[Theorycrafting] Toughness is broken (or useless) for DoTs

[Grimbur]

Ok Sulorie ... Again, I get your point.
But, it feels a little bit easy for me to decide that Toughness is useless for DoTs when only one archetype heavily relies on it.
All the other classes dont even care about Toughness so it definitely feels like an anti-tank call and not a "there is another rule because it is a dot".

[emiliorv]

Toughness reducing TOTAL damage of dot, not every tick.

If you calculate the reduction in % is the same for tick or for total damage => if toughnes mitigate 8% dmg per tick will mitigate 8% of total damage...

[Dabbart]

A, toughness is not % damage reduction. I don't know why you are trying to format the mitigation to %s. It's a static number that is removed from the ability prior to the damage being applied. Same as any main stat, 5pts=1DPS, in this case -1DPS. For DoTs it removes the total from the DoT, then the ticks start. This is also the time when all your buffs/debuffs and the opponents buffs/debuffs are determined. This server HAD a time when every tick rechecked for buffs/debuffs and avoidance but was removed as "cancerous".

B, Different abilities use weapon DPS and stat bonus' differently. Every ability doesn't take a 1-1 ratio from your int(for DPS AM) and weapon dps. This server doesn't have the best indication of this, or listing but you can search the forums to find some numbers, for reference check out this post

C, You are increasing your toughness much higher than the main attack stat. Try raising the attack stat to higher than your toughness initially, then test differences. Get a few crits in there and you'll see toughness being more efficient as well.

However, based on your numbers there is no bug. When you changed your toughness between 140-665 (525pts or 105dps reduction difference) and showed a 23mit difference per tick on a 15s DoT you proved that.

Law of Conductivity ticks 6-7 ticks total I think? So, 23x6=138dps reduction difference between 665-140 toughness(29 mit on 665, 6mit on 140, 29-6=23 difference). Obviously, damage numbers aren't totally static so there is some variation(which is why cherry picking 1-2 results tends to show goofy numbers), however that seems to be functioning pretty well. Do you want Toughness to reduce EVERY tick of the DoT it's full amount? Have you considered the ramifications of that change?

There is a reason you get Resistances. There is a reason resistances and armor work as % reductions and toughness doesn't. They work in concert very well to reduce damage. Should toughness be tweaked? Imo yes, it should be empowered more. But that is an entirely separate conversation.

[zachary]

@Grimbur could you run some tests to determine whether the mitigation is absolute (I think the tooltip over Toughness says something like '-XXXdps') or a percentage?

If it's meant to be absolute, then I can see how it would have to be scaled against total DoT damage instead of per-tick.

If it's a percentage, it should be the same if done per-tick or total, since multiplication is distributive.

That said, it sounds like Int is affecting _each tick_ of DoTs, which would seem... unbalanced.

@Grumbur I hate to ask, but could you get us some more data? Specifically, the damage/mitigation of each tick of the DoTs ? And maybe of a couple different DoTs of various strengths (by having the AM remove +Int gear)? That should help answer a few of these questions.

[Grimbur]

Well, I know that we can always find a reason, even a good one, that can explain the maths behind all this.

But, for me, it is far easier than that.

With the same offensive and defensive stats,

a Direct Damage does 477(-313) to my tank
a DoT does 1610(-145) over 15 sec to my tank
More than 3 times the damage with less that the half in mitigation.

Everybody can say that it is normal or not.
For me, the numbers are self explanatory and NO, this cannot be normal.

but, as I said, if it is considered as normal at the end by the devs, so be it and I will do what needs to be done to upgrade my stuff because my own conclusion is that toughness is just a pure joke.


Groumf

[Mordecaieth]

I am standing behind you in this as someone who often Solo's I don't dare dream of fighting casters with DoT damage because it is just simply and utterly broken. Call me an idiot, call me a retard. I don't care, if you play an Archmage or if you play a Shaman, toughness is a mascot stat and you know it.

[Sulorie]

Naked damage tests have no meaning for balancing.
Cast-time spells are more affected by toughness than instant casts e.g. dots.
This all are typical solo roam problems of classes not fit for soloing. You need resist buffs, high avoidance and/or healing to deal with different situations.

[zachary]

@Dabbart your numbers don't add up, even for an absolute measure.

@Grimnur posted (summarized):
Toughness 665.
DD: Archmage's Radiant Lance hits you for 477 damage. (313 mitigated)
DoT: Archmage's Law of Conductivity hits you for 322 damage. (29 mitigated)

For total mitigation to be close to the same, the DoT would have to tick something like 11 times (for a total of 3542 damage (319 mitigated)), not the 6-7 times you say it ticks. (I can't find docs on how often it ticks; RoR builder just says 'over 15s')

I don't know what the variance in the effectiveness of Toughness is, but I don't think it's close to 50-60% that would imply.

>Naked damage tests have no meaning for balancing.
I disagree. They're good to figure out what a particular stat affects.

> Cast-time spells are more affected by toughness than instant casts e.g. dots.
So Instant-DDs are less affected by toughness? Anyone have a BW with Nova to test with?

> This all are typical solo roam problems of classes not fit for soloing.

Sure, all damage can be overcome with enough healers, but that doesn't make it balanced. Turn it on it's head: If the problem was that toughness was too powerful vs DoTs, would you say "Well, if you're not a solo caster it's not a problem"?

[Zxul]

The question is whatever 100 intel adds same total dmg to dots as 100 toughness removes. If it does, then working as intended, even if because of dot's baseline high dmg toughness isn't the best protection vs. If however the dmg is different, then either there is a bug, or devs purposely made toughness less effective.

[Dabbart]

Your numbers don't add up, because you don't understand how damage is calculated. Radiance lance is a 2s cast. Note how we use the term DPS? That is Damage Per Second. More seconds in the cast, the higher main stat is utilized, and the higher Toughness is utilized. A 2s cast, against 665 toughness = -266dps (approx 133 -dps from toughness [665/5]x2) again, stat benefits and weapon DPS differ from ability to ability, and damage isn't a static number so they wont add up perfectly all of the time. Which is why you gotta run the test 10-100 times to get avg numbers.

You are comparing Apples to Pineapples and expecting them to be the same size. Try the Instant AM dps ability. Or compare a DoT to another DoT with different duration.