# Status 4.0: Making Status Effectiveness Scale with Damage

## Recommended Posts

Disclaimer: This topic is very dry. Nothing flashy, mostly math and game logic. If you are not up for that then… try? Please? I understand that math and game logic aren’t topics a lot of people enjoy thinking about, but if you ever want something like status to change fundamentally (which I strongly believe it should, and I hope to convince you here to think the same) you gotta wade through this stuff.

If you aren’t up for wading through the dryness, here’s the TL;DR.

TL;DR: Make every status effect scale linearly with the amount of elemental/physical damage inflicted.

The title also sums the premise up nicely. If you are curious how I went about designing a system that works with that premise (and attempt to fill all the holes it creates), a few thousand words await you.

For the most part when I suggest a change or new mechanic it is italicized. Skimming the post for just the section names and italicized sentences should give you a good idea to what is going on.

Please, if there is a part of this proposal you take issue with, do not instantly dismiss the entire proposal. I am only one person, there are definitely issues here. Try and see what my intent is, assume that I am not an idiot, and help me understand where I am mistaken.

In the beginning, there was DoSP

In order to reduce the word count, I made up an acronym for the core concept of this proposal.

DoSP: “Damage of Status Proc” When an attack procs a status effect, the DoSP is the amount of damage of the element that had its status inflicted. This number is NOT affected by health type damage resistances or armor damage reduction.

• Example: If a weapon deals 500 Heat and 800 Viral damage then RNG procs the Heat status effect, the “damage of the status proc” is 500.

“Total DoSP” is the amount of DoSP that an enemy is currently under the effects of. If a status effect has a duration of 6 seconds, after the 6 seconds the Total DoSP will reduce by the DoSP of the given status effect.

• Example: You inflict an initial 500 DoSP attack then a 300 DoSP attack 4 seconds later. For the first four seconds the total DoSP is 500, for the next two seconds the total DoSP is 800, the next four seconds have a total DoSP of 300, and after that the total DoSP is 0.

Status effects are inflicted BEFORE normal damage is inflicted. If a bullet strips armor, the damage of the bullet will consider the armor after being stripped.

Status Proc vs Status Effect: For the purposes of this post a status proc is only defining the action of a status being inflicted. Basically, it is just a yes/no or black/white descriptor. Status effects on the other hand take into account what the status proc did to an enemy, status effects work in shades of grey

All of the effects of status procs can be generalized into two categories, damage and debuff.

Damage Status Procs

These are simple and generally already work with a “have damage matter” system. If a status proc does damage, that damage should be based on the amount damage of the respective damage type the attack had.

• Example: A weapon that deals 500 DoSP will have its damage effect be entirely based on that DoSP. What a novel concept… (no, this isn’t how it currently works)

Damage over time is based on the total DoSP. Multiple status procs of a single type will not create new instances of damage; they will only increase the damage of following instances. This is the exact same result of having multiple instances of status effects but with less UI clutter and a clearer communication of how much DoT you are doing.

Debuff Status Procs

Works by having the effectiveness of a status proc be based on a ratio of the total DoSP to the health (not EHP) of an enemy. This sounds a bit complicated on paper, but in practice I believe it is far more logical than the current status system.

• Example: Let’s start with an enemy with 1000 Health. If you inflict a cold status effect with a DoSP of 100 then the enemy would be slowed by 10% ( 100/1000 = .1 ). But if you inflicted a cold status with a DoSP of 500 then the enemy would be slowed by 50% ( 500/1000 = .5 ). And if you inflict both status effects in sequence (A 100 and 500 DoSP) then the enemy would be slowed by 60%.

Damage status procs already work this way. If the goal is to kill an enemy the effectiveness of a damage dealing status proc is a ratio of the damage of the status effect relative to the health of an enemy. A status proc that deals 10 damage per second on an enemy with 100 health is far more potent at achieving the goal when compared to a 1000 health enemy. Damage status procs are already a function of DoSP and health, it only makes sense for debuff status procs to work the same way.

The effect being relative to the enemy’s health follows a similar logic. If an enemy has ten times the health of another enemy, you expect the healthier enemy to be more resistant to status.

Back to the math, two more acronyms I made up.

SEF: “Status Effect Factor” = (DoSP) / (Health) This is the ratio that determines how powerful a debuff status effect is.

WHS: “Whole Health Status” The effect of a status proc if total DoSP is equal to the health of an enemy.

• Example: Back to the cold status, how that original equation worked is that the WHS was equal to an enemy being slowed by 100%. If, for example, the WHS was only 80%, that would mean that if the 1000 health enemy was inflicted with 500 DoSP it would now only be slowed by 40%.

Multiply the SEF by the WHS to find the effect of a status proc.

The reason SEF exists instead of status effects being based on damage in a vacuum is to make sure that status effects are a consistent experience across the entire game. You don’t want status effects to be completely useless for new players and you don’t want high level weapons to trivialize enemies with “OP” status effects. If an enemy has ten times the health of another enemy, you would expect them to be more resilient to status effects.

To me this just makes a lot more sense. If you use a weapon that hits really hard and inflict a status effect, you would think that the status effect would be more potent than what an SMG would inflict in a single attack. This also naturally makes for a balanced stacking system. A high RoF weapon and low RoF weapon with identical status chances will have the same status “effectiveness” over a period of time. This system automatically balances itself.

Keep in mind that you can deal the full WHS amount of DoSP to an enemy without killing them. This is due to DoSP being unaffected by Armor and/or Shields. The WHS also acts as a cap on the effect of a status proc.

Elemental Status Effects

These are general suggestions, please for the love of god don’t think that this section is the main point of this topic. These are mostly here to give an idea of how the status effects can be converted to the above systems. Again, the purpose of the rework is to propose all status effects to scale with damage, the following are just examples as to how that could be done. If you think some of these suggestions are good, cool. If you think they suck I’d love to hear why it sucks but please don’t use them as proof that the core concept is flawed.

• Heat: Deal 100% of the total DoSP as Heat damage every .5 seconds for 6 seconds. Reduce an enemy’s armor value by 50% of the total DoSP for 6 seconds. Caps at 50% of armor.
• Electricity: A WHS of 100% of damage done to the enemy is chained to enemies in a 8-meter radius as Electricity damage for 6 seconds.
• Cold: Slows the target with a WHS of 100% (fully frozen) for 6 seconds. A WHS of 5 Icicles appear on the target (when the SEF=20% one Icicle will appear, at 40% a second will appear, and etcetera). When an Icicle is hit it deals the total Cold DoSP to the enemy as Finisher damage and destroys the icicle.
• Toxin: Deal 100% of the total DoSP as Toxin damage every .33 seconds for 6 seconds.
• Blast: Enemies in an 8-meter radius have a chance to be inflicted with a Cold or Heat proc relative to the amount of elemental damage of each status type. For example, if the Blast damage is 60% Heat and 90% Cold then there will be a 60% chance that enemies are inflicted with Cold and a 40% chance to be inflicted with Heat. The DoSP of the heat/cold procs is based on the DoSP of each respective damage type.
• Radiation: Creates a radiation field with a WHS range of 15-meters around enemy that deals 50% of the total DoSP every .5 seconds for 6 seconds. Damage from the AoE has a 50% Status Chance. Enemies in range of the field will target the nearest entity.
• Gas: Creates a gas cloud with a WHS range of 15-meters around enemy that deals 100% of the total DoSP every .5 seconds for 6 seconds.
• Magnetic: Pulls enemies in a 8-meter radius towards the target by a WHS of 25m/s for 6 seconds.
• Viral: Amplify damage done to health with a WHS of 500% for 6 seconds.
• Corrosive: Reduce an enemy’s armor value by 100% of the total DoSP for 6 seconds. Caps at stripping 80% of armor.

One more time for the people in the back, these suggestions are not the point of this thread. They are only meant to be examples as to who DoSP can be implemented. A bad suggestion for a specific damage type is not necessarily a sign that the core proposal of this thread is flawed.

Physical Status Mechanics

Physical status is in a weird place due to it being an intrinsic part of weapons that can only be enhanced, not created (outside forced proc mechanics). Of all the things in this proposal this is probably the section I have the most doubt about, but I think that combined with everything else this is the best way to go about it.

Physical status effects are independent of elemental status effects.

• Example: A weapon with a 50% status chance has physical and elemental damage. Every hit now has a 50% chance to proc an elemental status effect and a 50% chance to proc a physical status effect.

Physical status now follows the same DoSP rules as elemental status effects.

This does a few things. First, it makes the base physical status spread of weapons matter again. The status effect of a damage type is just as if not more important than enemy vulnerabilities/resistances to damage types. In addition, it balances the playing field between pure elemental weapons and weapons with physical damage. With emphasis on DoSP pure elemental weapons will gain a great advantage over physical weapons in inflicting status. Elemental weapons being unique is great, but they should not be the general superior status weapon.

Alternatively, don’t do any of this. Have DoSP for physical status effects be based on total physical damage as it is now.

Physical Status Effects

• Slash: Deal 40% of the total DoSP per second for 6 seconds (bypasses armor).
• Impact: Reduce enemy damage by a WHS of 80% and reduce enemy accuracy by a WHS of 70% for 6 seconds. When the SEF > 15% subsequent hits will stagger.
• Puncture: Subsequent shots have a chance to be calculated as “weak point” (2x damage bonus, provides the bonus 2x crit multiplier, bypass shield gating) with a WHS of 150% (A total DoSP above 100% adds a chance to increases the damage bonus to 3x) for 6 seconds.

