Increased Burning Damage scaling

Fine, I suppose the better way to say it is that it makes for non-intuitive play.

I hit for 150, I burn for 50 fire damage that is then reduced by their fire resist. But that's non-intuitive (in several ways).

If I hit for 150 damage and I deal 1/3 of that per second I expect to see enemy HP go down each second by a third of the damage I dealt. I *don't* expect exponentially reduced damage on the burn because "resists count twice".

Non-intuitive behavior. Not that it matters because I'm pretty sure the only place I've ever seen the burn mechanic explained is the forums. And maybe a load screen. So I suppose the average player doesn't have a clue anyway.

It seems more intuitive than the puncture way to me. (although puncture makes sense as well since armour protects us from hits while the magical resists protect us from elemental or chaos damage).
When I notice I am on fire and get 85% fire resists with flask, I expect to burn less painfully, not still the same. Some burning damage doesn't come from hits at all, too. So yeah, intuitive enough, imo.

"

Autocthon a écrit :

I hit for 150, I burn for 50 fire damage that is then reduced by their fire resist. But that's non-intuitive (in several ways).

If I hit for 150 damage and I deal 1/3 of that per second I expect to see enemy HP go down each second by a third of the damage I dealt. I *don't* expect exponentially reduced damage on the burn because "resists count twice".

If you deal 200 Fire dmg on your initial hit on a 50% resist monster.
Your actual dmg is only 100.
And the burning dmg of that 100 is still 4/3s of the initial 100 = 133 burning dmg
No resistance is double counted in my opinion.
It's just two different ways to get the same results.

The other way round:

200 initial hit:

= 266 burning dmg reduced by 50% resists = 133 burning dmg

"

SW_Bonobo a écrit :

"

Autocthon a écrit :

I hit for 150, I burn for 50 fire damage that is then reduced by their fire resist. But that's non-intuitive (in several ways).

If I hit for 150 damage and I deal 1/3 of that per second I expect to see enemy HP go down each second by a third of the damage I dealt. I *don't* expect exponentially reduced damage on the burn because "resists count twice".

If you deal 200 Fire dmg on your initial hit on a 50% resist monster.
Your actual dmg is only 100.
And the burning dmg of that 100 is still 4/3s of the initial 100 = 133 burning dmg
No resistance is double counted in my opinion.
It's just two different ways to get the same results.

The other way round:

200 initial hit:

= 266 burning dmg reduced by 50% resists = 133 burning dmg

My argument is not that "hey I don;t get it" it's "Hey why are you basing burn on the damage the monster took and not the damage you rolled". And it was confirmed byu devs a LONG time ago that resists count again on the burn damage.

Anhyway, Because basing on damage roll prevents quadratic defense scaling, and makes burn an optional damage choice without needing to stack a ton penetration. Right now yo ueither spec for burn (and then just use fire traps because they deal way more dmaage than other burn effects ever could) or you burn for basically no damage.

Of course we're talking about a game where it was decided that burn damage shouldn't be able to tick concurrently (only use latest burn roll) making rapid spells significantly worse than slow powerful ones even with the same DPS if you use crit.

"

Autocthon a écrit :

Of course we're talking about a game where it was decided that burn damage shouldn't be able to tick concurrently (only use latest burn roll) making rapid spells significantly worse than slow powerful ones even with the same DPS if you use crit.

It doesn't use the latest, it uses the greatest; if you trigger 3 simultaneous burns on an enemy, the game always tracks the best one and uses that. Thus, to a certain extent rapid-fire burning does work; it's similar to the Lucky mechanic.

"

ScrotieMcB a écrit :

"

Autocthon a écrit :

Of course we're talking about a game where it was decided that burn damage shouldn't be able to tick concurrently (only use latest burn roll) making rapid spells significantly worse than slow powerful ones even with the same DPS if you use crit.

It doesn't use the latest, it uses the greatest; if you trigger 3 simultaneous burns on an enemy, the game always tracks the best one and uses that. Thus, to a certain extent rapid-fire burning does work; it's similar to the Lucky mechanic.

Well that's good to know. Still should tick concurrently.

Along my (continued) vein. I've played a few games that make the distinction between the damage an attacker deals and the damage a defender takes. Intuitively they make the distinction because;

If I walk up to somebody and punch them in the face apply the same force (deal from my perspective the same damage) whether they their face is made of flesh or stone (ie whether they take 10 damage or 1).

"

Vipermagi a écrit :

Then again, it's really hard to light a boulder on fire, so they should just be immune.

Immunity to burn damage should just be Fire immunity anyway.

all I'm saying is that burn damage behavior just isn't consistent with what you expect it to be. If an enemy burns for 33% of the damage I dealt each second I expect to see them take 33% of the damage I dealt each second... Not 15% because resistance inexplicably counts twice.