Definition of DoT For Wiki Purposes

[Flix 5,116]

Damage Over Time exists in Sacred 2 in two forms. In terms of mechanics, one is defined in the scripts as DoT, such as that inflicted by Blazing Tempest. It hits an enemy once, and then continues to do damage over a time period. This is the "true" Damage over Time.

 

The second type is actually just normal, flat damage, but inflicted on enemies repeatedly over a time period, such as the damage inflicted by Incendiary Shower. Rather than hitting an enemy once and continuing to do lasting damage, it hits an enemy over and over with a flat amount each time. In a sense we can think of them as "pseudo-DoT" Combat Arts.

 

Both types are included on the Wiki's Damage Over Time page. When I made the DoT pages for the individual DoT types, such as Damage Over Time: Fire, I used the main page as a reference and included all the relevant Combat Arts.

 

I noticed today Mibbs is removing those pseudo-DoT Combat Arts from the individual pages. What I would like to have is a consensus on whether all types should be classified as DoT (as they were previously on the Wiki) or if only strictly the Combat Arts that have DoT in their spells.txt tokens should be classified as such.

 

The major difference between the two that comes to mind is that since something like Incendiary Shower isn't classified as DoT by the game mechanics, Recovery Elixirs and modifiers like Damage over Time: Fire -X% wouldn't protect against it. There are probably other differences as well.

[mibbs 29]

On the page named "Damage Over Time" must be situated TRUE-DOT.

Don't mislead community, mixing direct/periodical damage on one page

[gogoblender 3,069]

Regarding removing and changing pages in huge form like this, We should please post to the community regarding changes like this so we can all see how we feel how the definitions may best suit answers for our community before content is removed from pages or moved somewhere else

Me and Schot can have a look at this tonight after I'm back from work, but looking forward to more feedback from the entire community regarding this.

 

thanks

 

 

gogo

[Silver_fox 397]

The general definition of DOT is just that - Damage over Time that does not end after one hit. That is what most gamers think when they first see the name in a game they just started playing. In Sacred 2 there is a DOT as damage type defined in spells.txt, but the player who just started to play the game won't know this detail and would go by general definition.

 

Therefore, removing the pseudo-DOT CAs means misleading the general community. The average player does not read spells.txt on a daily basis and does not know the definition of true DOT. Such player just plays the game and sees that a particular CA does damage not once, but several times over a prolonged period - therefore the player thinks that this CA is DOT. The way the page is now, many players would think that CAs they consider DOT are not on the page just because nobody bothered to add them.

 

The wiki is a general encyclopaedia of the game, it exists to explain the particulars of game mechanics to average player. So instead of just cutting the pseudo-DOT CAs out of pages and making these pages incomplete from the point of view of newcomers, we should place a description there, with this description explaining what the true DOT is, what the pseudo-DOT is, what is the difference between the two, which CAs are true DOT, and which are not though can be mistaken as such.

Edited May 14, 2014 by Silver_fox

[Flix 5,116]

On the page named "Damage Over Time" must be situated TRUE-DOT.

Don't mislead community, mixing direct/periodical damage on one page

 

Well, I can understand your point, and I appreciate all the great work you've been doing with game mechanics on the Wiki, but you just gutted several pages seemingly without any regard as to why they were set up like that in the first place. So hopefully we can use this thread to work it out.

 

I tend to agree with Silver Fox. It might be more useful to simply split the DoT Combat Arts into categories on the page, one for Combat Arts that are truly DoT in spells.txt, and one for those that are only DoT in practical terms but are not affected by DoT modifiers and Recovery Elixirs.

Edited May 14, 2014 by Flix

[lujate 576]

IMO CA's like Incendiary Shower do not fit the commonly accepted definition of a DOT. DOT's are debuffs that tick damage over time, not multi hit attacks like IS or Pelting Strikes.

[Silver_fox 397]

Well, Pelting Strikes never were on DOT page, as there is a Multi Hit for CAs like that. This page lists Incendiary Shower too, as my opinion about it is the same as yours - IS is multi-hit because there are many boulders each of which deals damage only once. However, Radiant Pillar and Raging Nimbus do look like DOT CA in conventional sense, as they hit enemies not only at the first touch but repeatedly over all the time the enemy stays in the effect area. The damage from those CAs comes in pulses, so it's not all that easy to tell them from true DOT CAs at a glance. The same with buffs - Incandescent Skin and Cleansing Brilliance have their damage described as "pulses" in CA tooltip, and this is usually a description of true DOT, but according to spells.txt they are not DOT CAs.