Forced Status Procs with a Damage Component

If a status proc is forced due to something like Hunter Munitions or a melee stance combo the DoSP will be the base damage of the weapon or the DoSP of the respective damage type, whichever is greater.

Forced Status without a Damage Component

Some forced status effects are done without a damage component. Piercing Roar for example inflicts a Puncture proc without dealing any significant damage. In the case of mechanics that are designed to inflict a status effect without dealing damage their values will be balanced as SEF (Status Effect Factor).

• Example: Piercing Roar inflicts a Puncture proc with a SEF of 50%. This means that any enemy affected by Piercing Roar, regardless of health, will take a puncture effect equal to 50% of Puncture’s WHS (Whole Health Status).

The ability to have forced status effects tied to mechanics that do not deal damage is a valuable tool for DE to have when designing abilities. This type of mechanic could also allow for certain abilities to scale into late game without having to have their damage scale (Frost’s Ice Wave, for example).

UI Representation of Total DoSP

With the current stacking mechanic, we now have a small number that is next to ever status an enemy is inflicted with below their health bar. This transparency in how affected an enemy is by status is a great tool for players, however the above rework would not be able to be represented by a number.

Instead of a number, have the status icon bordered by a circle. A full circle is representative of WHS (the cap for all debuff status effects). Damage status effects already have their potency represented in the UI through the damage numbers that pop up on enemies.

Ease of Modification

If DE were to wish make enemies that are resilient to status effects (like bosses, Liches, etcetera) having all status effects be based on status damage would make it far easier to make blanket changes and effect all status effects proportionally. One way would be to simply give enemies “DoSP Resistance”. This would mean that the initial DoSP dealt to an enemy would be reduced, decreasing the rate by which status effects are inflicted.

• Example: A “DoSP Resistance” of 30% would mean a 100 DoSP Heat proc would only add 70 heat damage to an enemy’s total DoSP.

If DE is more worried about the debuff aspects to status procs, then they could cap WHS to whatever percent they feel adequate.

• Example: Capping WHS at 80% would mean that a viral status would only be able to slow an enemy by up to 400%.

But not only can DE use this to make enemies more resistant, they could use it to make enemies more susceptible to status effects. Imagine if a fire Eximus took double cold DoSP. The ease of modifying the effectiveness of status effects when they are based on DoSP opens the door for new enemy types, new strategies, and new loadout types.

With the latest change to how Liches are affected by status, we got another case of arbitrary numbers having arbitrary consequences. Flat capping the amount of status effects an enemy can be inflicted by only serves to hamstring certain status effects and add another layer of complexity to an already unpredictable system.

Status and Shields

Shield gates did not make shields better, they made things with shields better. Enemies having large shields or even Warframes having large shields was not buffed by adding a shield gate. Grendel makes as much if not more use out of a Shield Gate then a Warframe like Frost.

Shields have an innate 50% DoSP Resistance.

As discussed in the prior section, DoSP gives more tools in DE’s toolbox to tune how everything works together. Enemy shields having innate DoSP resistance would make min/maxing for Corpus fundamentally different than min/maxing for Grineer. And because DoSP is a continuous system, status effects can cleanly carry over to an enemy’s health (and new status effects will add full DoSP) once their shields break.

This change would not benefit Warframes as much as enemies, but it would give shields a bit more of a purpose on Warframes then they currently do.

Disconnecting Status and Critical Hits

*Breaths in*

Have DoSP ignore critical multipliers.

*Breaths out* If this were to be done, many of the proposed numbers for status effects above may need to be adjusted. For me to assemble this concept and present it, I thought it was best to keep it in the scope of the present. It is difficult enough to throw out rough numbers without testing, such a massive change as disconnecting status from crit would make it neigh impossible.

The purpose for this change is to bring down the power of “crit-status hybrid” builds to be more like raw crit and raw status builds. Especially given making all status scale with damage, the power of critical hits would become even more impactful for “status” weapons.

The intention of this rework is to distill the number of variables that effect status to two, status chance and damage. As long as critical hits effect status effectiveness then pure status weapons will remain at a significant disadvantage.

Status Intensity: Status’s version of Critical Damage

Part of the power behind critical mechanics in Warframe is due to it scaling multiplicatively off two stats, critical chance and critical damage. The result of combining these two things is greater than the sum of their parts, leading to the power spike we all know and love with critical weapons.

With status effects being a function of damage, status chance has a lot of similarities with critical chance. And with DoSP being a consistent multiplier for the effectiveness of a status proc, the stage is set for status to get its own version of critical damage that effects all status effects consistently.

Status Intensity: A new weapon stat that exists as a multiplier of DoSP.

• Example: A weapon with 100 and a Status intensity of 1.5x. When the cold status effect is proced the DoSP is 150.

As for balancing this new stat, I would keep the values a bit lower than what Critical Damage can reach. The average base status power for weapons should only be 1. I would not want to see modding Status Intensity be as mandatory for a status weapon as building Critical Damage is for a crit weapon.

Damage Resistances and DoSP

If DoSP and damage are both affected by damage resistances it would lead to enemy resistances/vulnerabilities having a multiplicative effect on each other in the case of damage status procs. There are a few remedies for this, but to be honest I am torn on the right direction.

Option 1: The damage of damage status procs is unaffected by resistances.

This is the quick fix to keep the system working as is. There would only be one instance where enemy resistances are applied to a damage calculation.

Option 2: DoSP ignores enemy resistances.

The damaging effects of status effects (when applicable) are still affected by damage resistances. This would mean damage status procs would have a reduced effectiveness as the damage of the status procs align with the elemental damage, just not with any weird stacking. However, debuff status effects would not be influenced at all by resistances. For example, a Cold status would have the same effectiveness versus a Lancer as a Crewman while a Heat status effect would deal more damage to the Lancer than the Crewman. Big downside here is obviously the inconsistency.

Option 3: Damage resistances effect DoSP but not damage.

The downside to this is that it makes choosing your elements for non-status weapons irrelevant. The benefit of this system could be interesting though, it could open the field to bring different damage types and/or status effects to different factions. You could build Magnetic against Grineer and not get a massive hit to DPS. Your status effects would be incumbered, but they would still be present. It may not even be a bad thing if crit weapons ignored enemy resistances, crit weapons fill the role of an easy, general use weapon. Status weapons would require more min/maxing but if built correctly could exploit enemy weaknesses. Sometimes having a casual option is beneficial.

Option 4: Remove resistances.

Have damage just be damage, the only thing damage types contribute is different status effects. On the surface this is a massive simplification, but it could potentially make for more variation in build crafting if you do not have to worry about being forced into cookie-cutter damage matchups.

This is enough to be its own separate topic and discussion, so I’ll leave it there.

Status 5.0: Death to Status Chance, long live Status Power

As the title of this section insinuates, this is a separate suggestion. Consider this a mental exercise.

Every hit deals a status effect. Rename the Status Chance stat to Status Power. Status Power is a multiplier on DoSP.

• Example: A weapon has 1000 Heat damage and 500 Corrosive damage. The weapon had a Status Chance of 50%, now it has a Status Power of 50%. Every shot from the weapon will deal a heat status proc with a DoSP of 500 and a Corrosive status proc with a DoSP of 250.

In some respects, this is just deleting Status Chance, only leaving the new mechanic of Status Intensity. Status Intensity and Status Power as essentially the same thing, however in the case of this side-proposal they have been merged.

The beauty of making status based on damage is that this rework of the rework would not actually take a lot to do. Status Chance and “Status Power” are basically the exact same thing. On average a weapon using Status Power and one using Status Chance will inflict the exact same DoSP over time. It uses all the same principles but entirely removes RNG from status effects.

Conclusions

I do not think it can be overstated how powerful it would be if status chance were a direct correlation to how good a weapon is at inflicting status effects. A good status weapon will have a high status chance, a bad status weapon will have a low status chance, and this goes for all status types. When DE balances a weapon they do not have to worry about extraneous variables like base fire rate and damage types when balancing the status effectiveness of said weapon. All they must worry about is adjusting a single number.

The reason for removing base damage from the elemental status calculations is to increase the value of modding for elementals. As it stands it is generally the most effective to simply maximize damage output while making sure the element types are correct. By having elemental status effects be only affected by the damage of an element, that means that the elemental mods will add far more value to your build than they currently do. Hopefully to the extent that equipping another elemental mod may have a chance at replacing some “mandatory mods” in niche situations.

If you are concerned with hos this 1:1 stacks up against current status calculations, this is a nerf to any status effect that has less than +100% elemental damage from mods, a buff to everything above +100% elemental damage, and a considerable buff to a weapon with innate elemental damage (for the status effects that use that innate element).

Finally, the changes to critical interactions would work in tandem with everything else to make modding for status a viable alternative, not just addition to, modding for crit. Without the changes to how status effectiveness is calculated making raw status weapons compete with hybrid builds is nearly impossible.

The secret power to this rework comes with the potential of status chance and critical chance being interchangeably powerful. If two weapons, one with a 40% status chance and one with a 40% critical chance, were both roughly the same power level the challenge of balancing weapons would be made astronomically easier. Just imagine what it would do for the modular weapon meta.

