the dot. It doesnt scale the dot part twice by scaling the hit, but you are still scaling 2 things with the 1 passive. A single dip would be something that only scales the dot or the hit, not both.
"
Snorkle_uk wrote:
"
Unagi604 wrote:

I believe it's not technically double dipping, because you're dipping with a 2nd chip now.


"
Emphasy wrote:

Well it is not double dipping anymore, because the mods don't make themself more valuable. They just work on both parts (Initial Hit and DoT) but don't influence each other. But there is a big issue with that.


its still double dipping, you take 1 damage passive and it works on the hit and on the dot. It doesnt scale the dot part twice by scaling the hit, but you are still scaling 2 things with the 1 passive. A single dip would be something that only scales the dot or the hit, not both.

The new thing is 'Dual dipping'. The old thing is 'Double dipping' (the dot damage). The old thing also 'dual dipped' of course. But that was not so important usually.
'Double dipping' probably refers to scaling the same thing twice. Like 'Double Strike' (two hits with same weapon) vs 'Dual Strike' (one hit per weapon).
No wonder it's lost, it's in the middle of the jungle!
How will Avatar of Fire ignite builds be affected? Can you provide some more detailed examples of calculating the dps of a common skill with the planned changes? E.g. Avatar of fire with arctic breath and cold to fire linked.

Thanks!
"
Zrevnur wrote:

The new thing is 'Dual dipping'. The old thing is 'Double dipping' (the dot damage). The old thing also 'dual dipped' of course. But that was not so important usually.
'Double dipping' probably refers to scaling the same thing twice. Like 'Double Strike' (two hits with same weapon) vs 'Dual Strike' (one hit per weapon).



when people talked about scaling dots before we would say pick passives that double dip, and the explanation we would give is that it would scale the hit and the dot, as opposed to passives that didnt double dip that would only scale the hit or the dot, not both. We never talked about the dot getting double scaled, and we talked about this endlessly on these forums, its been talked about endlessly in podcasts and youtube vids and it has never been specifically stated that the dot was getting scaled twice, always been stated that the increase would effect the hit and the dot which is still what is happening and the game will still suffer the ill effects of it by forcing the mechanics to be balance around situations like chaos damage, proj damage, whatever the passives are that scale the hit and the dot rendering ways of building without choosing the scaling that double dips ineffective.

you can reclassify it after the fact all you want, the way we have spoken about double dipping up till this manifesto post remains the same.
"
Zrevnur wrote:
"
Snorkle_uk wrote:
"
Unagi604 wrote:

I believe it's not technically double dipping, because you're dipping with a 2nd chip now.


"
Emphasy wrote:

Well it is not double dipping anymore, because the mods don't make themself more valuable. They just work on both parts (Initial Hit and DoT) but don't influence each other. But there is a big issue with that.


its still double dipping, you take 1 damage passive and it works on the hit and on the dot. It doesnt scale the dot part twice by scaling the hit, but you are still scaling 2 things with the 1 passive. A single dip would be something that only scales the dot or the hit, not both.

The new thing is 'Dual dipping'. The old thing is 'Double dipping' (the dot damage). The old thing also 'dual dipped' of course. But that was not so important usually.
'Double dipping' probably refers to scaling the same thing twice. Like 'Double Strike' (two hits with same weapon) vs 'Dual Strike' (one hit per weapon).


It is still double dipping. However it no longer has quadratic growth.

e.g Old system = f(y) = Θ(1 + y) ^ 2

e.g New system = f(y) = Θ(1 + y x 2)

In essence. IF you have a base damage of 1000 and a modifier of 20% increased damage, you get the following;

e.g Old system = f(0.2) = Θ( 1 + 0.2) ^ 2 x 1000 == 1440 damage (+440)

e.g New system = f(0.2) = Θ( 1 + 0.2 * 2) x 1000 == 1400 damage (+400)

With normal damage, you just straight up get;

e.g Θ( 1 + 0.2) x 1000 == 1200 damage (+200)


440 damage versus 400 damage versus 200 damage. This is just with 20%. When you start introducing larger modifiers, the difference becomes exponentially larger.
"
Snorkle_uk wrote:
"
Zrevnur wrote:

The new thing is 'Dual dipping'. The old thing is 'Double dipping' (the dot damage). The old thing also 'dual dipped' of course. But that was not so important usually.
'Double dipping' probably refers to scaling the same thing twice. Like 'Double Strike' (two hits with same weapon) vs 'Dual Strike' (one hit per weapon).


when people talked about scaling dots before we would say pick passives that double dip, and the explanation we would give is that it would scale the hit and the dot, as opposed to passives that didnt double dip that would only scale the hit or the dot, not both. We never talked about the dot getting double scaled, and we talked about this endlessly on these forums, its been talked about endlessly in podcasts and youtube vids and it has never been specifically stated that the dot was getting scaled twice, always been stated that the increase would effect the hit and the dot which is still what is happening and the game will still suffer the ill effects of it by forcing the mechanics to be balance around situations like chaos damage, proj damage, whatever the passives are that scale the hit and the dot rendering ways of building without choosing the scaling that double dips ineffective.

you can reclassify it after the fact all you want, the way we have spoken about double dipping up till this manifesto post remains the same.


The way I used it and the way I have seen other (knowledgable) people use "double dipping" is so that the "dipping" refers to the DoT. I am unaware (for example) of people saying things like "cold damage double dips for Vortex". This would be phrased as "cold damage affects both the hit and the DoT" instead.