Edited May 14, 2014 by Silver_fox

[mibbs 29]

На вики этого нет, но в игре также существуют дебаффы в чистом виде. Не вредоносные эффекты\оглушение\привязки, а именно дебаффы, которые соответсвенно своему названию вешают на персонажа отрицательный эффект.

 

Стоит подразделять дебаффы на короткие и длинные, короткие обычно висят 10 секунд и кидаются мобами, а длинными (30 секунд) грешат боссы.

 

Эффекты дебаффов могут быть самыми разными - вплоть до остановки перса на месте, замедления скорости атаки, уменьшения боевых характеристик и т.д.

 

Общее свойство всех дебаффов - ничто на них не влияет. Единственный способ их удалить - переждать или кинуть круг изгоняющей магии (и то будет произведена проверка силы изгнания, и лишь при успешной проверке дебафф будет удален)

 

---------------------------

In the game there are different debuffs. Debuff causes on the character a negative effect.

 

Debuffs divided into long and short: short debuffs usually affects for 10 seconds and used by mobs, and long (30 seconds) usually used by bosses.

Effects of debuffs can be very different - stop a character in place, slow movement speed, reduce different characteristics, etc.

 

A common property of all debuffs is nothing doesn't affect them. The only way to remove them is to wait it out or cast Expulse Magic circle (and it will check the banishing potential, and only if check is successful debuff will be deleted/removed)

Edited May 14, 2014 by mibbs

[lujate 576]

I imagine the distinction in spells.txt is whether the damage comes from a debuf on the target or from an outside source. I see your point how there is some grey area that is likely to confuse people.

 

As I see it, the wiki is a practical reference intended for the average player, who may not even know spells.txt exists. So including CA's on the DOT page that, while not technically DOT's, could be considered DOT's, might be the best option. Of course, with a detailed explanation for those who might be interested.

[xcessive 55]

In my opinion DOT is damage that "sticks" to the target. The target gets hit one time but receives damage multiple times over time (that sounded weird xD).

The only confusing thing is, that the clearly non-DOT CAs are referred to as "pseudo DOT" here. We should just stop calling them like that.

 

Maybe there could be a camparison in the first lines of the DOT wiki site between DOT (true DOT) and Multi-Hit Damage (pseudo DOT).

 

Radiant Pillar and Raging Nimbus are clearly no DOTs. I dont think that beginners would mix that up, because these two spells dont "stick" to the target. They stay where they are (more or less) and damage everything in a certain radius multiple times.

[Flix 5,116]

Well, I had to call them something so we can talk about them, and after all, those CA's made it onto the page in the first place, and remained there for a long time, so I don't suppose the distinctions were all that obvious to everyone. Probably the major misleading factor was that these Combat Arts have durations - they inflict damage in pulses over a predefined period of time, as Silver Fox pointed out.

 

Now that I consider Multi-Hit, do you guys think it would make more sense just to move these Combat Arts from DoT to the Multi-Hit page? The more we talk about it, the more these CA's seem to fit the definition of Multi-Hit Combat Arts.

[Dragon Brother 619]

I think I'm in the pseudo-dot should be in the multi hit camp. I'm not sure I've ever thought of them as damage over time attacks.

[Silver_fox 397]

The headline definition of Multi Hit CAs is way too general, so many things can fit it. So was the headline definition of DOT CAs for a long time, which is why the DOT page got such excessive listing. From my point of view, what defines Multi Hit CAs is that they have well-discerned Hits, each hit behaves like weapon hit, dealing damage only to one enemy, and the maximum number of Hits is a property of CA - it is either listed in CA description (like Incendiary Shower and Glacial Thorns) or defined by animation (Pelting Strikes). The stationary Area of Effect CAs that do pulsing damage to every enemy caught in the pulse have the same trouble fitting into Multi Hit as they do fitting into DOT. They don't have visualization of each hit, nor any limit and way to define the number of hits, the number of times they hit an enemy is defined by duration, as pulses come every second (the same way true DOT pulses come), and number of enemies in the zone, so it's not a property of CA.

 

Speaking of Multi Hit page, what probably should be added here are Ancestral Fireball (with Fusillade mods) and Archangel's Wrath (with Salvo). They can't hit additional targets, but they can hit one target multiple times, which in case of AW can be used to trigger "per Hit" modifiers (RPH and Lifeleech) twice.

 

As for whether or not the beginners can easily say that this or that CA is not DOT... Well, the very first definition of DOT was made a long time ago (I mean DOT in general, not in Sacred 2). And at first it was very simple and broad - "DOT is a kind of damage that requires passage of time to be fully inflicted, as opposed to instant damage that comes at the same moment the hit is delivered", or something like that, I don't recall the exact wording. Then, as computer games became more popular and multiple, more variations of DOT and takes on the concept emerged - now we can see damage that gradually diminishes health and damage that comes in pulses, damage that sticks to the character and damage that is inflicted in fixed area, etc. Each game has its own way in which DOT behaves, and what definition each player has depends only on this particular player's previous gaming experiences.

