I get it now. I calculated defiance as I went, assuming you had none at the start. Figuring out the defiance buff as if you already went through the chain once makes much more sense for a DPS calc (which is about the long haul). Thank you for the explanation and the work you are putting into this, very neat.
Have you done a DPE comparison? That would be interesting as well.
Why Blasters? Empathy Sucks.
So, you want to be Mental?
What the hell? Let's buff defenders.
Tactics are for those who do not have a big enough hammer. Wisdom is knowing how big your hammer is.
DPE is far more normalized for the various sets, except that Fire once again pulls way ahead. Archery is also higher (bit over 20%) than most, since that's one of its perks, but Fire is still tops for DPE (bit over 40%). W/a few exceptions here & there, almost all the T1, 2 & 3 blasts and even snipes are normalized to have the same DPE. A few exeptions are Burst (high), Scream (high) BiB (low) and Power Burst (high), but none of these are significant like pretty much all of Arch or especially Fire.
An Offensive Guide to Ice Melee
elec's T1 and T2 are slightly above average as well if you account for end return
It sorta makes sense that Fire has a bit more damage than the others though, since they have no status effect in them.
Basically, their "status affect" is more damage (aka, the Fire Dot).
Where as Ice for example, slows the enemy down quite a bit.
Which is better ?
I have no idea.
But I personally like ... more damage. 
[ QUOTE ]
Basically, their "status affect" is more damage (aka, the Fire Dot).
Where as Ice for example, slows the enemy down quite a bit.
[/ QUOTE ]
The funny thing about this is that Fire actually benefits from this design twice. Fire Blast has excellent damage and DPS, but it's not entirely due to the "secondary effect". The more substantive benefit is that Fire Blast is simply fast. Fire Ball and Blaze, which are probably the two most important powers in the set, both animate significantly faster than any of their counterparts in the other sets. Low animation times gives Fire a massive advantage in the DPS category because it gets more attacks in within a similar period of time.
[ QUOTE ]
Ice slows and lowers To Hit
[/ QUOTE ]
Only 2 of the powers do that (BIB and Blizzard), and they're both relatively minor, shorter duration effects than the -rech -spd.
Ice's big schtick is -rech -spd.
[ QUOTE ]
except that Fire once again pulls way ahead.
[/ QUOTE ]
Heh. I guess the DoT really makes up for using an AoE every ~8 seconds. I figured Archery, Energy, Psi, and Sonic would pull ahead of the others due to the lack of needing to hit an AoE power.
Why Blasters? Empathy Sucks.
So, you want to be Mental?
What the hell? Let's buff defenders.
Tactics are for those who do not have a big enough hammer. Wisdom is knowing how big your hammer is.
The other general inaccuracy I often see used when people discuss how awesome fire is is that when they cut off the chain they don't cut off the dot, they count it all.
Blaze is the main culprit for this, its dot runs 4.1 seconds past the initial damage.
For the purposes of long run dps calculations it doesn't matter, but it is worth being aware of due to the fact that long run dps calculations (particularly for blasters) apply to so little of the game.
ie.
flare>blaze>blast
Most would calculate the avg expect dot and apply it to both blaze and fireblast, but that is misleading. If you cut the timer off as soon as fireblast is done then blaze would at most have 2 ticks and blast none.
In a repetition scenario vs the same target that is irrelevant, but when discussing blastesr that isn't that common as they do so much damage.
In other words, for calculation purposes the avg dot ends up being represented like it is up front damage. If it was fire would be OP'd, but in actual play the dot is very good, but a bit less amazing than paper analysis shows.
[ QUOTE ]
In other words, for calculation purposes the avg dot ends up being represented like it is up front damage. If it was fire would be OP'd, but in actual play the dot is very good, but a bit less amazing than paper analysis shows.
[/ QUOTE ]
It's also for this same reason that Defiance isn't nearly as awesome as paper analysis indicates, nor is Sonic Blast for Blasters quite as awesome. Delayed effects are indeed less effective overall than direct effects, but they're an important factor to consider when trying to consider balance.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
In other words, for calculation purposes the avg dot ends up being represented like it is up front damage. If it was fire would be OP'd, but in actual play the dot is very good, but a bit less amazing than paper analysis shows.
