Slash Procs

[TnaneverRisen]

7 hours ago, TheLexiConArtist said:

When the direct slice of a cutting tool could be enough to split you effortlessly in half, but most of the force is taken out of that by armour, that's greatly reduced direct slash damage.

But it doesn't take much of a cut still getting through to sever a blood vessel and cause some pretty major bleeding (proc damage).

There's arguable logic in proc damage beating out direct damage. The fact it's value-based not just agnostic percentage-health (as well as the fact it somehow.. doesn't bypass shields any more) is probably the more 'videogame logic' of the equation.

 

On the flip-side of that, since we're all about the Real Logic, how exactly are the same enemies still capable of moving around with effective tons of additional armour - which we know is the same type, per resistances - being bolted on, even looking no different for all the added armour 'thickness'? Armour scaling makes no logical sense either, but here we are in videogame logic land.

Another absolutely useless, ridiculous post from you ConArtist (fitting alias).  I've already pointed out that if you want to use that bad lore-friendly logic, then it must also apply to other damage types...which it doesn't, meaning slash procs are BROKEN.  What, you think "puncture" damage can't pierce a blood vessel?  You think armor can somehow block "gas" - especially when you can clearly see the target has no face/breathing protection? Absolutely ridiculous.  You are not able to justify the double armor penetration from slash procs, whether by nonsensical bad lore logic or by game balance.  I don't understand why there are so many people who want to fight against the betterment of the game.

[Proscriptor]

@TnaneverRisen

how would you prefer bleed to act, same as toxin? 

[TnaneverRisen]

1 minute ago, Proscriptor said:

@TnaneverRisen

how would you prefer bleed to act, same as toxin? 

I'd prefer, of course, for all damage types to be logical and balanced, regardless of how they specifically acted.

Just regarding damage procs (electricity, bleed, etc.), I would have the proc damage based on the final damage calculation of the attack that applied the proc, and have the proc damage itself ignore armor amount, but take into account health type.  Also, I'd change true damage (for bleed) to slash damage.  For example:

(100 slash damage) - (all defenses, including armor and health type) = 20 slash damage
bleed damage = 20/3 = 6.6 base damage per tick

Against ferrite armor, 6.6 would be reduced by 15% to 5.6 damage per tick.
Against infested flesh, 6.6 would be increased by 50% to 9.9 damage per tick.

I suppose toxin could be unique by still bypassing shields...which doesn't really matter right now given the bad balance of shields vs armor.  You don't exactly need to build for toxin or magnetic to power through weak corpus units.

There are all sorts of other related issues that I haven't addressed in this thread (and won't, for conciseness), such as attack speed vs attack damage for status effect application and magnitude, hunter munitions, arbitrary status stack caps, etc., so don't think I believe everything else is perfect or even good.

 

[(PSN)Madurai-Prime]

1 hour ago, TnaneverRisen said:

Oh I see, you're one of those people that won't believe the sky is blue until you see a scientific whitepaper on the precise wavelengths at specific times of the day.  Gotcha.  What a sad way to live to not believe your own basic observations.

If you're not aware, and it seems clear that you aren't, there's something called the Steel Path where there are whole maps full of highly armored grineer.  Why are you posting here again?

If you're not aware, the game isnt being balanced around the Steel path, or the simulacrum....

If you go take a look at the dev provided post on how to post feedback, you'll get some advice on how to properly post feedback. 

"It's too strong" isn't constructive, especially with no data.....except exaggerated numbers like 1000x damage, and claiming nerfing 1 out of 100 "strong things" will create diversity when actually building a weapon to specifically take advantage of slash procs decreases build diversity because you're literally focusing on one element.....

It's not very diverse to only use a Reaper Prime with a riven and heavy attack. Everyone doesn't want to play like that and some people don't care about slash procs and don't even need them, on the regular starchart or the Steel path. If you're not aware, some weapons don't even have slash on them, or have such low base weighting it's not even worth building it for slash. 

If the game has too much power for you, you're more than welcome to fix your own builds and your own playstyle if it bothers you so much.

[TnaneverRisen]

1 minute ago, (PSN)Madurai-Prime said:

If you're not aware, the game isnt being balanced around the Steel path, or the simulacrum....

If you go take a look at the dev provided post on how to post feedback, you'll get some advice on how to properly post feedback. 