 

What DOT wiki page needs is a detailed explanation made by someone who really knows the mechanics and CA description in scripts. It would define what DOT is in Sacred 2 and what should not be confused for it. I guess a couple of words should be added about secondary effects like Burn, Poison and Open Wounds, all of which stick to the character and damage him/her in pulses, but those are considered Detrimental effects, not DOT. And where should damaging Buffs go at all? They stay with the player's character, not enemies, they don't have a fixed amount of hits, and their damage is not technically DOT. Should they just stay as Area of Effect without any further classification of the damage dealing?

Edited May 15, 2014 by Silver_fox

[mibbs 29]

Вы написали здесь очень много, мои мысли начинают путаться.

Вашей самой большой ошибкой было то, что на одной странице вы объединили два вида урона, которые никак не связаны друг с другом. Вики-проект в первую очередь должен содержать такую информацию, чтобы не вводить людей в заблуждение, именно поэтому эта страница про ДОТы подверглась критике и была существенно мной отредактирована.

Не имеет значения, как вы относитесь к ДОТам: этот вид урона имеет свою особую механику, и свою особую страницу на вики, в которую каким-то образом попал ПРЯМОЙ урон.

Если вам так хочется, не составит труда на этой же странице упомянуть "Псевдо-DOT", его отличия по сравнению с обычным периодическим уроном (поглощается броней, может быть заблокирован/отражен, может вызывать Вредосный Магический Эффект), упомянуть боевые умения, которые часто ошибочно принимают за ДОТ.

Насчет огненного шара, метеоров, гнева архангела - вот каким боком тут это вообще? Это просто несколько снярядов одного боевого умения (как например у Ледяных Колючек более 50 снарядов, и их сюда припишем?)

______________________________

 

You wrote here a lot, my thoughts begin to flounder.
Your biggest mistake was that on one page you combined two types of damage which are not connected with each other. Wiki project should contain verified information, not to lead people astray. That's why this page is about Magic DOTs was criticized and was significantly edited by me.

No matter how you think about DOT: this type of damage has its own mechanics, and his own special page on the wiki, which somehow got the info about DIRECT damage.
If you so desire, will not be difficult on this page to talk about "Pseudo-DOT", its difference compared with simple Damage Over Time (Pseudo-DOT absorbed by armor, can be blocked and reflected, can cause Detrimental Magic Effects). We can mention CAs, which are often mistaken for the DOT.

About Fireball, Meteor Shower, Archangel's wrath that's how sideways here it at all? It's just a few projectiles of a single Combat Art (such as Glacial Thorns more than 50 projectiles, and here let us assign?)

Edited May 15, 2014 by mibbs

[Silver_fox 397]

Тут просто параллельно упомянули страницу про умения, наносящие урон несколько раз (вот эту -Multi Hit). Огненный шар, метеоры и гнев архангела предлагается добавить туда, а не к ДОТ умениям. Было здесь предложение перенести туда все, что сейчас лежит на ДОТ странице, но ДОТом не является, но это, по-моему, уже перебор. На Multi Hit странице лучше оставить только умения, у которых число ударов хоть как-то фиксировано. А на ДОТ странице не нужно держать лишнего, туда надо только кинуть объяснение, что есть вот такие-то умения (и перечень), которые имеют продолжительность и пульсирующий урон, но ДОТом не являются.

 

To prevent the confusion, I'll repeat that Ancestral Fireball, Archangel's Wrath and Incendiary Shower are nominated for putting on Multi Hit CA page, not on DOT page at all. However, I do not think that putting Radiant Pillar on Multi Hit is warranted. I guess it should be left as just Area of Effect CA, and not figure on other pages.

[gogoblender 3,069]

Wiki project should contain verified information, not to lead people astray. That's why this page is about Magic DOTs was criticized and was significantly edited by me.

Mibbs, your work here is appreciated, great input on the mechanics. I agree with verified information, but the way this information is to be related to our readers has to be in a way that they will understand and make use of as general users.

Please dont edit, remove information from pages without first discussing it here on the forum, as this wiki has survived well now for years with consensus making the way for how we want to teach readers about this game.

Our biggest guide has always been to never remove any content from Wiki unless first discussed.

I am liking the disussion here but want to again reflect upon our ground rules (though few they may be) that nothing is to be removed or edite from Wiki pages unless first discussed here in this forum and then agreed upon by our senior Wiki editors.

