Topic: DoT Damage - pro/con/ideas - post here

All of those who have played other MMOs probably know it:

(D)amage (o)ver (T)ime skills or weapons

Perpetuum doesn't have it yet. I want to hear other opinions about it, and perhaps some suggestions how to implement it.

  1. Contra arguments:
    - its harder to balance then direct damage (stacking and duration)
    - it would probably increase the data-traffic
    - ... (i will fill this up with posted arguments)

  2. Pro arguments:
    - some damage type would be more logical with DoT damage (eg. Chemical damage)
    - more variety in how damage is dealt between the ammo types
    - DoT weapons will probably need other tactics
    - ... (i will fill this up with posted arguments)

  3. Ideas/suggestions:
    - all chemical ammo types should be changed to DoT damage
    - thermal damage should have a chance to start a fire
    - shields could naturally block any DoT damage (except for the initial blow)
    - New weapon types like "Flamers"
    - Pulse Laser (nice idea Alf wink )
    - Drainer
    ... (i will fill this up with posted ideas)

Last edited by Bunkerkind Anni (2010-03-28 16:27:06)

Re: DoT Damage - pro/con/ideas - post here

flamers

Offensive signature. - DEV Zoom

Rawr, fear my signature.

Re: DoT Damage - pro/con/ideas - post here

NO, please no DoTs...... Sorry but I think this should stay with games like WOW, AOC etc.

Perpetuum Community Wizard Guy!
For beginning video tutorials please visit: http://gremrod.wordpress.com
Perpetuum Short stories: http://perpetuumfiles.wordpress.com/ Written by me.

Re: DoT Damage - pro/con/ideas - post here

explain yourself wink

your argument sounds like DoT are a pure fantasy-game mechanic, which is plain wrong...

Re: DoT Damage - pro/con/ideas - post here

Dots are unececery in game like this.

It add nothing.

Offensive signature. - DEV Zoom

Rawr, fear my signature.

Re: DoT Damage - pro/con/ideas - post here

I think it's a good idea, but as already mentioned, it adds a lot more load to the server. It certainly adds for more varied tactics, and some interesting flavors (could add the posibility to tie in a fight).

As far as flamers go, I think that should add some heat mechanic, which is more interesting imo (think mechwarrior).

Re: DoT Damage - pro/con/ideas - post here

Actually we can make DoTs.
But not only with damage, we could make the drainers work that way, also armor repairers, and many many things, but there are some huge drawbacks as well

i would like pulse lasers
But to calculate LOS in every sec for 1 module is unacceptable, costs too much.
Also every modul which cycle time can be affected by any means are pain in the ass as well in that case.

Are you sure you want to destroy this item?:
Alligior (101028825 pcs)

Re: DoT Damage - pro/con/ideas - post here

Thanks Alf - nice Idea

Armor repair as "Heal over Time" sounds not so bad IMHO

Re: DoT Damage - pro/con/ideas - post here

I think it's a good idea.

On top of the potential for many new kinds of items and equipment, multiple means of inflicting damage enrich the Perpetuum experience by having the player craft new tactics to leverage and defend against a given damage type, DOTs included.

Re: DoT Damage - pro/con/ideas - post here

One of the reasons that I would not want to see DoTs in this game is because it is meant to be based on targeting / engagement.

If you bring in DoTs you will see a squad of mechs drop DoTs on a single target and then quickly move to engage a new target while they really have no reason to keep the DoT target engaged/targeted any longer.

All they need to do is run as a group target drop DoT and move. Anyone with enough DoTs is going to pop.

They can rinse and repeat.

If you put DoT in the game then the targeting skill/limit goes out the door.

I would rather see the game stay with active targeting/focus damage over any type of passive damage / DoT.

.......

Now since someone brought up the fact that the game has HoT, that is fine. For that to work the repper needs to keep target. This is fine, but I don't think it warrants DoT.


.......

Unless I am totally wrong and the mech/bot that drops the DoT needs to keep focus on the target?

Last edited by Gremrod (2010-03-30 17:06:28)

Perpetuum Community Wizard Guy!
For beginning video tutorials please visit: http://gremrod.wordpress.com
Perpetuum Short stories: http://perpetuumfiles.wordpress.com/ Written by me.

Re: DoT Damage - pro/con/ideas - post here

valid points -

but if you could get enough people to DoT-kill someone with a single salvo of a group -> then why dont you kill him just instantly with that salvo and normal weapons?

One of my suggestions was that Dot-damage is blocked by shields, except for the initial blow.
With changing chemical damage to always-DoT the shields would get a bigger use as they are now. Changing would mean that instead of 30 instant damage it would do 3x10 Damage

Re: DoT Damage - pro/con/ideas - post here

Bunkerkind Anni wrote:

valid points -

but if you could get enough people to DoT-kill someone with a single salvo of a group -> then why dont you kill him just instantly with that salvo and normal weapons?