"It's too strong" isn't constructive, especially with no data.....except exaggerated numbers like 1000x damage, and claiming nerfing 1 out of 100 "strong things" will create diversity when actually building a weapon to specifically take advantage of slash procs decreases build diversity because you're literally focusing on one element.....

It's not very diverse to only use a Reaper Prime with a riven and heavy attack. Everyone doesn't want to play like that and some people don't care about slash procs and don't even need them, on the regular starchart or the Steel path. If you're not aware, some weapons don't even have slash on them, or have such low base weighting it's not even worth building it for slash. 

If the game has too much power for you, you're more than welcome to fix your own builds and your own playstyle if it bothers you so much.

If you go take a look at the thread, you'd see examples of data, which is really unnecessary given the general knowledge on how strong slash is compared to other procs...but again, you're the type of person who won't believe a nose exists on his face until the doctor gives him a report.

I don't think you have any idea what you're talking about.  You're just flailing and grasping now.  "Too much power" for me?  You think my complaint is that I'm just "too good" at beating stuff...and that's why I want to have more build diversity than focusing on bleed procs?  How many drugs have you smoked today?

[Proscriptor]

14 minutes ago, TnaneverRisen said:

I'd prefer, of course, for all damage types to be logical and balanced, regardless of how they specifically acted.

Just regarding damage procs (electricity, bleed, etc.), I would have the proc damage based on the final damage calculation of the attack that applied the proc, and have the proc damage itself ignore armor amount, but take into account health type.  Also, I'd change true damage (for bleed) to slash damage.  For example:

(100 slash damage) - (all defenses, including armor and health type) = 20 slash damage
bleed damage = 20/3 = 6.6 base damage per tick

Against ferrite armor, 6.6 would be reduced by 15% to 5.6 damage per tick.
Against infested flesh, 6.6 would be increased by 50% to 9.9 damage per tick.

I suppose toxin could be unique by still bypassing shields...which doesn't really matter right now given the bad balance of shields vs armor.  You don't exactly need to build for toxin or magnetic to power through weak corpus units.

There are all sorts of other related issues that I haven't addressed in this thread (and won't, for conciseness), such as attack speed vs attack damage for status effect application and magnitude, hunter munitions, arbitrary status stack caps, etc., so don't think I believe everything else is perfect or even good.

 

proc damage indeed is based on the final damage, as you would prefer

i don't understand your idea of procs ignoring armor

procs do take into account the health type when applied on armored enemies as well as unarmored

i don't understand this part: "bleed damage = 20/3 = 6.6 base damage per tick". what does this calculation mean

you concede that the toxin proc would be the same as bleed, while toxin damage would have the advantage of bypassing shields. that doesn't make sense to me, because it means there would be two identical procs in the game.

the idea that bleed proc should deal slash damage is not in line with the conceptualization of damage types: "slash" is the type of damage to tissue caused by blades and expanding munitions, meaning gashes, cuts, lacerations, wound channels caused by bullet fragments etc. this is what happens when the working end of a melee weapon or a projectile/beam hits a body. 

the proc that comes out of this "wound" is bleeding, and that is literally just loss of blood. it makes no sense that the proc would be conceptualized so as to repeatedly cause cuts, lacerations etc. that's just not in line with the design philosophy of damage in warframe. it's pretty abstracted but still needs to have a clear relation to real world mechanisms. 

[(PSN)Madurai-Prime]

2 minutes ago, TnaneverRisen said:

If you go take a look at the thread, you'd see examples of data, which is really unnecessary given the general knowledge on how strong slash is compared to other procs...but again, you're the type of person who won't believe a nose exists on his face until the doctor gives him a report.

I don't think you have any idea what you're talking about.  You're just flailing and grasping now.  "Too much power" for me?  You think my complaint is that I'm just "too good" at beating stuff...and that's why I want to have more build diversity than focusing on bleed procs?  How many drugs have you smoked today?

"Slash procs are just way too strong."

Sooo....are you suggesting you did not say this? Are you not using this claim?