[/ QUOTE ]
It's also for this same reason that Defiance isn't nearly as awesome as paper analysis indicates, nor is Sonic Blast for Blasters quite as awesome. Delayed effects are indeed less effective overall than direct effects, but they're an important factor to consider when trying to consider balance.
[/ QUOTE ]
Sure it is important. But I'd argue that what is being discussed in this thread is just dabbling in balance. It is entertaining, interesting, and quite good, but it is just the tip of the iceberg.
It is very important to be aware of peak capabilities, just as it is important to be aware of typical results both on paper and in practice.
ie. Sonic blasters are capapble of stacking 5 maybe even 6 -resist debuffs, but in practice they rarely do.
Just like fire is capable of 180+ dps, but in practice they rarely do because it requires rolling dot, which just doesn't happen outside of bosses and higher.
That's why I have said already that it is ok for fire to have so much extra damage, but if it was front-loaded it wouldn't be.
Defiance is a bit different than fire's dots, or sonic's -res in that Defiance is perpetual and fire and sonic are self contained. Definace carries on to the next foe, whereas the -res of sonic or the dot of fire does not.
All three tend to not perform as well as they do on paper, but defiance is for a different reason. Defiance is because very few people have endless targets with no pauses. Fire and sonic is because very few targets live long enough to reach near peak capability.
Your own numbers show that hasten+SO fire is only 21% better than energy. For a set with no mitigation and back loaded damage that seems perfectly fine to me compared to all upfront and huge mitigation.
*didn't use lolAR, cause it is just messed up and will hopefully do much better in an aoe comparison.
Honestly, I still don't think that the additional DoT damage is the biggest factor in Fire's incredible performance. It wouldn't be too hard to simply remove that from the calculation and use only the base damage numbers in order to illustrate that Fire just has DPA that is simply that awesome. It's not the fact that Fire does so much damage with its attacks. It's that Fire does so much damage and takes up so little time to do it.
True ... but as he also mentioned, Fire has no damage mitiogation in the form of stuns/kockbacks/slows ... they have to deal with the MOBs at full strength .. which is kinda harsh for an AT with no defensive powers.
They do pay for that high damage.
Just in other areas.
[ QUOTE ]
Honestly, I still don't think that the additional DoT damage is the biggest factor in Fire's incredible performance. It wouldn't be too hard to simply remove that from the calculation and use only the base damage numbers in order to illustrate that Fire just has DPA that is simply that awesome. It's not the fact that Fire does so much damage with its attacks. It's that Fire does so much damage and takes up so little time to do it.
[/ QUOTE ]
Don't get me wrong, fire is dang good. Blaze is still the best attack blasters get even without dot.
Rather than me continuing to pooh pooh the great work you are doing I'll contribute something:
Fire w/ no dot
*Flare is 100% guaranteed dot, so included
Code:[/color]Tier 1 dam DPA DPE
C bolt 62.6 52.7 12.0
P dart 62.6 52.7 12.0
P bolt 62.6 52.7 12.0
I bolt 62.6 52.7 12.0
Snap 52.6 44.3 14.9
Shriek 52.6 44.3 12.0
Burst 67.5 56.8 13.0
N bolt 37.5 31.6 12.0
Flare 63.2 53.2 17.1
Code:[/color]Tier 2 dam DPA DPE
L bolt 102.6 55.5 12.0
M blast 102.6 55.5 12.0
P blast 102.6 55.5 12.0
I blast 102.6 55.5 12.0
Aimed 82.6 44.6 15.9
Scream 91.2 49.3 13.3
Slug 102.6 55.5 12.0
X ray 62.6 33.8 12.0
F blast 62.6 33.8 12.0
Code:[/color]Tier 3 dam DPA DPE
L bolt na na na
TK 122.6 103.2 12.0
P burst 132.6 66.3 12.8
BiB 142.6 108.0 11.0
Blazing 161.7 81.7 15.9
Shout 132.6 45.7 12.1
Ignite 283.6 67.1 54.5
Cosmic 132.6 59.6 12.8
Blaze 132.6 111.6 12.8
Blaze is still a hero, but tk blast and BiB are right there with it. Flares is avg with 6 of the 9 sets (included rad blast too) pretty much the same. Fire blast is a dog. Turning it into a 1.85 cast for defiance hurt this power a lot.
The DPE on blaze and Fblast are avg, while flares is quite good.
Without dot Fire would be a very pedestrian set. Bested easily in damage by ice and psy. And probably right in there with arch and eng. But of course with no mitigation whatsoever.