True but they still need to use primary target to alpha the target. From what I have seen in most mmos DoT are drop and forget. I just have a concern about the lock target and drop a DoT and your able to unlock target and move to a new one.

Bunkerkind Anni wrote:

One of my suggestions was that Dot-damage is blocked by shields, except for the initial blow.
With changing chemical damage to always-DoT the shields would get a bigger use as they are now. Changing would mean that instead of 30 instant damage it would do 3x10 Damage

Well, I can see where you coming from for the dmg type of chemical. But another concern I would ahve is the load of the server ticking/tracking DoTs during a large battle.

I really think if DoT are done in this game something has to be balanced into the targeting system for them.

Perpetuum Community Wizard Guy!
For beginning video tutorials please visit: http://gremrod.wordpress.com
Perpetuum Short stories: http://perpetuumfiles.wordpress.com/ Written by me.

Re: DoT Damage - pro/con/ideas - post here

Gremrod wrote:

One of the reasons that I would not want to see DoTs in this game is because it is meant to be based on targeting / engagement.

If you bring in DoTs you will see a squad of mechs drop DoTs on a single target and then quickly move to engage a new target while they really have no reason to keep the DoT target engaged/targeted any longer.

All they need to do is run as a group target drop DoT and move. Anyone with enough DoTs is going to pop.

They can rinse and repeat.

If you put DoT in the game then the targeting skill/limit goes out the door.

I would rather see the game stay with active targeting/focus damage over any type of passive damage / DoT.

Lets assume for a second that you could have DoTs and just for the sake of argument here, they did the same damage that a normal shot would do over the cycle time. 

Simple Setup:
10 Robots vs 10 Robots
All robots have 1000 hit points
Normal weaopns do 50 damage every 5 seconds (10 dps)
DoT Weapons do 50 Damage over 5 seconds (10 dps)
One side has DoT weapons and the other has normal weaopns

In both cases if each side is focus firing single targets, they will all have to stay on each target the same ammount of time.  The only dif here is that the dot team would not kill the target at the start of the last shot but at the end of the last shot's cycle.

On a massively large ammount of robots involved (say 1000 vs 1000) both normal weapon damage types and dots would be the same for targeting.  Every 5 seconds one robot dies.

When it comes down to it all that matters is DPS, DD (Direct Damage) or DOT is all the same in the end.

Re: DoT Damage - pro/con/ideas - post here

I would like to see a DoT system implemented as well. One thing that could be done to prevent incredible stacking issues would be to add an extended cooldown time to DoT ammo launchers (if specialized launchers were added to the game) or as side-effect of loading that ammo into your weapon. DoTs should (obviously) have an extremely low alpha strike- perhaps they could be stacked or increase the amount of damage over time to fully utilize their advantages. Indendiary or "armor-eating" acid bullets could be possible ammo types used in this category.

On a side note, I have to agree with Gremrod that it would definitely nullify the use of targeting extensions. I think my above suggestion would help compensate for that, but it is an idea that would need to be explored further.

Finally, I'd like to see radial falloff added to the combat system. From what I understand, there is a range falloff which gives a soldier type an incentive to have speed extensions and mass reducers. However, in close combat, there doesn't appear to be an advantage to moving while shooting. A bot with a high amount of speed should be harder to hit. A bot with very fast moving turrets should be able to hit faster moving targets. Any suggestions on this idea? Let me know if I'm describing something in progress/already implemented, because it is a mechanic that interests me a great deal.

Re: DoT Damage - pro/con/ideas - post here

Changr wrote:

...
On a side note, I have to agree with Gremrod that it would definitely nullify the use of targeting extensions. I think my above suggestion would help compensate for that, but it is an idea that would need to be explored further.

i still dont get this argument, especially if you are going with loxdon's example -
- instant-damage: if you do enough damage to kill a target with a single alpha strike, the target cant shoot back.
- DoT-Damage: if you do the same damage over time, the target has a period of time to shoot back, repair or use ewar.

in that case the DoT team would theoretically deal the same DPS - but the Instant-dmg team would win because they can shoot more often.

Changr wrote:

Finally, I'd like to see radial falloff added to the combat system. From what I understand, there is a range falloff which gives a soldier type an incentive to have speed extensions and mass reducers. However, in close combat, there doesn't appear to be an advantage to moving while shooting. A bot with a high amount of speed should be harder to hit. A bot with very fast moving turrets should be able to hit faster moving targets. Any suggestions on this idea? Let me know if I'm describing something in progress/already implemented, because it is a mechanic that interests me a great deal.

the mechanic was removed around new year, because it was to easy exploitable. There is no collision detection between the bots/mechs. The minimum-range-falloff-idea was scraped too.