[TnaneverRisen]

1 minute ago, Proscriptor said:

proc damage indeed is based on the final damage, as you would prefer

i don't understand your idea of procs ignoring armor

procs do take into account the health type when applied on armored enemies as well as unarmored

i don't understand this part: "bleed damage = 20/3 = 6.6 base damage per tick". what does this calculation mean

you concede that the toxin proc would be the same as bleed, while toxin damage would have the advantage of bypassing shields. that doesn't make sense to me, because it means there would be two identical procs in the game.

the idea that bleed proc should deal slash damage is not in line with the conceptualization of damage types: "slash" is the type of damage to tissue caused by blades and expanding munitions, meaning gashes, cuts, lacerations, wound channels caused by bullet fragments etc. this is what happens when the working end of a melee weapon or a projectile/beam hits a body. 

the proc that comes out of this "wound" is bleeding, and that is literally just loss of blood. it makes no sense that the proc would be conceptualized so as to repeatedly cause cuts, lacerations etc. that's just not in line with the design philosophy of damage in warframe. it's pretty abstracted but still needs to has a clear relation to real world mechanisms. 

No, proc damage is not based on the final attack damage.  You could hit something for 1 damage, due to the target's very high armor, but have a 10,000 damage bleed proc. due to the attack's base damage.  Instead, all damage procs should be based on final attack damage.

I used division by 3 because that's approximately how damage tics are calculated (it's really .35 for bleed, but I wanted to use simpler numbers for the example).

Toxin wouldn't be the same as bleed, because toxin is toxin damage and slash is slash damage, which get different bonuses/penalties based on health type - and again, I don't care if toxin bypasses shields.  It doesn't have a significant effect right now because shields are so weak.

Any lore-logic regarding "bleeding" would need to apply equally to all other damage types.  Unless you want to concede that, for example, gas should always bypass armor completely (except for targets that have gas masks perhaps), then you can't argue for this magic bleeding effect that bypasses all defense that no other damage type has.

[TnaneverRisen]

3 minutes ago, (PSN)Madurai-Prime said:

"Slash procs are just way too strong."

Sooo....are you suggesting you did not say this? Are you not using this claim?

Sooo...are you saying that's the only thing I said?  I didn't give any justification or reasoning?
Sooo...are you suggesting you didn't see any other posts in this thread? 
Sooo...are you completely oblivious to the actual gameplay?  You're admitting you're new then, right?

Sooo...it sounds like you have no idea what you're talking about, and are still grasping at straws.
 

[Proscriptor]

10 minutes ago, TnaneverRisen said:

No, proc damage is not based on the final attack damage.  You could hit something for 1 damage, due to the target's very high armor, but have a 10,000 damage bleed proc. due to the attack's base damage.  Instead, all damage procs should be based on final attack damage.

...

oh i understand what you meant now. what you propose would mean that armor would apply to procs twice

 

14 minutes ago, TnaneverRisen said:

Toxin wouldn't be the same as bleed, because toxin is toxin damage and slash is slash damage, which get different bonuses/penalties based on health type - and again, I don't care if toxin bypasses shields.  It doesn't have a significant effect right now because shields are so weak.

the mechanics of the status effect would be identical. that's an unacceptable situation. that will never be the case. 

  

14 minutes ago, TnaneverRisen said:

Any lore-logic regarding "bleeding" would need to apply equally to all other damage types.  Unless you want to concede that, for example, gas should always bypass armor completely (except for targets that have gas masks perhaps), then you can't argue for this magic bleeding effect that bypasses all defense that no other damage type has.

i don't know about gas right now, but bleed damage will never be "slash" because it makes no sense. slash damage is what happens at the point of impact, and can't possibly happen afterwards on it's own. imagine if bleed was able to dismember corpses... 

[TnaneverRisen]

4 minutes ago, Proscriptor said:

oh i understand what you meant now. what you propose would mean that armor would apply to procs twice

 

the mechanics of the status effect would be identical. that's an unacceptable situation. that will never be the case. 

  

i don't know about gas right now, but bleed damage will never be "slash" because it makes no sense. slash damage is what happens at the point of impact, and can't possibly happen afterwards on it's own. imagine if bleed was able to dismember corpses... 

Why would it be "unacceptable"?  Electricity, gas, and heat already act the same way.  They have a base damage affected by armor, and their procs are affected by armor. They only different in the other effects they have (AOE, location-based AOE, and armor stripping).  Against corpus and infested, which often have no armor, the effects against single targets are exactly the same.

If it really bothers you, you could suggest different mechanics for slash and toxin (I'm not against this at all).

[(XBOX)GearsMatrix301]

IDK why your suggestion for there being bad status procs is to nerf the good ones down to their level.