If the "same thing"(the DoT usually) is not affected twice by something then its not PoE-commonly called "double dipping".


"
KnyazSunny wrote:
Spoiler

It is still double dipping. However it no longer has quadratic growth.

e.g Old system = f(y) = Θ(1 + y) ^ 2

e.g New system = f(y) = Θ(1 + y x 2)

In essence. IF you have a base damage of 1000 and a modifier of 20% increased damage, you get the following;

e.g Old system = f(0.2) = Θ( 1 + 0.2) ^ 2 x 1000 == 1440 damage (+440)

e.g New system = f(0.2) = Θ( 1 + 0.2 * 2) x 1000 == 1400 damage (+400)

With normal damage, you just straight up get;

e.g Θ( 1 + 0.2) x 1000 == 1200 damage (+200)


440 damage versus 400 damage versus 200 damage. This is just with 20%. When you start introducing larger modifiers, the difference becomes exponentially larger.

If it makes sense to call it 'double dipping' or not depends on implied context. Mostly on what the 'dipping' refers to. "Double dipping" as used currently is usually all about the DoT damage. So I consider the "dipping" context the DoT damage. And the DoT damage does no longer "double dip".

Edit: minor correction
No wonder it's lost, it's in the middle of the jungle!
Last edited by Zrevnur on May 2, 2017, 3:11:48 AM
"
Zrevnur wrote:
Spoiler
"
Snorkle_uk wrote:
"
Zrevnur wrote:

The new thing is 'Dual dipping'. The old thing is 'Double dipping' (the dot damage). The old thing also 'dual dipped' of course. But that was not so important usually.
'Double dipping' probably refers to scaling the same thing twice. Like 'Double Strike' (two hits with same weapon) vs 'Dual Strike' (one hit per weapon).


when people talked about scaling dots before we would say pick passives that double dip, and the explanation we would give is that it would scale the hit and the dot, as opposed to passives that didnt double dip that would only scale the hit or the dot, not both. We never talked about the dot getting double scaled, and we talked about this endlessly on these forums, its been talked about endlessly in podcasts and youtube vids and it has never been specifically stated that the dot was getting scaled twice, always been stated that the increase would effect the hit and the dot which is still what is happening and the game will still suffer the ill effects of it by forcing the mechanics to be balance around situations like chaos damage, proj damage, whatever the passives are that scale the hit and the dot rendering ways of building without choosing the scaling that double dips ineffective.

you can reclassify it after the fact all you want, the way we have spoken about double dipping up till this manifesto post remains the same.


The way I used it and the way I have seen other (knowledgable) people use "double dipping" is so that the "dipping" refers to the DoT. I am unaware (for example) of people saying things like "cold damage double dips for Vortex". This would be phrased as "cold damage affects both the hit and the DoT" instead.

If the "same thing"(the DoT usually) is not affected twice by something then its not PoE-commonly called "double dipping".


"
KnyazSunny wrote:
Spoiler

It is still double dipping. However it no longer has quadratic growth.

e.g Old system = f(y) = Θ(1 + y) ^ 2

e.g New system = f(y) = Θ(1 + y x 2)

In essence. IF you have a base damage of 1000 and a modifier of 20% increased damage, you get the following;

e.g Old system = f(0.2) = Θ( 1 + 0.2) ^ 2 x 1000 == 1440 damage (+440)

e.g New system = f(0.2) = Θ( 1 + 0.2 * 2) x 1000 == 1400 damage (+400)

With normal damage, you just straight up get;

e.g Θ( 1 + 0.2) x 1000 == 1200 damage (+200)


440 damage versus 400 damage versus 200 damage. This is just with 20%. When you start introducing larger modifiers, the difference becomes exponentially larger.

If it makes sense to call it 'double dipping' or not depends on implied context. Mostly on what the 'dipping' refers to. "Double dipping" as used currently is usually all about the DoT damage. So I consider the "dipping" context the DoT damage. And the DoT damage does no longer "double dip".

Edit: minor correction

Wiki explains it: http://pathofexile.gamepedia.com/Double_dipping
No wonder it's lost, it's in the middle of the jungle!
Okay, here's why this is not double dipping:
In the new system, you do 100 damage per attack, and you get 100% More damage, you now do 200 damage per attack.

In the old, double dipping system, you would do more than that if part of your damage is DoT, but 200 if you had nothing that double dips.

What some people seem to be implying is that to get rid of double dipping, that "100% more" should only apply to one part of your damage. So I guess if you had a 50/50 split, you'd do 150 total damage. Which means that there would never be any reason whatsoever to have a build that did damage in the hit and the dot.
Dont buff DOT! GGG please dont do it! Even without dd DOT strong, and after you buff it THAT much DOT will become absolutely mandatory!

Remember when reduced mana gem was mandatory and you changed it exactly the same reason as DOT, so dont buff DOT, pls dont do it!
Heist Master Craft Service in Heist My IGN TreeOfDead
https://www.pathofexile.com/forum/view-thread/2037371 Vouch
Heist Masters 8 level Crafting All Service all crafts mods
Best Heist SC Master Craft Service Heist SC in HSC craft!
Master Crafting Service in Heist HSC craft PM: TreeOfDead
Will poison continue to stack though?..

Report Forum Post

Report Account:

Report Type

Additional Info