We want to preserver the body of knowledge and effort made by the hundreds of contributors over many years, and its' important that everyone that walks away after making a contribution believes that their work exists until it is discussed regarding editing.

Thanks

 

 

gogo

[chattius 2,523]

I think there were several attempts to define DoT over all the years and its types. Some of the confusion was and is because of different languages of the posters.

anhaltender Schaden - sticking continious damage or what I expected when reading DoT. Could be from:

Lasting damage from a poison or fire hit

damage from a spell which sticks to the target for a while and does damage ticks

---

and then these confusing Schadensgebiete/Schadenswolken (damage areas/damage clouds) which do periodical damage and can be in 8 types, but the game has not all of them:

stationary (like ice storm), moving (DM whirlwind), hero bound (fireskin), monster bound (DM eternal fire)

which can either hit every enemy in its area of affect (ice storm) or random ones (meteors).

[mibbs 29]

please, help!

I need a correctly translated this phrase:

 

"Some Combat arts often mistakenly takes for Damage over time. These Combat arts as Damage over time have fixed duration, fixed damage and fixed frequency of attacks.

Unlike Damage over time these Combat arts can be blocked\reflected, armor protects against them, each damage has a chance to cause\inflict the appropriate detrimental magic effect. "damage over time:*** -x%" modifier and recovery elixirs don't protect against damage, caused\inflicted by these CAs."

[Flix 5,116]

"Some Combat Arts are easily mistaken for Damage over Time. Like Damage over Time CAs, these Combat Arts have fixed durations, fixed damage and fixed frequency of attacks.

However, unlike Damage over Time, the damage from these Combat Arts can be blocked\reflected, armor protects against them, and each hit has a chance to cause the appropriate Detrimental Magic Effect. Furthermore, "Damage over Time:*** -x%" modifiers and Recovery Elixirs do not protect against the damage inflicted by these CAs."

Edited May 22, 2014 by Flix

[Flix 5,116]

Multi-Hit Combat Arts just got massive additions of CA's. I did not do this. Given the current, super-inclusive definition of Multi-Hit, any of these could fit the definition, but maybe we could refine the definition so we don't have a thousand CAs listed with no clear connection?

 

Also Archimedes Beam and Gust of Wind just got removed from Area of Effect, which I don't think I agree with.

[Silver_fox 397]

Yes, I also noticed this. With the current definition of Multi-Hit we can include all Area of Effect CAs there, just because they send more than one damage number flying. My opinion about what defines Multi-Hit can be seen a couple of posts above, so I won't repeat it. Basically, I think that only CAs that can do only fixed number of hits at each CA level can stay there, so Area of Effect CAs that can damage any number of enemies should be excluded.

 

I either can't completely agree with removal of GOW from Area of Effect list. Yes, it has a number of flows and an enemy can get between them and stay unharmed, but it's not restricted to hitting one enemy with one flow, so the maximum number of hits it deals is not fixed. It looks more like an Area of Effect CA with more complex area shape than a simple circle.

[mibbs 29]

Не любое Area of effect CA - мульти-хит

И не любой мульти-хит - АОЕ

Вообще принципиальное различие здесь в том, что АОЕ создает зону с определенным эффектом, в то время как мульти-хит просто бьет более одной цели за одну активацию боевого умения.

И так как есть четкое определение Мульти-хита и АОЕ, каждое из боевых умений может быть отнесено в ту или иную группу (а иногда и в обе сразу).

Архимедов луч и Порыв ветра не создают зону с эффектом, соответственно не могут быть занесены в АОЕ

___________________

 

Not any Area of effect CA - multi-hit

 

And not any multi-hit - Area of Effect

 

In General, the fundamental difference here is that Area of Effect creates a zone with a certain effect, while the multi-hit just beats more than one target per one activation of combat art.

 

There is a clear definition Multi-hit and Area of Effect, each of combat arts can be attributed to this or that group (and sometimes both).

 

Archimedes Beam and Gust of Wind NOT create a zone of effect, accordingly, may not be listed in the Area of Effect.