Preliminary Q and A

“This is too complicated”

The math that makes something work is not indicative of how complicated a system is to work with. At its core, the way all this works is “if bullet do big damage, bullet do big status” and “If bullet do a lot of little damage, bullet stack little status into big status”. Where the current system is based on an arbitrary stacking mechanic that would require specific knowledge of how everything stacks, the proposal above makes everything simple in concept. Explaining to a player “If it does a lot of damage, it will do a lot of status” is inherently a lot simpler than “Some statuses do damage, some increase effectiveness with more hits. Sometimes the stacking of hits isn’t proportional and there are spikes. Oh, and there are caps on the amount of stacking sometimes, but not always. Those caps also sometimes change depending on the enemy.” I would argue that the proposal above is the most logical and expected way for the system to work for a new player. It doesn’t matter that the equations are complicated, all you need to know to start building for status is that the amount of elemental damage you do makes status better and that status chance makes it happen more often.

“Why doesn’t status duration scale with status effect factor (SEF)”

If status duration scaled with SEF then inflicting a status effect would make subsequent status effects last longer which would make subsequent status effects last longer which would… I think you get the idea. This would mean that the effect of a status proc would be tied to two factors, the DoSP of the new status proc and the total DoSP. When you add multiple scaling factors to anything it is important to make sure that they do not compound with each other.

“You just said compounding factors were bad, why did you suggest status effects that have both range and damage scale?”

Maybe a little bit of hypocrisy, but I think this is a different case. For one these effects still scale with total DoSP, independent of status per second. There also are not any weird companioning effects like there could be if duration scaled with SEF. However, by having two effects that enhance each other it does mean that status effectiveness will not scale linearly with DoSP. Personally, I think that having a few status effects scale better with DoSP than others isn’t all bad if it is kept in check, it adds another layer to modding. In addition to picking status effects for their effects, you may want different effects based on how good of a status weapon you are using. Toxin is a status effect with a consistent value, so it will still have good value on low status weapons. Whereas Gas’s dual scaling means that you don’t get its full value when used on said lower status weapon, with a high status weapon you have the opposite case. Maybe this isn’t the play and the range of a status effect should be unaffected by DoSP, I’d like to hear what yall think.

“Why you nerf crit weapons?”

For status weapons to compete with critical weapons, and for each of those weapons to not be overshadowed by hybrids, multiplicatively stacking multipliers need to go away. This is not intended to be a “nerf” to crit weapons, the larger intention of this change is to allow for buffing status weapons (through buffing status effects) without inadvertently making crit/status hybrids even more powerful.

“You did not explain why the current system is bad”

This is true, my hope was that by reading this proposal the reasons why status stacking is bad would shine through. I could have ranted for a few hundred to thousand words about why status stacking is bad, but I feel like it is easier to explain/understand why status stacking is bad by showing the alternative. Unless status is balanced raw status weapons will NEVER be able to compete with crit consistently. Having to account for fire rate when balancing status is a massive hurdle to DE’s design space.

“That was a lot of words, how long have you been at this?”

In one form or another, since 2017. It has seen a lot of iteration, a couple ground-up rewrites, and many hours being stared at. I need a life. The latest status revision gave me a kick to finish this up… then I sat on it for six months… then [DE]Scott talking about more status changes got me to finally post it.

“This was a waste of time; DE would never do this”

Probably, but it was fun to put together and I can hope.

##### Share on other sites

Dident read everything but arent there gonna be a problem in the internal engiens calculations due to some weapons being able to produce damage up in the milion?

But i like the idea that it scales of damage

##### Share on other sites

Wouldn't this make status procs from non scaling damage sources scale backwards? The higher the health of the enemy the harder it is to get the same strength of a status proc. Making it practically impossible to slow down a lvl 9999 enemy with cold status unless you're using scaling damage or forcing a % of the WHS like your suggestion with piercing roar.

##### Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Liljeman said:

Wouldn't this make status procs from non scaling damage sources scale backwards? The higher the health of the enemy the harder it is to get the same strength of a status proc. Making it practically impossible to slow down a lvl 9999 enemy with cold status unless you're using scaling damage or forcing a % of the WHS like your suggestion with piercing roar.

I don't think "scale backwards" is a fair way to say it. They just won't scale. If you don't mod a weapon and go against a level 10 then level 100 enemy the damage doesn't scale down, it just did not scale at all. So yes, if you only deal 10 cold DoSP to a level 9999 enemy it will be basically useless. Much like how if you deal 10 damage to a level 9999 enemy it will be basically useless.

You mention Piercing Roar and it seems like you got the gist of how that works. For any ability/mechanic that DE wants to inflict status but not deal (significant) damage then skipping DoSP and going straight to SEF (status effect factor) is how to do that. While there are some abilities that should get this treatment I think there is also an argument that some abilities should be given some sort of scaling damage instead (the damage scaling equation used with Xaku, Grendel, and Vauban has its issues but that is a separate discussion).

At the end of the day this is a nerf to the ability for status effects to infinitely scale with enemies, I won't try to deny that. But I would argue that status effects being independent of enemy scaling is one of the things that makes it nearly impossible to balance the game. The whole point of level scaling is to make things more difficult to deal with, if a core part of our arsenal ignores scaling then issues will always arise.

##### Share on other sites

A couple of points here. If you're going to have some Status Effects deal damage, then ALL Status Effects need to deal damage (or reduce enemy EHP). For various reasons, Warframe is a game where DPS is king. If players have the choice, they'll always go for the Status Effects that deal damage, thus artificially limiting build variety. Having all Status Effects deal damage (not necessarily to the same extent, just some damage) would get around this problem, as players would then be free to pick the Status Effect they like, rather than having this decided for them by game mechanics. It also solves the issue of Status Guns being quite terrible for damage unless you're cheesing Slash procs or shredding armour - again, a small handful of all possible Status effects.

I'd go one further and simply remove health-type-specific damage resistances altogether, actually, but that's a separate subject. Would solve one of the central issues your proposal is trying to get around, though.

Secondly, can we please face facts and admit that we need "Status Magnitude" as a weapon stat already? If your weapon is a "crit gun," you need to deal with Critical Chance and Critical Damage. Chance determines how likely you are to land a crit, damage determines the magnitude of the crit once it procs. Status, by contrast, has ONLY Status Chance to work with. The magnitude of the actual status effects is fixed, so they almost ALWAYS favour rapid-firing, low-damage weapons. Because you have no means of boosting your status effect, it makes no sense to pick a slow-firing weapon. Yes, your proposal aims to fix this, but it does so via a more "hardcoded" way. Rather than tying status effect magnitude to weapon damage, just move Status Magnitude out to its own stat.

This way you could have weak, slow-firing AoE weapons which nevertheless still deal substantial amounts of Status anyway. You know what's even better? You can tie the amount of damage Status Effects do (as a percentage of that damage component) TO Status Magnitude. That way, even weak guns can still do a lot of Status damage via procs without needing to use one of the, like, three Status Effects that actually scales well. And, if you took my previous suggestion and made all Status effects also deal damage, then that makes Status weapons of ALL damage types into a worthwhile competitor to critguns for actually killing stuff.

I'd personally go one further by removing status/critical chance entirely, have all weakpoint hits be critical hits and all hits in general deal a little bit of status, but that's well outside the scope of this thread. You've likely seen me post it already, as well.

##### Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, DrBorris said:

I don't think "scale backwards" is a fair way to say it. They just won't scale.

Fair enough, I was arguing with myself if I wanted to go with backwards or not scaling at all anyway.

26 minutes ago, DrBorris said:

But I would argue that status effects being independent of enemy scaling is one of the things that makes it nearly impossible to balance the game. The whole point of level scaling is to make things more difficult to deal with, if a core part of our arsenal ignores scaling then issues will always arise.

I can see your point here, having too easy access to a cc that makes most enemies irrelevant destroys the purpose of scaling entirely.

My fear though is that this system would be a huge nerf to all weapons forcing you to use cheesy tactics much earlier and make abilities the only viable option very quick.

To solve this we would have to discuss what can make an enemy more difficult and how, where and when those difficulties gets added to enemies. Your system seems nice, clean and easy to use for both players and developers but I can't see it work with how the enemy and reward scaling is working right now.

##### Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Steel_Rook said:

A couple of points here. If you're going to have some Status Effects deal damage, then ALL Status Effects need to deal damage (or reduce enemy EHP). For various reasons, Warframe is a game where DPS is king. If players have the choice, they'll always go for the Status Effects that deal damage, thus artificially limiting build variety. Having all Status Effects deal damage (not necessarily to the same extent, just some damage) would get around this problem, as players would then be free to pick the Status Effect they like, rather than having this decided for them by game mechanics. It also solves the issue of Status Guns being quite terrible for damage unless you're cheesing Slash procs or shredding armour - again, a small handful of all possible Status effects.

I started that section by saying "this isn't the point of this proposal" and I ended the section with "this isn't the point of this proposal". Status effects aren't in a vacuum, in order to deal a status effect you need to deal damage. Especially in this proposal where I emphasize that in order to deal status you need to deal damage. And even in regards to the ones I propose I do believe that they all enable damage.

• Heat: Deals damage and makes enemies susceptible to more damge.
• Electricity: Turns single target damage into AoE damage.
• Cold: Exposes enemies to finisher damage.
• Toxin: Just deals damage
• Blast: See Heat and Cold
• Radiation: Deals damage with a side of CC, also will spread its effect to other enemies (which deals damage)
• Gas: Deals damage in an AoE
• Magnetic: Groups enemies together. Yes, this one does not directly make number go up, but consider that Magnetic/Gas is a thing.
• Viral: Exposes enemies to more damage
• Corrosive: Makes enemies susceptible to more damage.
4 hours ago, Steel_Rook said:

I'd go one further and simply remove health-type-specific damage resistances altogether, actually, but that's a separate subject. Would solve one of the central issues your proposal is trying to get around, though.