IME it is definitely the dot (especially for blasters with slow FireBlast) that makes the set shine.
Using No Dot for Fire a chain of: *dot included on flares
Blaze>Blast>flare>repeat (229% rech in Blaze)
yields
First run (cold) - 122.84 dps
Second run (moderate defiance) -137.64 dps
Third run (hot) - 148.83 dps
*Once it is "hot" the defiance buff is constant at 48.4% for each attack, so while there might be a better defiance sequence for fire, the chain I gave would be what I'd use to kill things in game because of front loading my damage.
Still solid, but nothing to write home about.
[ QUOTE ]
Without dot Fire would be a very pedestrian set. Bested easily in damage by ice and psy. And probably right in there with arch and eng. But of course with no mitigation whatsoever.
[/ QUOTE ]
I know we're mostly talking about ST DPS here, but I think statements like that might be taken the wrong way for ppl skipping ahead. Fire still kicks Ice & Psy's butts for AoE. Even w/o the DoT, I think Fire would be almost balanced w/the other sets (that have more mitigation/utility) considering its ST & AoE potential (and remember, you'll likely only need 2 of the T1~3 blasts if you combine w/your secondary, so you can just drop FBlast). Of course, that means w/DoT, Fire is... um, perfectly balanced. Yeah, that's the ticket.
An Offensive Guide to Ice Melee
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Without dot Fire would be a very pedestrian set. Bested easily in damage by ice and psy. And probably right in there with arch and eng. But of course with no mitigation whatsoever.
[/ QUOTE ]
I know we're mostly talking about ST DPS here, but I think statements like that might be taken the wrong way for ppl skipping ahead. Fire still kicks Ice & Psy's butts for AoE. Even w/o the DoT, I think Fire would be almost balanced w/the other sets (that have more mitigation/utility) considering its ST & AoE potential (and remember, you'll likely only need 2 of the T1~3 blasts if you combine w/your secondary, so you can just drop FBlast). Of course, that means w/DoT, Fire is... um, perfectly balanced. Yeah, that's the ticket.
[/ QUOTE ]
So what secondary are we now shoehorning the player into? Is the st immobs you are talking about replacing Fireblast with, or one of the melee attacks? What is the dpa when you add in a second or two to close to melee?
You're absolutely right, without proc dot fire's aoe would still be fine. That's because only ONE power has proc dot from it's aoe's (excluded true nukes).
With no dot on Fireball:
Code:[/color]Power Dam DPA Cast 5 10 16 End DPE 5 10 16
Fistful 56.9 43.1 1.3 215.5 431.1 na 8.5 6.7 33.4 66.7 na
Explo 56.3 28.4 2.0 142.2 284.3 454.9 15.2 3.7 18.5 37.0 59.3
RoA 150.2 35.6 4.2 177.8 355.6 568.9 20.8 7.2 36.1 72.2 115.5
Buck 56.9 30.8 1.9 153.8 307.6 na 10.2 5.6 27.9 55.8 na
M30 56.3 30.4 1.9 152.2 304.3 486.9 15.2 3.7 18.5 37.0 59.3
Flame 121.1 32.7 3.7 163.6 327.3 na 23.9 5.1 25.3 50.7 na
F Auto 178.6 28.8 6.2 144.0 288.0 na 15.6 11.4 57.2 114.5 na
B Light 63.8 48.3 1.3 241.7 483.3 773.3 15.2 4.2 21.0 42.0 67.2
Circuit 56.3 17.8 3.2 88.8 177.6 284.2 15.6 3.6 18.0 36.1 57.7
E Torr 60.1 45.5 1.3 227.7 455.3 na 11.9 5.1 25.3 50.5 na
Explos 56.3 30.4 1.9 152.2 304.3 486.9 15.2 3.7 18.5 37.0 59.3
Frost B 87.6 30.2 2.9 151.0 302.1 na 15.2 5.8 28.8 57.6 na
I Storm 116.8 51.9 2.3 259.6 519.1 830.6 15.6 7.5 37.4 74.9 119.8
Psy N 55.7 22.2 2.5 111.0 221.9 355.1 18.5 3.0 15.1 30.1 48.2
Howl 50.7 20.2 2.5 101.0 202.0 na 10.2 5.0 24.9 49.7 na
Shock 40.0 16.8 2.4 84.0 168.1 na 11.9 3.4 16.8 33.6 na
Ehaze 84.5 33.7 2.5 168.3 336.7 na 15.2 5.6 27.8 55.6 na
Nuet 56.3 30.4 1.9 152.2 304.3 486.9 15.2 3.7 18.5 37.0 59.3
Irrad 62.6 47.4 1.3 237.1 474.2 758.8 18.5 3.4 16.9 33.8 54.1
F ball 56.3 47.4 1.2 237.0 473.9 758.2 15.2 3.7 18.5 37.0 59.3
breath 109.8 37.9 2.9 189.3 378.6 na 15.2 7.2 36.1 72.2 na
RoF 125.1 55.6 2.3 278.0 556.0 889.6 15.2 8.2 41.2 82.3 131.7
It's better, but I'm not seeing anything more than a few percentage points better than other sets. Even then it is Rain of Fire doing a lot of the leg work, which few fire blasters even take for various reasons.