 

 

Сильвер, GoW имеет ту жу механику. что и Glacial Thorns - посылается фиксированное количество летящих снярядов в узком конусе перед персонажем. То, что эти сняряды имеют 100% шанс пробить цель, не делает GoW достойным быть причисленным к группе АОЕ (тогда сюда можно отнести и Glacial Thorns, которые тоже при модификации могут лететь сквозь противников)

 

 

Edited May 23, 2014 by mibbs

[Silver_fox 397]

Yes, Gust of Wind has the same technical implementation as Glacial Thorns, but so has Blazing Tempest. All CAs that can be focused or spread over a sector depending on mouse position are implemented as separate stripes of damage that can overlay each other for focus or move separately. If you think that the fact that they technically consist of multiple stripes makes these CAs Multi-Hit rather than Area of Effect, then you should remove Blazing Tempest too, as Gust of Wind is more similar to it than to Glacial Thorns. But then you'd have to deal with the fact that most players consider these CAs Area of Effect and use them accordingly. I think that the terms of practical usage of CAs may be more important in their classification than their technical implementation in game files.

 

С точки зрения технической реализации, все фокусируемые умения представляют из себя отдельные полоски урона, своего рода снаряды. Эти полоски либо накладываются друг на друга при фокусировке, либо расходятся конусом. Если то, что полоски проходят полное расстояние, не тормозятся противниками и покрывают зону каста, не является достаточным признаком АОЕ, тогда придется убрать и Пламенеющую Бурю (на которую еще и рельеф местности влияет, останавливая распространение части полос огня). У Колючек снаряды ведут себя как стрелы оружия дальнего боя - они маленькие, бьют в основном одного противника, пробивают с шансом. Порыв Ветра и Пламенеющая Буря похожи друг на друга больше, чем на Ледяные Шипы, поэтому мне странно, что одно из этих умений было убрано, а другое осталось. Да, количество полос на конус площади у Порыва Ветра меньше, чем у Пламенеющей Бури, так что шанс промахнуться им больше, но сами полосы ведут себя примерно одинаково.

[mibbs 29]

Сильвер, я отлично знаю принцип работы Пламенеющей Бури - я играл пиросоркой. Меня удивил момент с фокусировкой пламени - прямой урон вырастал (!), причем вырастал как-то иначе, нежели при фокусировке GoW или GlacialThorns: не было множества цифр урон в столбик - просто увеличивалась цифра урона, одна цифра урона (в три раза)! Именно поэтому я все не решался отнести Бурю к одной из разновидностей так называемых направленных атак (угол атаки в этом типе CA обычно задается как cone_adapt в spells.txt).

Но сегодня вы разрушили мои сомнения, ваше мнение будет учтено...я удалю бурю со страницы "Аrea of Еffect"

 

Ну давайте порассуждаем логически:

На странице с АОЕ широко представлены боевые умения, общая черта которых - создание некоей зоны эффета (АОЕ) в заданном радиусе от центра, которым может выступать как сам персонаж, так и выбранная персонажем область.

Однако есть умения, у которых в качестве зоны эффекта (АОЕ)выступает конус - это:

умение инквизитора Levin Array,

умение стража храма Furious Emblazer,

умение дракомага Gust of Wind,

умение высшей эльфийки Glacial Thorns и Blazing Tempest.

Несмотря на разную механику всех этих боевых умений, я предлагаю все их отнести к АОЕ, так как при всей их непохожести на остальные АОЕ они сохраняют их основное свойство - создают зону, в которой что-то происходит.

--------------------------------

Silver, I know how Blazing Tempest works - I played piro elf. I was surprised a moment to focus flame - direct damage grew (!), moreover grew otherwise than by focusing GoW or GlacialThorns: there were NOT many digits of damage in a column - just increased the number of one digit damage (three times)!

But today you destroyed my doubts, your opinion will be taken into account...I will delete the "Blazing tempest" from "Area of Effect" page

Well, let us think logically:
On the page with Area of Effect widely represented CAs, a common feature is the creation of a zone of effect (Area of Effect) in radius from the centre.
However, there are skills you have as an area of effect (Area of Effect)is the cone is:

Inquisitor's Levin Array,
Temple guardian's Furious Emblazer,
Dragon mage's Gust of Wind,
High elf's Glacial Thorns and Blazing Tempest.

Despite the different mechanics all these combat arts, I offer all to relate them to Area of Effect, because, for all their diversity from other Area of Effect they retain their main characteristic is to create a zone in which something happens.

Edited May 23, 2014 by mibbs

[Flix 5,116]

I don't think anything should be removed from the Area of Effect page. Not Blazing Tempest, Gust of Wind or Archimedes Beam. They all have zones of effect.

 

There's another reason I think the Multi-Hit definition needs to be pared down, and not just because as it is there is such a significant overlap with Area of Effect and DoT that it almost renders it meaningless. The reason is because Multi-Hit had a definition in Sacred 1 (in fact it was the name of many Combat Arts for diverse characters, as was Hard Hit), and many Combat Arts in Sacred 2 replicate that type. Adding every single spell that can hit more than once is not very useful.