Odd that you say this is a separate subject when I have a whole section dedicated to how resistances will work with status. I also say it is a bigger issue that could have its own discussion, but I lay out what the options are including just killing resistances.

4 hours ago, Steel_Rook said:

Secondly, can we please face facts and admit that we need "Status Magnitude" as a weapon stat already? If your weapon is a "crit gun," you need to deal with Critical Chance and Critical Damage. Chance determines how likely you are to land a crit, damage determines the magnitude of the crit once it procs. Status, by contrast, has ONLY Status Chance to work with. The magnitude of the actual status effects is fixed, so they almost ALWAYS favour rapid-firing, low-damage weapons. Because you have no means of boosting your status effect, it makes no sense to pick a slow-firing weapon. Yes, your proposal aims to fix this, but it does so via a more "hardcoded" way. Rather than tying status effect magnitude to weapon damage, just move Status Magnitude out to its own stat.

Did... did you read this thread? For one, I mention this exact mechanic. And secondly THE ENTIRE REASON for this thread to exist is to remove fire rate as a factor in status application entirely. You don't need "status magnitude" (I call it Status Intensity above) in order to level the fire rate playing field, all you need is for all status effects to be an exclusive function of damage. That is the point if this thread, not the suggestions for status effects, the point is to make all status effects based on damage in order to make status chance a consistent and representative factor.

4 hours ago, Steel_Rook said:

I'd personally go one further by removing status/critical chance entirely, have all weakpoint hits be critical hits and all hits in general deal a little bit of status, but that's well outside the scope of this thread. You've likely seen me post it already, as well.

... I really appreciate the time you put into the Forums. There aren't many people that give thoughtful responses and approach so many threads in a logical/civil manner. I haven't been nearly as active as I have in the past but seeing your comments here gives me the hope to occasionally comment myself. That said... did you read the OP? Because I have a section dedicated to this exact thing (well, not the crit part). Furthermore due to the suggested mechanics of DoSP removing status chance in favor of every hit dealing status is extremely easy, the above topic is a foundation that can remolded into many different directions. It feels like you came here with your own opinions on the topic, skimmed to the part you understood at a glance (the status suggestions), then commented without giving the effort to know what I was actually suggesting. It is a lot of words, I know, but could've you just waited till you had time to go through it before you responded? I am sorry if I am misjudging but given your response it doesn't feel like you tried to understand the proposal.

4 hours ago, Liljeman said:

My fear though is that this system would be a huge nerf to all weapons forcing you to use cheesy tactics much earlier and make abilities the only viable option very quick.

To solve this we would have to discuss what can make an enemy more difficult and how, where and when those difficulties gets added to enemies. Your system seems nice, clean and easy to use for both players and developers but I can't see it work with how the enemy and reward scaling is working right now.

It absolutely has that potential, all foundational reworks have that potential. But I hope that the foundation of DoSP is a solid enough one that DE could balance it right. It would be up to finer testing of the values associated with status effects that would determine how good the system actually feels to use.

##### Share on other sites

This was a lot to digest. Please correct me if I got something wrong.

19 hours ago, DrBorris said:

A status proc that deals 10 damage per second on an enemy with 100 health is far more potent at achieving the goal when compared to a 1000 health enemy. Damage status procs are already a function of DoSP and health, it only makes sense for debuff status procs to work the same way.

I disagree with this approach.
Primary goal of debuff status effects is to debuff, weaken or controll enemies. As such (low damage) utility weapons have a purpose, as they can fill supporte rolles within your loadout. Your concept directly ties CC/utility/support to damage, while damage and support are 2 different domains. Why would I want to CC or weaken a half dead enemy? What if I just want to controll a group of enemies?
Current status stacking is simple and already covers a good number of feats yout try to reinvent. Electric status can deal 0 damage but still CC an enemy. A progressive way to improve existing system would be to create new stacking behaviour (like a new effect after X stacks). You on the other hand had to invent new modiefiers like SEF or WHS to create a workaround around status being tied to enemy health. I am also confused why you are talking about "consistent experience" as the effectiveness of your weapon shifts to the "bad side" over the course of a mission as lvls/HP rise.

I get the impression your intent is to limit status effects against high lvl enemies. If I am correct you achieved this goal.

20 hours ago, DrBorris said:

To me this just makes a lot more sense. If you use a weapon that hits really hard and inflict a status effect, you would think that the status effect would be more potent than what an SMG would inflict in a single attack. This also naturally makes for a balanced stacking system. A high RoF weapon and low RoF weapon with identical status chances will have the same status “effectiveness” over a period of time. This system automatically balances itself.

Weapons already work like that, since harmfull status effects are tied to weapon damage, while weapons damage itself is balanced by firerate. A contestable point is whether you actually need only one hit to inflict a full utility status effect.

20 hours ago, DrBorris said:

Ease of Modification

If DE were to wish make enemies that are resilient to status effects (like bosses, Liches, etcetera) having all status effects be based on status damage would make it far easier to make blanket changes and effect all status effects proportionally. One way would be to simply give enemies “DoSP Resistance”. This would mean that the initial DoSP dealt to an enemy would be reduced, decreasing the rate by which status effects are inflicted.

If DE is more worried about the debuff aspects to status procs, then they could cap WHS to whatever percent they feel adequate.

Current status system offers a more elegant solution, since status effects have a stacking nature, you just need to adjust individual proc limit on an enemy. This allows to create selective weaknesses/resistences to specific status effects, Your idea to adjust WHS would affect all status effects, thus is a less flexible approach.

21 hours ago, DrBorris said:

But not only can DE use this to make enemies more resistant, they could use it to make enemies more susceptible to status effects. Imagine if a fire Eximus took double cold DoSP. The ease of modifying the effectiveness of status effects when they are based on DoSP opens the door for new enemy types, new strategies, and new loadout types.

This idea is already in the game, realized by health type modifiers. What confuses me is that you previously said status should not be influenced by health types, yet you reintroduce the same mechanic under a diffirent name.

21 hours ago, DrBorris said:

With the latest change to how Liches are affected by status, we got another case of arbitrary numbers having arbitrary consequences. Flat capping the amount of status effects an enemy can be inflicted by only serves to hamstring certain status effects and add another layer of complexity to an already unpredictable system.

Bad execution does not mean bad concept. Nothing stopes DE from applying arbitrary numbers to your concept.

21 hours ago, DrBorris said:

Disconnecting Status and Critical Hits

I am really confused by this point, not because you want to disconnect status from crits, but because you previously strenghtened the tie between status to damage in your concept.
I get the idea to separate crit weapons from status weapons from hybrid weapons. However, current misery is primary created by weapons with high crit as well as status stats and forced procs from mods like HM or stance combos.
Second mistake was to cap Corrosive, since potent status weapons cannot reduce enemy defence to 0 and then overload them with otherwise lethal status effects.
Third mistake is that Toxin (not even Toxin status) ignores Shields, so that shielded enemies can be bruteforced with high damage, yes that includes crit and not status, weapons.
Especially points 2 & 3 make high status weapons largely ineffective against enemy defences, while crit weapons have access to high damage as well as powerfull forced procs; not to mention reworked status priority favors low status weapons with forced procs -> crits + Viral meta. And then there is of course status immunnity of VIP targets.

Status revisit advertised to make status weapons more powerfull, but it actually dumpstured them. Damage/status system is awfully managed as a whole.

21 hours ago, DrBorris said:

Status Intensity: Status’s version of Critical Damage

Probably long overdue to add this. Even though bane mods kinda do this already and Empowered Blades alreaedy introduced Status Intensity.

20 hours ago, DrBorris said:

Option 2: DoSP ignores enemy resistances.

The damaging effects of status effects (when applicable) are still affected by damage resistances. This would mean damage status procs would have a reduced effectiveness as the damage of the status procs align with the elemental damage, just not with any weird stacking. However, debuff status effects would not be influenced at all by resistances. For example, a Cold status would have the same effectiveness versus a Lancer as a Crewman while a Heat status effect would deal more damage to the Lancer than the Crewman. Big downside here is obviously the inconsistency.

I do not perceive this as incosistency. Different enemies can be resilient or vulnerable to different effects. I would say this creates the need to diversify your loadout in the first place.

TL;DR: You remove different aspects of the current system and then reintroduce the same ideas under a differnt name. You deem current system faulty based on a bad execution.

##### Share on other sites

As hesitant as i usually am with nerfing, this time I agree that the crit/status hybrid build is due for a nerf with decoupling status and crit. Otherwise any buff to status effects will just buff hybrid weapons far more than pure status weapons, meaning we are basically just where we started but with more damage.

A bit of a weird case for this however are heavy attack builds on weapons with forced slash procs on heavy attack. They are a weird sort of hybrid and I'm not sure how good they would be if crit didnt affect the slash proc anymore. On the other hand heavy attack builds without good base crit chance arent really a thing currently. Maybe for heavy attacks the proposed status intensity value could be innately higher.

##### Share on other sites

Abit off topic but I'm curious on how this system would work when enemies deal damage to us. I don't think it would be very enjoyable fighting enemies that caps a very strong status effects on us with 1 bullet. On the other hand I would want a system that's fair: enemies follow the same rules as us for dealing damage with crits, status, headshots etc.

##### Share on other sites

3 hours ago, ShortCat said:

Primary goal of debuff status effects is to debuff, weaken or controll enemies. As such (low damage) utility weapons have a purpose, as they can fill supporte rolles within your loadout. Your concept directly ties CC/utility/support to damage, while damage and support are 2 different domains. Why would I want to CC or weaken a half dead enemy? What if I just want to controll a group of enemies?