The AoE output of Fire is not really hit very hard by the removal of proc dot.
If for w/e reason they pulled all the proc dot from Fire it would be a decent st set and a solid aoe set. With absolutely no mitigation. It would still be good because only one other set does both categories well (Arch). But arch would be about as good as it with more mitigation, more range, and similar endurance efficiency.
Middle of the road st, with good aoe doesn't sound like Fire to me. Or at least not how it has typically been represented in every game I've ever played.
At some point someone must have thought the exact opposite of you cause they went ahead and specifically added more dot damage to the set. 1.5x as much to each power that had proc dot.
[ QUOTE ]
So what secondary are we now shoehorning the player into? Is the st immobs you are talking about replacing Fireblast with, or one of the melee attacks? What is the dpa when you add in a second or two to close to melee?
[/ QUOTE ]
Well, if you allow for melee attacks, any secondary except Dev would allow you do drop the lowest DPA blast (or two) and increase your overall DPS. If you're strictly talking about ranged, you'd be forced to take /Fire, though any of the Immobs would be better than a DoT-less Fire Blast.
[ QUOTE ]
At some point someone must have thought the exact opposite of you cause they went ahead and specifically added more dot damage to the set. 1.5x as much to each power that had proc dot.
[/ QUOTE ]
What's the timing on that? I'm pretty sure the devs didn't pay much attention to animation times for like the 1st 2~3 years of the game, so the concept of DPA was pretty foreign to them. But, you know, I'm perfectly happy to be wrong and have Fire in its current "balanced" state, DoTs and all.
Anyway, this really illustrates what I've been saying all alone--you can't balance (or compare) the primaries very well in a vacuum. Fire by itself might not have much (any) mitigation, but what if you pair it w/something like Ice? How much mitigation do you need when you can kill most things in one salvo? I think all we can offer up are various metrics, of which this thread is one. Sustained DPS is a very good metric--it's not even close to the end-all, be-all, but it's a good tool in trying to figure out what to play, or how to tweak what you already play.
Maybe someone can work out a "burst damage per spawn" comparison, assuming X seconds per spawn and Y global recharge, etc, kind of analysis? Might be a great complement to this particular thread.
An Offensive Guide to Ice Melee
12.07.06 Patch notes
[ QUOTE ]
Blaster Improvements:
* These changes are all aimed towards addressing sets based on feedback from players. These changes also affect Defender and Corruptor versions of these powers where applicable.
Blaster Fire Manipulation: Ring of Fire: Increased overall damage. Damage ticks are now faster, as well. Recharge was increased to 6 seconds.
* Blaster Fire Manipulation: Fire Sword: Bonus damage increased.
* Blaster Fire Manipulation: Combustion: Bonus damage increased.
* Blaster Fire Manipulation: Fire Sword Circle: Bonus damage increased.
* Blaster Fire Blast Powerset: Bonus damage increased by 50% for all appropriate powers.
* Blaster Fire Blast: Blaze: Increased Range to 40'
* Assault Rifle Ignite: Increased Range to 40'
* Energy Blast Power Burst: Increased Range to 40'
* Radiation Attack Cosmic Burst: Increased Range to 40'
* Sonic Attack Shout: Increased Range to 40'
* Blaster Devices Taser: Increased Range to 20'
* Blaster Devices Smoke Grenade: No longer requires a 'to hit' check for the Perception Debuff. The other effects of the power still require a successful to hit check.