[Proscriptor]

@TnaneverRisen

they don't act the same way

here are some parameters that vary between DoT procs

1. 1s delay / no delay
2. capped/uncapped
3. damage calculation includes elemental damage: true/false
4. has / doesn't have a special mechanic (debuff)
5. each proc instance has a separate timer: true/false
6. subsequent procs refresh duration of existing procs: true/false
7. no AoE / AoE centered on the target / AoE centered on an area
8. has a damage type different from the type of direct damage it is associated with: true/false

toxin proc - i will start with it as it's the most vanilla DoT proc; i will compare other procs to toxin as a baseline

1. 1s delay
2. uncapped
3. true
4. no debuff
5. true
6. false
7. no AoE
8. false

slash proc

1. 1s delay
2. uncapped
3. false
4. no debuff
5. true
6. false
7. no AoE
8. true (true damage)

heat proc

1. 1s delay
2. uncapped
3. true
4. has a debuff
5. false
6. true
7. no AoE
8. false

electricity proc

1. no delay
2. uncapped
3. true
4. has a debuff
5. true
6. false
7. AoE centered on target
8. false

gas proc

1. no delay
2. capped
3. false
4. no debuff
5. true
6. false
7. AoE centered on an area (damage keeps ticking after the target dies)
8. false

therefore each DoT proc has special mechanics

no two DoT procs will ever have the same mechanics in warframe because it's abhorrent from a design perspective

[FooldudeDalis]

15 hours ago, (XBOX)Rez090 said:

Who cares about puncture damage? Puncture is already and still worthless as a status.

Yes, that is my point, puncture is the ANTI-ARMOR IPS damage type and is basically worthless.  You'd think "cause the enemy to deal 30-75% less damage" would be a good debuff, but I guess that's just how out of whack things are.

14 hours ago, VhwatGoes said:

Gas doesn't cap, that is just visual. It's radial effect caps at 10 procs, but the damage continues to rise. It's one of the many neglected aspects of that poor element.

Wait, seriously?  Well that's good to know, kind of sad that it does not help Gas all that much.

[TnaneverRisen]

9 minutes ago, Proscriptor said:

@TnaneverRisen

they don't act the same way

here are some parameters that vary between DoT procs

1. 1s delay / no delay
2. capped/uncapped
3. damage calculation includes elemental damage: true/false
4. has / doesn't have a special mechanic (debuff)
5. each proc instance has a separate timer: true/false
6. subsequent procs refresh duration of existing procs: true/false
7. no AoE / AoE centered on the target / AoE centered on an area
8. has a damage type different from the type of direct damage it is associated with: true/false

toxin proc - i will start with it as it's the most vanilla DoT proc; i will compare other procs to toxin as a baseline

1. 1s delay
2. uncapped
3. true
4. no debuff
5. true
6. false
7. no AoE
8. false

slash proc

1. 1s delay
2. uncapped
3. false
4. no debuff
5. true
6. false
7. no AoE
8. true (true damage)

heat proc

1. 1s delay
2. uncapped
3. true
4. has a debuff
5. false
6. true
7. no AoE
8. false

electricity proc

1. no delay
2. uncapped
3. true
4. has a debuff
5. true
6. false
7. AoE centered on target
8. false

gas proc

1. no delay
2. capped
3. false
4. no debuff
5. true
6. false
7. AoE centered on an area (damage keeps ticking after the target dies)
8. false

therefore each DoT proc has special mechanics

no two DoT procs will ever have the same mechanics in warframe because it's abhorrent from a design perspective

While that's true, you're making distinctions without a difference.  Yeah, technically there are differences, but in practice, the differences are usually to small to even notice.  The most important thing is how fast you can take down high level, heavily armored grineer.  If you want additional differences between toxin and slash, for flavor, sure why not.

[TnaneverRisen]

1 minute ago, FooldudeDalis said:

Yes, that is my point, puncture is the ANTI-ARMOR IPS damage type and is basically worthless.  You'd think "cause the enemy to deal 30-75% less damage" would be a good debuff, but I guess that's just how out of whack things are.

Wait, seriously?  Well that's good to know, kind of sad that it does not help Gas all that much.

Regarding the puncture issue - you're right.  That "Rez90" person has trouble thinking more than 1 level deep.