Is it a good thing that we have purely utility weapons in Warframe? Almost every point of progression is about making damage (per second) number go up. If you don't have powerful enough tools to deal with enemies should you be able to deal with enemies?

It would be dishonest to say that a system like this is faultless, but I think the advantages it brings are far more worthwhile than what status stacking brings. Kitguns are the example that keeps coming to my mind. As it stands, balancing kitguns is a mess mostly due to status. The burst/sustained DPS is very well balanced between the different mag size loaders but the effectiveness of status vs. crit is hilariously bad. With status stacking there is no easy fix because not only can we change loaders, we can change fire rate. In addition status is not a linear scaling system so even if fire rate was consistent you wouldn't be able to have it hit punch-for-punch with crit scaling. In theory, if the status effect numbers are balanced right, with the above rework all kitguns could be naturally balanced. It wouldn't take extra tweaking, a 30% status chance is a consistent status effectiveness across the board. It just works.

Now imagine how easy it would be for DE to balance everything else. This is the core to the proposal, the new massive advantage that exists. Status based on hits is not without its advantages but it will never be able to offer the consistency that status based on damage can.

3 hours ago, ShortCat said:

Current status stacking is simple and already covers a good number of feats yout try to reinvent. Electric status can deal 0 damage but still CC an enemy. A progressive way to improve existing system would be to create new stacking behaviour (like a new effect after X stacks). You on the other hand had to invent new modiefiers like SEF or WHS to create a workaround around status being tied to enemy health. I am also confused why you are talking about "consistent experience" as the effectiveness of your weapon shifts to the "bad side" over the course of a mission as lvls/HP rise.

Would you say it is inconsistent for your unmodded Braton to deal less damage to a level 10 enemy than a level 50 one? Of course not. I'm applying the same logic to status. Weapons exist to kill enemies. They kill enemies in a variety of ways but at the end of the day that is what they are there for. A weapons may kill enemies with a side of CC, but it is still to mainly kill enemies.

The core issue I see with status stacking is how it scales with fire rate (a stat that has little correlation to progression) over damage. It also just... stops. You hit an enemy 10 times and then your status is done doing status thing despite you continuing to inflict status. A consistent experience isn't your weapons doing the same things to enemies disconnected to their level rising. A consistent experience is the effects of everything scaling as enemy level scales.

3 hours ago, ShortCat said:

I get the impression your intent is to limit status effects against high lvl enemies. If I am correct you achieved this goal.

To an extent, yes. High level enemies are high level enemies and we should have to approach them as such. I'm not at all suggesting that level 100 enemies should now be able to tank status, that comes down to finer balancing that no one can properly understand without testing, but I do think that a level 500+ should probably be shrugging off your 10 damage cold procs.

3 hours ago, ShortCat said:

Weapons already work like that, since harmfull status effects are tied to weapon damage, while weapons damage itself is balanced by firerate. A contestable point is whether you actually need only one hit to inflict a full utility status effect.

Only two status effects are tied purely to damage. I don't think it is a very good system when you are confined to two status effects if you want to make the best use out of low rate of fire weapons. Wouldn't it be more interesting if I could mod a Daikyu for cold and have it freeze enemies solid that it did not manage to kill?

3 hours ago, ShortCat said:

This idea is already in the game, realized by health type modifiers. What confuses me is that you previously said status should not be influenced by health types, yet you reintroduce the same mechanic under a diffirent name.

I debated leaving that sentence in at that early part. I eventually kept it because I wanted people to forget about as many extraneous variables when going through the core proposal.

Damage resistances are something every enemy has, and they affect, ya know, raw murder damage. DoSP resistance is a bit different in that it does not reduce raw TTK and that every enemy wouldn't necessarily have it. In order to be an enemy in this game you need to have a health type. If you have a health type you have resistances. DoSP resistance isn't something that I suggest with the intention of giving it to every enemy.

3 hours ago, ShortCat said:

Bad execution does not mean bad concept. Nothing stopes DE from applying arbitrary numbers to your concept.

How else is DE supposed to retool the current system? If DE wants to reduce the effectiveness of status on an enemy (which is fair) then reducing the stack cap is the most logical way to go about it in my opinion. This has the disadvantage of not affecting damage procs evenly, but if they wanted to add that they could add a layer of DoT damage reduction. There isn't a way to retool status stacking where it doesn't hit one thing harder than another, at least there isn't without a perfect level of balancing, something I wouldn't expect of anyone.

3 hours ago, ShortCat said:

I am really confused by this point, not because you want to disconnect status from crits, but because you previously strenghtened the tie between status to damage in your concept.
I get the idea to separate crit weapons from status weapons from hybrid weapons. However, current misery is primary created by weapons with high crit as well as status stats and forced procs from mods like HM or stance combos.

I removed the tie between crits and status explicitly because this proposal strengthens the tie between status and damage. Status weapons should be status weapons. Crit weapons are crit weapons. Hybrid weapons will absolutely exist but they will fall in between the two instead of above them.

Having some options with forced status is fine, HM is a band-aid for primary weapons that may need addressing but it doesn't break this proposal. In the case of building for crit and for status you want base damage, a forced slash proc on a crit weapon will be equivalently powerful to a forced proc on a status weapon. To me this makes the idea of balancing even forced procs easier.

3 hours ago, ShortCat said:

Second mistake was to cap Corrosive, since potent status weapons cannot reduce enemy defence to 0 and then overload them with otherwise lethal status effects.

The suggestions weren't supposed to be the point, they are mostly there for example. I kept the corrosive cap because DE went out of their way to cap corrosive in the latest status revision.

3 hours ago, ShortCat said:

Third mistake is that Toxin (not even Toxin status) ignores Shields, so that shielded enemies can be bruteforced with high damage, yes that includes crit and not status, weapons.

Again, not the whole point, and to be honest I was just kinda scared of suggesting anything beyond the status quo with Toxin. Keep in mind the 50% DoSP resistance I suggested for shields, that could possibly also affect Toxin's shield bypass as well. Either way Toxin is a scary discussion I did not want to poke.

3 hours ago, ShortCat said:

Especially points 2 & 3 make high status weapons largely ineffective against enemy defences, while crit weapons have access to high damage as well as powerfull forced procs; not to mention reworked status priority favors low status weapons with forced procs -> crits + Viral meta. And then there is of course status immunnity of VIP targets.

Remember that status effects are calculated on enemy HEALTH, not EHP. Shielded enemies do get some resistance to DoSP, but an armored unit will be susceptible to debuff effects just as much as the Infested.

A benefit I envision with this proposal is that vip targets having status immunity will be far less mandatory if DE wants those targets to stay alive for a few seconds. DE won't have to worry about us instantly getting the max Viral multiplier, instantly slowing them to a crawl, instantly reducing their armor.

3 hours ago, ShortCat said:

Probably long overdue to add this. Even though bane mods kinda do this already and Empowered Blades alreaedy introduced Status Intensity.

I have trouble imagining status intensity being a easy stat to introduce when so many status effects don't have an obvious intensity. And it could easily just lead to things DE would see as problems if we were able to push status effects past the thresholds they put in place for a reason. Status intensity is an easy stat to implement with DoSP, it is just a multiplier on a number that affects every status equally.

3 hours ago, ShortCat said:

I do not perceive this as incosistency. Different enemies can be resilient or vulnerable to different effects. I would say this creates the need to diversify your loadout in the first place.

Maybe, I left all the options in because I did not think it would be fair to pretend I knew which would be best. My bias against the second option is clear but I can see its advantages. I would personally prefer if you took different status effects because of their effects, but a little meta chess does have its value as well.

3 hours ago, ShortCat said:

TL;DR: You remove different aspects of the current system and then reintroduce the same ideas under a differnt name. You deem current system faulty based on a bad execution.

I very much disagree that the faults of status stacking on hits are only in execution. Fire rate being a more important stat in inflicting status effects makes balancing the game a mess at a fundamental level because fire rate isn't a stat that scales with progression. Then having some status effects that scale with damage instead of crits only makes the issue worse. Also, I don't believe you gave fair credit to the things the above system allows for that would be impossible with status stackin on hits, back to the example of kitguns (and the effort to balance all weapons in the game). Imagine how easy it would be for DE to balance weapons if a weapon with a 30% critical chance was nearly equally powerful to a weapon with a 30% status chance given similar base damage. Sure, this could in theory be done in the current system if both weapons had the same fire rate, but how many weapons would this apply to?

2 hours ago, Liljeman said:

Abit off topic but I'm curious on how this system would work when enemies deal damage to us. I don't think it would be very enjoyable fighting enemies that caps a very strong status effects on us with 1 bullet. On the other hand I would want a system that's fair: enemies follow the same rules as us for dealing damage with crits, status, headshots etc.

Damaging status procs are currently the only ones that pose a real threat to us and those already scale with damage. Also due to the astronomical difference between player and enemy EHP I think there is a case that some status effects should be adjusted on a case-by-case basis on how they apply to the player.

##### Share on other sites

3 hours ago, DrBorris said:

Is it a good thing that we have purely utility weapons in Warframe? Almost every point of progression is about making damage (per second) number go up. If you don't have powerful enough tools to deal with enemies should you be able to deal with enemies?

In my opinion - Yes. We have 3 weapons + 1 Frame in our loadouts. Combining those to achieve a common goal seems like a good design to me.

3 hours ago, DrBorris said:

...kitguns...

Personally, I find Kitguns (or Zaws) bad design, precisely because players have advanced controll over base stats.