* Blaster Archery Fistful of Arrows: corrected an issue which could prevent the power from damaging foes.
* Blaster Archery Blazing Arrow: corrected an issue that could limit the DoT portion of the power from doing more than one tick of damage.
* Blaster Assault Rifle Flamethrower: Range increased slightly and recharge time changed so it now matches the range and recharge of the Corruptor version of this power.
* Blaster Electrical Blast Aim should now display the proper look, and match the other powers in the power set.
[/ QUOTE ]
It was fueled by players specifically saying Fire was not performing well enough above the other sets relative to its total lack of mitigation.
It was a situation where feel and experience trumps paper because even on paper fire was still better. I'm inclined to believe that even though the game has changed, it hasn't changed enough to make the reason for the fire buffs invalid.
Buffing the dot on fire was the ideal solution to address the issue of fire not doing enough damage relative to other attack sets because it allowed them to keep the set very close to where it originally was from a "burst" st/aoe perspective so that they weren't suddenly blowing through minions/luts significantly faster than before.
At the same time it allowed the set to have much better performance in protracted battles. This is vital because where other sets gain solid mitigation over time through kbs/slows/-tohit/stuns and w/e else Fire does not. It is over time that fire needs to be noticeably more damaging. Buffing the dot allowed them to address that issue, without giving them OPd upfront damage.
From another perspective:
Take ice blast and pretend it could only stack 3 of its -rech/slow debuffs.
That is 60% -rech. If a boss was attacking every 4 seconds for 500 damage (125dps) the ice blaster would quickly reduce that to every 10 seconds (50dps).
How much faster should Fire kill that target to be of about the same relative strength?
If said ice blaster would experience death after 24 seconds (1,200 hp/50dps) and the fire blaster would be killed in 10 seconds (12 sec due to atttack rate) vs the same foe how much damage should fire do to be equally viable?
Every blast set has mitigation tools that range from better than fire to exceedingly better than fire. I just used ice because the math is really easy for it.
Fire/ice = yay!
[ QUOTE ]
Fire/ice = yay!
[/ QUOTE ]
I enjoyed that combo quite a bit. Mostly because blaster shiver is amazing and lets you use rain of fire like corruptors do.
[ QUOTE ]
It was fueled by players specifically saying Fire was not performing well enough above the other sets relative to its total lack of mitigation.
It was a situation where feel and experience trumps paper because even on paper fire was still better. I'm inclined to believe that even though the game has changed, it hasn't changed enough to make the reason for the fire buffs invalid.
[/ QUOTE ]
Actually, it was right around that time when people started looking at blaster primaries on paper again. I adapted PeakDR for blaster/defender ranged sets around mid '06 on request, and my Ignite post dates from that period as well. PeakDR showed that Fire's performance reputation was exaggerated, which partially knocked the legs out of the notion that Fire's mitgation was balanced by Fire being the absolute top performer (damage types aside, AR exceeded Fire's performance under the PeakDR metric).
Its also possible a post I made about DoT around that time influenced this, although I'm not sure. While adapting blaster primaries to my PeakDR calculations, I noticed that the average DoT estimates of sources like CoD and others were assuming flat percentages, and not factoring in CancelOnMiss. CancelOnMiss significantly reduces the amount of average DoT a power will generate, and I think its an interesting coincidence that the true average tick value of a five-tick cancelonmiss DoT (2.69) is about 50% lower than the estimate you'd get with flat percentages (4.0).
Basically, five ticks is the maximum DoT for fire blast (Blaze has five) so if you wanted to adjust Fire's DoT damage upward so that the average DoT was at least as high as the flat percentage would imply, you'd increase the DoT by about 50% in magnitude.
Nevertheless, I think Fire blast's problems were overstated then. Or rather, they were overstated relative to blaster problems in general: the entire blaster archetype was subsequently discovered through datamining to be underperforming (which was the trigger for the I11 blaster revisions). I think Fire's expressed problems in I8 were really endemic of blaster problems in general for most of the player population. And in a possibly fortuitous twist, Fire ended up benefiting slightly less than most blaster sets in I11, because it was already a fast set (Flares notwithstanding) and thus didn't gain quite as much ground as other sets did by being cast time adjusted. So its entirely possible that Fire ended up right where it ought to have been in the end by getting a DoT buff and less benefit from cast time changes.