[Proscriptor]

7 minutes ago, TnaneverRisen said:

While that's true, you're making distinctions without a difference.  Yeah, technically there are differences, but in practice, the differences are usually to small to even notice.  The most important thing is how fast you can take down high level, heavily armored grineer.  If you want additional differences between toxin and slash, for flavor, sure why not.

the implications of these differences are very significant, for builds and gameplay likewise.

it isn't about flavor. 

since you agree that the bleed proc and toxin proc are not to be the same, it's now up to you to define what you would want bleed to look like.

if you want bleed to be the same as the current toxin proc, you need to figure out what to do with the toxin proc.

not me, you

if you don't do that, you're wasting your time because bleed and toxin proc will never be the same. it's just as much a fact of the world as earth being round. 

[TnaneverRisen]

3 minutes ago, Proscriptor said:

the implications of these differences are very significant, for builds and gameplay likewise.

it isn't about flavor. 

since you agree that the bleed proc and toxin proc are not to be the same, it's now up to you to define what you would want bleed to look like.

if you want bleed to be the same as the current toxin proc, you need to figure out what to do with the toxin proc.

not me, you

if you don't do that, you're wasting your time because bleed and toxin proc will never be the same. it's just as much a fact of the world as earth being round. 

I don't need to figure out what to do with the toxin proc.  There's no issue with the suggestion that bleed should have to take armor into account.  Toxin already has different bonuses from slash against different health types.

You've created some standard of "they must be different" that I don't care about, and given how little the differences matter in practice, I suspect most others don't care either.

If the fact that toxin and slash have different bonuses against different health types isn't different enough for you, here's a random idea to help: toxin procs could last 8 seconds instead of 6, and bleed procs could lower melee speed.  Don't like it?  Then go come up with something else that satisfies your requirement.

 

[Proscriptor]

this topic is dead and done then

what you've made is a "make bleed the same as toxin proc" thread

a complete waste of time for everyone 

[TnaneverRisen]

1 minute ago, Proscriptor said:

this topic is dead and done then

what you've made is a "make bleed the same as toxin proc" thread

a complete waste of time for everyone 

Lol.  Nope.  This topic is "dead and done" for you, because you've imagined me claiming that bleed and toxin should be the same, when clearly I've pointed out they already have different bonuses vs different damage types.  Reality isn't your strong suite.  Your posts are a waste of time for everyone, so stop posting.

[Proscriptor]

no it's dead and done for everyone. you've wasted everyone's time with this "make bleed = toxin proc" junk thread

also you've demonstrated how you don't know anything

for you the mechanical differences between DoT procs are flavor

you should contemplate how you failed on a fundamental level today by posting all this crap

[TnaneverRisen]

Just now, Proscriptor said:

no it's dead and done for everyone. you've wasted everyone's time with this "make bleed = toxin proc" junk thread

also you've demonstrated how you don't know anything

for you the mechanical differences between DoT procs are flavor

you should contemplate how you failed on a fundamental level today by posting all this crap

Nope, I didn't say make bleed the same as toxin.  You keep imagining that if you want, but I'm not going to accept your craziness. 

I even gave a specific example as to how, for nitpickers like you, they could make it even MORE different.

Your posts are complete trash.  Your logic is faulty.  Your observations are not credible. 

[Proscriptor]

  

3 hours ago, TnaneverRisen said:

... Why are you posting here again?

no one values what you have to say about the damage system as you don't have the needed level of understanding or even demonstrate that care to understand it's finer points

indeed... why are you posting here again?

[TnaneverRisen]

2 minutes ago, Proscriptor said:

  

no one values what you have to say about the damage system as you don't have the needed level of understanding or even demonstrate that care to understand it's finer points

indeed... why are you posting here again?

Correction - YOU don't value what I have to say, because you aren't even able to comprehend what I'm saying.
You still believe I want slash to be exactly the same as toxin, don't you?  Amazing.  Let's put you in a glass jar and study this kind of insanity for a while.  Might be entertaining. 

[Proscriptor]

i comprehend what you've said perfectly

your "ideas" have no merit

DE will never make two procs mechanically the same, and your "thoughts" on that topic move nothing and no one. i'd call this a mental excercise but it's hardly even that as a mental excercise at least implies some thinking took place, and i see evidence of your feelings on the issue of balance and how the game works, but if you want change you need to bear out something cogent and not patently terrible  

therefore this thread is a big nothing

now, keep talking about putting me in places and let's see how things progress from there