3 hours ago, DrBorris said:

Would you say it is inconsistent for your unmodded Braton to deal less damage to a level 10 enemy than a level 50 one? Of course not. I'm applying the same logic to status. Weapons exist to kill enemies. They kill enemies in a variety of ways but at the end of the day that is what they are there for. A weapons may kill enemies with a side of CC, but it is still to mainly kill enemies.

I said it later in my post, but this very point is contestable. Does it make sense to uncover full status effect with only 1 hit? In some cases - yes. It all boils down to the fundamental idea that it is OK for gear to have only utility purpose. You disagree with this stance, but my support for this idea comes from there.
Nevertheless, your concept would put high fire rate, low damage weapons - especially focused on utility status - far behind.

3 hours ago, DrBorris said:

The core issue I see with status stacking is how it scales with fire rate (a stat that has little correlation to progression) over damage. It also just... stops. You hit an enemy 10 times and then your status is done doing status thing despite you continuing to inflict status. A consistent experience isn't your weapons doing the same things to enemies disconnected to their level rising. A consistent experience is the effects of everything scaling as enemy level scales.

Status chance is a more important stat than firerate. Furtheremore, there are ways to scale both.
10 stack limit is the rule from the current system and in some cases it is indeed ill managed. Your proposal however has the same boundaries: at some point weapons will run into an equilibrium of new statuses applied <-> old status expired; it will just vary on weapon to weapon basis, which is, if you ask me, even less consistent or intuitive than a flat status cap.
Furthermore, I also mentioned additional effects after X stacks. One idea of mine for cold is that each proc slows the enemy by % untill an enemy is frozen(=100%) and at this stage the enemy would take increased damage from all sources, while subsequent cold procs would not be wasted, but maintain this frozen state.

3 hours ago, DrBorris said:

Only two status effects are tied purely to damage. I don't think it is a very good system when you are confined to two status effects if you want to make the best use out of low rate of fire weapons. Wouldn't it be more interesting if I could mod a Daikyu for cold and have it freeze enemies solid that it did not manage to kill?

Fire, Toxin, Electricity scale from base damage as well as elemental damage; slash & gas scale from base damage. All harmfull status effects scale from damage. The above statement is not correct.

3 hours ago, DrBorris said:

Damage resistances are something every enemy has, and they affect, ya know, raw murder damage. DoSP resistance is a bit different in that it does not reduce raw TTK and that every enemy wouldn't necessarily have it. In order to be an enemy in this game you need to have a health type. If you have a health type you have resistances. DoSP resistance isn't something that I suggest with the intention of giving it to every enemy.

Then nothing changes in this regard.

3 hours ago, DrBorris said:

How else is DE supposed to retool the current system?

I would start by reducing the total number of elements, banning rainbow builds and let elements fulfill a destinct role. At the same time I would rework enemy health types under one cohesive design plan.

3 hours ago, DrBorris said:

If DE wants to reduce the effectiveness of status on an enemy (which is fair) then reducing the stack cap is the most logical way to go about it in my opinion. This has the disadvantage of not affecting damage procs evenly, but if they wanted to add that they could add a layer of DoT damage reduction. There isn't a way to retool status stacking where it doesn't hit one thing harder than another, at least there isn't without a perfect level of balancing, something I wouldn't expect of anyone.

Within the current system DE has 2 levers, status cap & health type multiplier. Want to adjust a utility proc? - change the cap (here I assume it is possible to assign an individiual cap to each element). Want to adjust proc damage? - adjust health type. Then there is one bonues lever in form of armor/shields, which can "cover" and create 2-3 layered encounters. (Not in the traditional WF way, but kinda like 3 health bars with diffeernt weaknesses. If necessary of course.)
For the record, I am not saying current damage/status system is good, because it is not. I am saying it has a solid basis and its geenral concept (different elements & status stacks & health types) can cover many differnt scenarios.

3 hours ago, DrBorris said:

I removed the tie between crits and status explicitly because this proposal strengthens the tie between status and damage.

That's even worse. Low damage weapons in general would be completely useless, without any option for redemption.

3 hours ago, DrBorris said:

The suggestions weren't supposed to be the point, they are mostly there for example...

I wasn't talking about your status effects in this part, but the actual faults of the damage system.

6 hours ago, ShortCat said:

However, current misery is primary created by weapons with high crit as well as status stats and forced procs from mods like HM or stance combos.
^Theses/first argument
Second mistake was to cap Corrosive, since potent status weapons cannot reduce enemy defence to 0 and then overload them with otherwise lethal status effects.
Third mistake is that Toxin (not even Toxin status) ignores Shields, so that shielded enemies can be bruteforced with high damage, yes that includes crit and not status, weapons.
Especially points 2 & 3 make high status weapons largely ineffective against enemy defences, while crit weapons have access to high damage as well as powerfull forced procs; not to mention reworked status priority favors low status weapons with forced procs -> crits + Viral meta. And then there is of course status immunnity of VIP targets.
^Argumentation
Status revisit advertised to make status weapons more powerfull, but it actually dumpstured them. Damage/status system is awfully managed as a whole.
^Conclusion

3 hours ago, DrBorris said:

I have trouble imagining status intensity being a easy stat to introduce when so many status effects don't have an obvious intensity. And it could easily just lead to things DE would see as problems if we were able to push status effects past the thresholds they put in place for a reason. Status intensity is an easy stat to implement with DoSP, it is just a multiplier on a number that affects every status equally.

Status intensity would be just another conditional +damage mod.

3 hours ago, DrBorris said:

Maybe, I left all the options in because I did not think it would be fair to pretend I knew which would be best. My bias against the second option is clear but I can see its advantages.

I speak in favor of this "color codding" approach because otherwise I see specifically Warframe running into longterm issues. With several hundred weapons available, it becomes difficult to create new meaningfull weapons without feeding power creep. Color codding allows to create weapons with identical stats in all but damage type and those would still have their own niche.
The other solution is to create weapons with perks, like DE is doing. However this increases complexity and in the end development time, since they have to one-up themselves with every new addition. That's called complexity trap.

3 hours ago, DrBorris said:

Imagine how easy it would be for DE to balance weapons if a weapon with a 30% critical chance was nearly equally powerful to a weapon with a 30% status chance given similar base damage.

What is the point? That's like having 2 identical tools, just with diffirent grip colors.

##### Share on other sites

...Doesn't this just make low damage weapons even worse?

##### Share on other sites

20 hours ago, DrBorris said:

It feels like you came here with your own opinions on the topic, skimmed to the part you understood at a glance (the status suggestions), then commented without giving the effort to know what I was actually suggesting. It is a lot of words, I know, but could've you just waited till you had time to go through it before you responded? I am sorry if I am misjudging but given your response it doesn't feel like you tried to understand the proposal.

This is partially true, in that I skimmed your OP. I did miss your version of the "status magnitude" idea, this is true. The reason I skimmed, however, is that a majority of your OP is troubleshooting the implications of tying status magnitude to weapon damage and its interactions with shields, armour and health types. It's not that these things aren't relevant, but rather that my counter-proposal almost entirely eliminates them as a consideration. By removing health-type-specific resistances, you remove the major source of balance issues and thus need no further consideration. By tying status magnitude to a separate, independent stat, you don't need to resolve issues between base weapon performance and weapon status viability. If you'd like, I could go through your proposals point-by-point, but there really isn't much there that I specifically disagree with. My post may have come across more confrontational than I'd mean to, but I agree with your general premise here. Scaling Status effect by SOME stat inherent to each individual weapon rather than using the current one-size-fits-all approach is a good thing.

I just happen to have a more radical approach to game changes, in that my proposals often involve retiring entire systems or creating brand new ones. For example, one thing I didn't bring up as I felt my proposal was already radical enough was a reduction in the total damage types in the game. I don't see how DE can make 13 damage types all meaningful, but 4-7 could easily each have its own unique Status effect. Additionally, I don't see a reason to retain the physical/elemental divide between damage types at all. It seems to me that the original paradigm was that all weapons deal physical damage but some weapons (or some mods) have access to these "more special" damage mods. I'd personally rather treat all damage types the same. We don't need 13 damage types, we don't need 3 damage types just for physical damage. We don't need this system grandfathered over from old early 2000s MMOs.

A few parting comments, as well:

On the notion of all status effects dealing damage - I understand what your design is going for. My proposal, however, was a lot more blunt. Rather than trying to come up with different ways in which various Status effects deal damage, I proposed simply putting DOT on all them. The higher your Status Magnitude, the more of your damage goes into the DOT. I'd also go with roughly the same amount of damage for all of them. I'm not opposed to the system you propose, but I feel that the ad hoc complexity of Status effects is currently one of their major downsides.

On the general notion of tying Status Effects to damage - yes, I agree that that's one way of solving core issue. I simply happen to feel that it creates a number of issues of its own. You're already having to compare an abstract "weapon DPS" calculation against enemy health in order to derive a ratio by which to multiply debuff/control status effect magnitude, at least if I'm reading your proposal right. What you're working with here is a fairly static number... Let me give you an example. A "decent" critgun is one with a base critical hit of 25% or up and a critical damage of *2, at least in my assessment. This is irrespective of weapon DPS, enemy EHP or any other considerations. If the weapon has that much, it's decent for crit. The weapon might suck ass anyway, but that's down to other factors - it's still a good critgun within its own context. Similarly, most "status weapons" would end up falling within a relatively narrow band of status effect chance and status effect magnitude. With your calculation, however, you end up having to balance these numbers dynamically against multiple factors and end up with a fluctuating value that doesn't seem to need to fluctuate. To me, it feels like a very roundabout way of determining a ratio which you could simply define as a single stand-alone value and not worry about enemy level, enemy health, weapon damage or anything else of the sort. Unless there's a specific need for a more complex calculation, I tend to find that simpler calculations work better overall.