[Guide to Defense] [Scrapper Secondaries Comparison] [Archetype Popularity Analysis]
In one little corner of the universe, there's nothing more irritating than a misfile...
(Please support the best webcomic about a cosmic universal realignment by impaired angelic interference resulting in identity crisis angst. Or I release the pigmy water thieves.)
"Actually" makes it sound like a contradiction and then you proceed to just expand on what I've been saying in this thread.
Good info though. You may well have been the Player that led to the "player feedback" comment in the patch notes. I just recall what the pvp crunchers were doing at the time. Fire was numerically superior to other sets, but in practice it wasn't enough to warrant it being used in high end pvp when compared to ice, which had comparable st damage, better secondary effects and a lot more range.
pvp != pve, but I imagine what they knew held true in pve at that time as well.
I personally think blasters as a whole overstated their problems and whined themselves right into new defiance. In any event the dev's did not agree that Lrn2ply was sufficient advice. At the time most people were arguing that fire was fine. That evidently wasn't the case though. Like you say, fire has probably benefited the least from new defiance, in fact the longer cast on fireblast kinda sucks.
TL;DR version of both our posts: Fire is fine.
[ QUOTE ]
"Actually" makes it sound like a contradiction and then you proceed to just expand on what I've been saying in this thread.
[/ QUOTE ]
The "Actually" refers to the notion that Fire was considered superior on paper. It always had been up to that point, but in the months leading up to the Fire changes that significantly reversed. It wasn't so much that experience trumped the numerical analysis as it was the numerical analysis agreed with experience (by that point) in this case.
My recollection is that I was somewhat surprised to discover that while Fire was always assumed to be the AoE king, it seems no one actually tried to compare Fire to AR because the presumption was that AR's performance was so low it wasn't worth bothering. Furthermore, while Fire did have very good DPA no one (that I'm aware of) did an analysis of just how much recharge was required to fill a chain with Fire's top DPA attacks. It was always presumed that attack chains for reasonable builds were always "full" so there was no need.
[ QUOTE ]
I personally think blasters as a whole overstated their problems and whined themselves right into new defiance. In any event the dev's did not agree that Lrn2ply was sufficient advice. At the time most people were arguing that fire was fine.
[/ QUOTE ]
The I11 changes were datamining driven. When the devs ran their performance stats across the game, they discovered that when you look at the average levelling rate and reward earning rates (influence, drops, etc) of all players for each level range, and compare that average to the average levelling and earning rates of each blaster powerset combination (i.e. all energy/energy blasters, all fire/dev blasters, all ice/elec blasters) it was discovered that *all* of those combinations were lower than the overall average. By double-digit percentages in all cases. Even Ice/Ice, even Fire/Energy: all of them. I was also told that that situation was *unique*: there was no other archetype for which you could make that statement. That is what made blasters the high priority action item at that time.
Blasters had been "whining" about various things since I1, and their complaints peaked around I5. By I11, they were actually practically non-existent (at the time that blasters were being worked on, there were more complaints about Kheldians, Tankers, Stalkers, and Dominators in the public forums).
Whether Blasters overstated their problems is somewhat moot, as Castle determined on his own that a) blasters of all powerset combinations were underperforming the playerbase as a whole by significant amounts and b) that underperformance was partially due to being killed and under debt more often, and c) defiance 1.0 was probably encouraging more risk-taking than the archetype was designed to handle for the average CoX player. All of the player feedback related to the changes were details fit into that basic framework already established.
[Guide to Defense] [Scrapper Secondaries Comparison] [Archetype Popularity Analysis]
In one little corner of the universe, there's nothing more irritating than a misfile...
(Please support the best webcomic about a cosmic universal realignment by impaired angelic interference resulting in identity crisis angst. Or I release the pigmy water thieves.)
So, as long as you can keep the attack chain up, indefinately, it will give you a modifier of 2.3433, except for the first round of the chain where you build it up the first time.
Gotcha.
Is this with Hasten up or not?
[ QUOTE ]
We're referring to how you're adding the DoT incorrectly. It's not an 80% chance for the 5 ticks of 14.08. Each tick has an 80% chance to occur and allow the DoTs to continue to occur. The first tick has an 80% chance to occur, The second tick has a 64% chance to occur, and so on.
[/ QUOTE ]
Is this chance a hardcoded chance, or is it influenced by +Accuracy ?
Inspirations ?
Buffs ?
Aim ?