Haste & Dots: Better Methodology

#0 - April 20, 2010, 7:22 p.m.
Blizzard Post
The Cat methodology of how haste effects DoTs is said to be:
- Time between DoT Ticks will be reduced, which effectively reduces the dot duration unless enough haste exists such that it adds another tick.

O.k. this is a flat out terrible implementation for a number of reasons:
- A DoT running its full duration is helpful for removing Stealth
- DoTs that have durations equal to or greater than the CD are not improved (e.g. Curse of Doom)
- It makes break points critical for adding that last tick to certain abilities

There is a much better solution to this problem: Round up the number of ticks, and then redistribute damage to all ticks.

For Example:
Base ability has 10 ticks over 10 seconds for 1000 total damage.
This amounts to 100 damage per second.

With the addition of 1% haste.
This means that we have 100 damage over 9.9 seconds (10/1.01 = 9.9)
Previously 0.1 seconds = 10 damage
Round up the number of ticks = 11 ticks

As such, the new ability will have 11 ticks evenly distributed over the 10 seconds (1 every .91 seconds) with each tick dealing:

(1000+10)/11 damage = 91.8 Damage per tick (vs. 100 previously)
But there are now 11 ticks (vs. prior 10)
Total damage is 1010 vs previous 1000 (1% boost).

Isn't this just a better solution?
Note: The only ability that I think would have cause to be done differently is Curse of Doom as its intended to only deal damage once.
#58 - April 23, 2010, 5:11 a.m.
Blizzard Post
We don't think slight variation on hot durations will mess anyone up. Slight variation on dot durations might mess you up a little bit (in terms of having a very predictable rotation), but since you can just refresh those spells without clipping, that seems okay too. Meanwhile, we think there is benefit in the damage per tick not changing.

Channeled spells are a little trickier to solve. While they technically work like dots, they feel more like nukes to players using them, so changing the duration may feel awkward on those. You may not care about a slight duration change on say Blizzard but you might on Mind Flay when you want to go directly from a channel to another spell. We may end up letting channeled spells just cast faster and finish sooner. We don't want to lower the durations continually with increased haste on hots and dots because it can turn into a real dps or hps loss depending on the situation. Try the Glyph of Rapid Rejuv. It can be useful on some fights but a real pain on others. Tight dps rotations could likewise get screwed up by dots with short durations.
#61 - April 23, 2010, 5:25 a.m.
Blizzard Post
Q u o t e:

It wouldn't ever be a XPS loss though, would it? Since unless the spell has a cooldown barring it's repeated use ( A clarification on how you plan to treat things like wild growth, death and decay, and consecrate would be nice here, since making them tick faster would decrease uptime ) .. it can be refreshed just like before..

I guess I just don't understand why the need for the sweeping change to begin with.... Since it doesn't really seem like it'll feel like haste anymore if things aren't speeding up as a whole...


Sweeping change compared to what? Hots and dots not benefiting from haste?

We might lower the cooldown on some of those spells. Alternatively a spell like Wild Growth could stand to have its cooldown raised. The idea of having a single use on some of those spells might work too.
#72 - April 23, 2010, 6:33 a.m.
Blizzard Post
Q u o t e:
Q u o t e:
The idea of having a single use on some of those spells might work too.
"Single use"? As in once-per-fight, ala the potion cooldown?

Or did you mean something else entirely with that comment?


Sorry, I meant that some of those spells have cooldowns equal to their durations to prevent you from blanketing the room with them. You essentially get one at a time. That might become a problem if haste shortened the duration to the point where you had dead time before the cooldown. We don't want to reduce cooldowns with haste though. That is potentially too powerful in a lot of situations. So one answer is that every time you cast one of those spells, it removes the previous version. Thus you still get one.
#73 - April 23, 2010, 6:33 a.m.
Blizzard Post
Q u o t e:
Were I writing the code I'd look more at adding a multiplicative tick damage increase. It's fairly simple to implement, uses far less server resources and you end up with predictable interactive results. Yes this would basically be just adding spell power conversions for Haste on theses spells, but in the long run as a player I'd much rather have predictability and as a programmer I like the simplicity of the implementation. Same ends, different means and all.


But then haste isn't haste. It's just spell power.