Again - I get what you're going with. I just feel that the route you've chosen is needlessly complex in terms of implementation and creates an unnecessary amount of extra variables which don't really serve an intended purpose so much as exist as a byproduct. We're both proposing the same thing, effectively, except I propose defining it separately rather than trying to back-calculate it off of existing values. To give you a metaphorical example - think back to how per-pellet Status Chance used to work. Someone at DE wanted to calculate Status chance the same for shotguns as for all other weapons, so attempted to back-calculate per-pellet Status chance off of a generic stat, and the results were spiky and unintended behaviour. It's still a clever calculation that I absolutely love from a mathematical modelling perspective, but I don't think you'll find many who still argue it was the right solution. Keep it simple and you avoid unpredictable behaviour, special-case exceptions and unintended stacking effects. That's really all I'm saying here.

##### Share on other sites

3 hours ago, ShortCat said:

That's even worse. Low damage weapons in general would be completely useless, without any option for redemption.

3 hours ago, Aldain said:

...Doesn't this just make low damage weapons even worse?

One of my biggest pet peeves with design is using one broken thing to justify another broken thing. If a weapon isn't performing well why not just buff the weapon? Keeping status as is despite what I believe are major issues just to keep a few weapons afloat feels wrong. Especially when the alternative is to just make a number go up a little. A full status rework like this wouldn't mandate another balance pass on weapons but it absolutely should come with one.

Also, when you say "low damage weapons", what do you mean? As it stands very few weapons are actually low damage, what currently makes a weapon bad at dealing damage has more tied to its critical stats. The above proposal is basically giving those status weapons modifiers that can compete with crits, so they no longer need crit to bring them up.

3 hours ago, ShortCat said:

In my opinion - Yes. We have 3 weapons + 1 Frame in our loadouts. Combining those to achieve a common goal seems like a good design to me.

I don't think that is something that fits the pace of Warframe. Even if swap speed is increased to be basically instant it will be pointless to switch weapons when everything dies as quickly as it does. Elite enemies will (hopefully) come around that last more than a second but having status be designed in a way so a couple weapons can have a niche as status applicators against a rare enemy at the expense of every other weapon isn't a good trade in my opinion. Guns are for killing things, Warframes are for manipulating the battlefield. If there is to be overlap then it should come from mechanical differences (like Zakti opening enemies to finishers) not the core damage system.

3 hours ago, ShortCat said:

Personally, I find Kitguns (or Zaws) bad design, precisely because players have advanced controll over base stats.

Okay, but are you really going to just gloss over how useful it would be for status chance to be representative of how good a weapon is at dealing status? From a new player's point of view it makes deciding what to mod for far easier, status number is big so it must be good for status. From DE's perspective it makes things easier because they can experiment with new archetypes for weapons like a cold status bow, or an irradiating sniper. Those things could exist today but it would require them being given new mechanics, with the proposal It Just Works™.

3 hours ago, ShortCat said:

10 stack limit is the rule from the current system and in some cases it is indeed ill managed. Your proposal however has the same boundaries: at some point weapons will run into an equilibrium of new statuses applied <-> old status expired; it will just vary on weapon to weapon basis, which is, if you ask me, even less consistent or intuitive than a flat status cap.
Furthermore, I also mentioned additional effects after X stacks. One idea of mine for cold is that each proc slows the enemy by % untill an enemy is frozen(=100%) and at this stage the enemy would take increased damage from all sources, while subsequent cold procs would not be wasted, but maintain this frozen state.

Doesn't that equilibrium exist with status stacking as well? Me making every status effect suggestion last six seconds wasn't an accident and I probably should have explained some more of the rational behind it. The reason that status effects last six second is because you should have killed that enemy in six seconds. Yes, status will decay, but if the status effects start decaying you should take that as a sign that you aren't geared for the enemy you are shooting at. An enemy living for more than six seconds is a rare occurrence already unless you are pushing the damage system far beyond its limits, occurrences that I don't think should be considered relevant when reworking damage.

Why do you think it is better design that a high fire rate weapon is better at inflicting status? You suggest leaning even further into fire rate being just as important as status chance when calculating how effective a weapon is at inflicting status, how is this better? My quest to "fix" status started three years ago when I was annoyed with how Latron Prime was given a decent status chance but was a bad status weapon due to fire rate, why should my Latron Prime be a bad status weapon?

3 hours ago, ShortCat said:

Status intensity would be just another conditional +damage mod.

So no effect on non-damaging statuses... cool.

3 hours ago, ShortCat said:

What is the point? That's like having 2 identical tools, just with diffirent grip colors.

Can't you say that about every weapon in every game? All they do is eventually enable you to reduce the enemy health to zero, they are basically all the same thing.

• Crit weapons would have high alpha damage and get a considerable damage boost against enemy weakpoints.
• Status weapons are able to dispense their damage in a variety of ways. Debuffing an enemy may make it easier to kill them but it inherently means that the enemy isn't always dead instantly, in the process of killing one enemy you may have hurt their friends as well though.

Just because the number is the same it doesn't mean that they affect enemies the same way. Just above this you talked about "color coding" and how you can give things the same number but different uses.

##### Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Steel_Rook said:

-snip-

Wait... with the new quotes collapsing is doing the "-snip-" needed anymore? It feels wrong to not do the -snip- to walls of text...

I get where you are coming from and see how at an extreme high level the proposals are doing the same thing. I don't really see it as working backwards though. This whole concept is based on a very simple idea, if a bullet does big damage the resulting status effect will also big. That is the starting point and while I did use the current status effects as inspiration it wasn't me forcing it all to work together, it just works.

The majority of this thread isn't me trying to make this work with resistances, in the only section where I bring up resistances one of the options I propose is to just get rid of them. Most of the sections are laying out the core rules (like the changes to crit interactions) and exceptions (like forced status procs), things that your proposal needs as well.

One of the early analogies for how the SEF (Status Effect Factor) works conceptually is relevant here. When you apply a damage over time effect the "effectiveness" isn't really the amount of damage it is doing, it is how much closer it is turning the enemy into dead. A 100 DoT against a level 10 and level 100 enemy have vastly different effectiveness because the time they take to die is longer. In effect, the "status effect" of damage over time is the enemy being dead. Every step in between is just a "Status Effect Factor" between 0 and 1. Take that exact logic and apply it to things that aren't damage and you have my proposal, swapping "enemy is dead" with "whole health status" (not incidentally correlated to an enemy having no health).

It is kind of hard to compare to your proposal because it is such a big switch. I remember reading your thread but I don't remember if any status effects had any form of non-damage effect. And if those existed, how did those effects scale? I get that it all looks complicated but I personally don't see it as simpler than the math today. Don't forget that dealing damage in itself is a math equation, I am just applying that math equation to non-damage effects. Making things simple is often a complicated task.

##### Share on other sites

16 hours ago, DrBorris said:

I get where you are coming from and see how at an extreme high level the proposals are doing the same thing. I don't really see it as working backwards though. This whole concept is based on a very simple idea, if a bullet does big damage the resulting status effect will also big. That is the starting point and while I did use the current status effects as inspiration it wasn't me forcing it all to work together, it just works.

Right, and that's not necessarily BAD. However, I think this is our main point of disagreement - I find that general rule of thumb to be limiting. My primary push here is to ensure that sometimes bullets CAN do big damage but little to no Status and sometimes bullets can do very little damage but still do big Status. Tying Status directly to damage creates a significant design limitation as it unilaterally turns all high-damage weapons into Status guns, including the high-damage ones which were previously critguns. The reason I bring up Criticals so much is that I feel those were done well. You could have really heavy-hitting, high-DPS weapons with good Crit, but not all of them are like that. The Kohm family (Kohm, Kohmak, Twin Kohmak) are pretty good for DPS, but they have low Crit and high Status. Inversely, the Tenora has pretty high DPS and substantial Crit but fairly low Status.

See, I'm not opposed to your principles of game design, necessarily. I like the idea of making slow-firing, heavy-hitting weapons worth using for Status, absolutely. However, I want to leave this as an option for the design team to use, rather than turning it into a hard engine-level limitation. To put it another way, I want slow-firing weapons to be able to have good Status, but I don't want them to HAVE to have good Status across the board by mandate. This is why I propose decoupling Status from Damage - so that you can have one but not the other or both... Or maybe even neither, though the resultant weapon would likely suck. Maybe as a Mk. 1 version? In this, my disagreement here is somewhat ideological, in that I'd rather keep our weapon stats as independent of each other as possible. We can always bind them together at the design level, but binding them together at the engine level is limiting.

16 hours ago, DrBorris said:

It is kind of hard to compare to your proposal because it is such a big switch. I remember reading your thread but I don't remember if any status effects had any form of non-damage effect. And if those existed, how did those effects scale? I get that it all looks complicated but I personally don't see it as simpler than the math today. Don't forget that dealing damage in itself is a math equation, I am just applying that math equation to non-damage effects. Making things simple is often a complicated task.

It's not so much a matter of how complicated the math would be for players to understand, though that is a factor. It's more that complex interactions make it harder for the design team to create a holistic experience without risking odd behaviour under specific semi-rare circumstances. That was the whole problem with per-pellet Status effect chance for weapons with native multi-shot. The system worked reasonably fine up to 95%, even 99% Status Effect. It only broke past 99, which was actually not that common - not a lot of Status weapons could do that, and most needed fairly specific modding setups to do that. Even so, this created the impression in the player base that "100% Status or GTFO." Looking through the Wiki, nearly every shotgun had an entry indicating whether it could achieve 100% Status effect chance before Multishot, and what mods were needed for it. It's pretty safe to say that this wasn't the original designers' intent, but the math worked out to create that edge case which the community then adopted.

But to answer your question on how non-damage status effects would stack - my original proposal was to take a "base" status effect value and then modify this via flat multiplier. For reference, let's look at Crits. Most weapons have a Critical damage multiplier of *2. Accounting for base damage (because that's included in Crit damage), that's a base Critical hit bonus damage multiplier of *1, i.e. the weapon's damage dealt again. A weapon which deals 100 damage with a *2 Crit would deal 100 + 100 damage. The same can be applied to Status Effects. Let's take Cold for example. Let's take Cold, for example, and refactor it a little. Let's say every Cold Status effect reduces enemy "speed" by 5%, up to a maximum of 75% (no more "stacks"). A weapon with a Status Magnitude of *1 would then slow enemies down by 5% per Cold proc, requiring 15 procs to cap. A weapon with a *3 Status Magnitude would deal 15% slow per Cold proc, requiring just 5 procs to cap. That would be a good Status gun. A bad Status gun might have only, say, a 0.4 Status Magnitude, causing it to slow enemies down by just 2% per Cold Proc, which now requires a whole 38 procs to cap.

Now, the above CAN work with Status Chance still in the game, but it can equally as well work with no Status chance - every hit deals Status. At that point, base Status values would probably need to drop, however. The Cold proc I used in the previous example might need to drop to 2-3%, for example. I don't have precise numbers because you're one of the few people to actually take this proposal seriously, so I haven't really had to do precise over-time statistics :) However, I'm convinced that this could work quite well. It's still subject to rate of fire, but so is damage. If need be fast-firing weapons could simply be given lower Status magnitude (or Status chance, if we're keeping that) to compensate. Smart game design always looks at over-time stats rather than base stats anyway.

You can extend this to all of the debuff Status effects, simply scaling the magnitude of each individual proc based on the weapon's Status magnitude off a common base value. Control effects are a little bit more difficult to scale that way, but I'm of the opinion that Control effects ought to be handled differently anyway. Let's take Cold for example again. I'm of the opinion that Cold should eventually freeze enemies solid after a certain threshold. Say once an enemy is slowed down to 75% (i.e. Cold Status cap), they're straight-up frozen and unable to move. You could then keep them frozen as long as the Cold proc is in effect (ostensibly letting players keep them frozen forever) or keep them frozen for a fixed amount of time (modified by Status Magnitude) after which they unfreeze and shed all Cold procs, needing to be re-frozen again. I say this as a lead-up to Radiation and the Confuse effect, in that I believe this should start as something else up until we stack enough Radiation to turn it INTO a confuse. Its current implementation does scale somewhat, but... Well, enemy DPS is far too low to do meaningful work against enemy EHP at even moderate levels (40-ish), so even boosting a single confused enemy's damage up by 500% is not going to do much. Again, I've not put together a holistic list of Status effects and how they scale because it never seemed like anyone cared enough to bother. I can try if you'd like.

And mind you, I'm not suggesting that my system is "simpler" than yours. In fact, it probably requires slightly more care since Status Magnitude would need to be tailored to weapons a bit more than critical damage. The main advantage I see in it is that you CAN tailor Status magnitude to each individual weapon independent of its damage, thus eliminating the danger of special-case exceptions. At least I think so, anyway. Please let me know if you see any obvious holes in my model above, because it feels like I'm forgetting something important.

##### Share on other sites

14 hours ago, DrBorris said:

One of my biggest pet peeves with design is using one broken thing to justify another broken thing. If a weapon isn't performing well why not just buff the weapon?

Is a weapon like Phantasma broken? It has low damage, but it pulls itself with high status. First few bullets hardly deal any damage, but they inflict status effects to debuff the enemy and afterwards damage climbs really fast. Your concept does not allow such interactions, as by default the best status weapon ist not the one with best status stats, but with highest damage.

15 hours ago, DrBorris said:

Doesn't that equilibrium exist with status stacking as well?

Never denied that. Just pointed out another similarity you previously described as a flaw.

16 hours ago, DrBorris said:

Why do you think it is better design that a high fire rate weapon is better at inflicting status? You suggest leaning even further into fire rate being just as important as status chance when calculating how effective a weapon is at inflicting status, how is this better?

I never implied any of that, high status application atm depends on 3 major variables - firerate, status chance, number of damage instances. Especially since status is allowed to scale past 100% you can inflict more than one status per damage instance. Not to mention, status effects are allowed to be powerfull even with one stack.

16 hours ago, DrBorris said:

So no effect on non-damaging statuses... cool.

You said it yourself, it is difficult to define intensity for some status effects.
Otherwise it is even not much different from +status chance. On the one hand you have higher chance to trigger more weaker effects; on the other hand you trigger less but stronger effects. When I think about it now, status intensity is not really necessary, since results are similar, as long as status is allowed to stack.

16 hours ago, DrBorris said:

All they do is eventually enable you to reduce the enemy health to zero, they are basically all the same thing.

They should not be mechanically identical though.

17 hours ago, DrBorris said:

Status weapons are able to dispense their damage in a variety of ways. Debuffing an enemy may make it easier to kill them but it inherently means that the enemy isn't always dead instantly, in the process of killing one enemy you may have hurt their friends as well though.

Sounds like a utility weapon.

17 hours ago, DrBorris said:

Just because the number is the same it doesn't mean that they affect enemies the same way. Just above this you talked about "color coding" and how you can give things the same number but different uses.

Yes, "color codding" thingy is indeed guilty in this regard. However, weapons operate on a higher layer with hundreds of options. There is no excuse to apply the same logic to a damage system with only 2.5 options.

##### Share on other sites

5 hours ago, ShortCat said:

Is a weapon like Phantasma broken? It has low damage, but it pulls itself with high status. First few bullets hardly deal any damage, but they inflict status effects to debuff the enemy and afterwards damage climbs really fast. Your concept does not allow such interactions, as by default the best status weapon ist not the one with best status stats, but with highest damage.

Phantasma is not a low damage weapon, with a crit build its non-crit DPS is 17,000, the same as Corinth Prime. The reason it feels low "DPS" is because it lacks crit stats. The above proposal allows all "low damage" (even though they are not actually "low damage", they are just low crit) status weapons to compete regardless of fire rate.

5 hours ago, ShortCat said:

Never denied that. Just pointed out another similarity you previously described as a flaw.

Not sure what flaw you are talking about. Consistency isn't something always being the same, consistency is something being predictable.

5 hours ago, ShortCat said:

I never implied any of that, high status application atm depends on 3 major variables - firerate, status chance, number of damage instances. Especially since status is allowed to scale past 100% you can inflict more than one status per damage instance. Not to mention, status effects are allowed to be powerfull even with one stack.

You may not have implied it but with status stacking on hits it is just a fact. And you bring up >100% status, which is actually an interesting case with status being based on hits. In theory if you want to "fix" debuff hit status on low RoF weapons you could just make a loose inverse correlation between fire rate and status chance. If DE wanted they could give my cold bow a base 100% status chance and then it would be able to inflict a larger cold status in a single hit.

Big problem though, not all status effects are based on hits. On this bow with a massive status chance it would actually be dumb to build it for the debuff status effects because now it will be able to deal absurd damage with the DoTs. This is what I mean by inconsistency, by making one type of weapon good at debuff you over-buff DoTs. On the flip side you have DoTs on high fire rate weapons, this isn't as much of an issue because debuffs are capped but if you want a DoT high fire rate status weapon you will incidentally make the debuff status effects absurd.

Status Chance as a number that represents a weapon dealing status effects is a lie, you have to take into account fire rate as well and even then the verdict varies massively with different elements.

5 hours ago, ShortCat said:

They should not be mechanically identical though.

But... but they aren't. The way you kill an enemy with a status weapon will feel different than killing them with crits. Just because they both scale with damage it doesn't mean they both play the same way.

5 hours ago, ShortCat said:

Sounds like a utility weapon.

I don't even know how to respond to this. Unless you are trying to say that all status weapons are utility weapons. Status weapons and crit weapons are both there to reduce an enemy's health bar to zero but they do it in different ways.

This conversation isn't going anywhere, nor is this thread. Probably should just let it die, a 5k word thesis on status isn't something people seem to care about, I'll take the hint.

##### Share on other sites

12 hours ago, DrBorris said:

This conversation isn't going anywhere, nor is this thread. Probably should just let it die, a 5k word thesis on status isn't something people seem to care about, I'll take the hint.

Let me summarize my impressions of your concept.

• All status effects are defined by weapon damage,
• Thus low damage weapons are by default terrible at status.
• And restricted on hit effects.
• Additionally, status scales based on damage dealt to total health, thus high lvl enemies will negate all status effects by default.
• This means all status effects move on a scale from good --> bad over the course of a single mission.
• Crits do not interfere with status under the premise to make those 2 more distinct. Yet, you introduce an equivalent of critical damage for status, status intensity.
• Health type midifiers are renamed to to DoSP resistance.
• Status stacks are renamed to WHS.
• UI is changed from obvious stack numbers to vacuous circles.
• There are still 13 elements with overlapping functionality and feature bloat!

Your main idea is to tie status to damage. And you died on that hill.
You remove existing concepts, just to reintroduce them later under a new name with a more convoluted nature, mostly to fix problems you created by tying status to damage.