Re: DoT Damage - pro/con/ideas - post here

Im pro-dot
currently, it is advisable that you use all of your weapons on a single target, and focus on it until it dies

with dots, it would be more effective to dot up one, switch to the next, dot it up, switch to the next, the first dots already expired, so switch back to the first one to dot up again, etc.  This is a change of optimal behavior, which makes games dynamic and fun IMO

to balance dot, you can make a hardcap on dot damage (depending on mech size perhaps?). So even if a hundred dot weapons hit a single target, it wont be effective at all. This would encourage spreading dots among enemies instead of focusing them on a single enemy, which isnt that different from direct damage weapons.

Re: DoT Damage - pro/con/ideas - post here

Other than a glob of acid, or adhering bombs/missiles with delayed explosions, all modern military or sci-fi weapons everything universally does damage immediately to mechanized things.

Something like a flamethrower or a chain gun would do damage constantly but not over time, if you turn off a flamethrower it will cease to have a effect other than the damage it caused (a person, flesh or made of straw could burn but not a robot, if something catches fire like fuel or ammo, more then likely the war machine explodes critically).

A damage over time weapon, needs to make sense from a logical perspective, not just a game play one. What exactly would cause damage over time, and not direct or constant. This isn’t wow or lol, no stacking poison attacks, or poison period exists for mechanized robots. They do not bleed either.

In the case of a adhering bomb or projectile, (something that goes chink and doesn’t explode until a few seconds latter), from a tactical perspective it doesn’t make sense to delay the explosion if its in the same area causing the same damage. If you have attack that waits to go off and it was life or death, would you really want to give a person a chance to keep fighting or shooting you, so you both die? Other than taunting someone with “you are already dead” I don’t see the point, if it’s the same ammo with the same explosive would you really want it exploding 5 seconds latter, instead of right now?

Re: DoT Damage - pro/con/ideas - post here

Hazanko wrote:

Other than a glob of acid, or adhering bombs/missiles with delayed explosions, all modern military or sci-fi weapons everything universally does damage immediately to mechanized things.

have you ever heard of "napalm", "plasmid" or simply "molotov cocktail" ?
have you ever seen a burned-out Tank?

Hazanko wrote:

Something like a flamethrower or a chain gun would do damage constantly but not over time, if you turn off a flamethrower it will cease to have a effect other than the damage it caused (a person, flesh or made of straw could burn but not a robot, if something catches fire like fuel or ammo, more then likely the war machine explodes critically).

if you had read the post from DEV Alf, you would know, that there would be enough possibiltys for a DoT mechanic. Basicly for some weapons it would mean nothing else then a cycle-time at 1/s and a constant gfx.
For energy-drainer that would make more sense then how it actual works.

Hazanko wrote:

A damage over time weapon, needs to make sense from a logical perspective, not just a game play one. What exactly would cause damage over time, and not direct or constant. This isn’t wow or lol, no stacking poison attacks, or poison period exists for mechanized robots. They do not bleed either.

you have answered that with your first sentence - in perpetuum there are "chemical damage" weapons -> which means nothing less the accid.

Hazanko wrote:

In the case of a adhering bomb or projectile, (something that goes chink and doesn’t explode until a few seconds latter), from a tactical perspective it doesn’t make sense to delay the explosion if its in the same area causing the same damage. If you have attack that waits to go off and it was life or death, would you really want to give a person a chance to keep fighting or shooting you, so you both die? Other than taunting someone with “you are already dead” I don’t see the point, if it’s the same ammo with the same explosive would you really want it exploding 5 seconds latter, instead of right now?

that part of your answer is kinda... not related to the topic. DoT has nothing to do with delayed damage...

Re: DoT Damage - pro/con/ideas - post here

No Flamers or that sort but a sustained laser dmg is great idea. run it in bursts so it still has a cool down period where it cycles ammo. i don't like the idea of running fire or acid or anything that you drop on everyone.

if you are just calculating the low every second the dmg is done over a 10 second period then it cycles off reloads and then fires again is the calculation going to be much different then a someone just firing guns one at a time? best example is like autos having a 3 second cycle time.

Re: DoT Damage - pro/con/ideas - post here

Nice Necro work!

DoT doesn't really fit at the moment. It's hard to set metal on fire externally. Acid however is an option so Chemical weapons would deal DOT. Not a bad idea. Never the less I am not sure if this is still relevant.

Re: DoT Damage - pro/con/ideas - post here

More dots, more dots, trow more dots.... OK, stop dots.

Re: DoT Damage - pro/con/ideas - post here

dots aren't really very fun to me.  After playing warhammer online, i don't miss them at all. 

dots and aoe's, both mechanics just weren't that much fun. 

I would pop out from around a corner, get blasted by aoe's and dots, see my health drop, go back behind cover and watch myself slowly die with nothing I could do about it except hope and pray it clears before hp reach 0. 

Dots are bad for trying to use cover tactics.  they mess it up.  you can't watch your health/armor bar to see when to take cover, you have to watch your dot stack and try and guess. 

Aoe's suck too.  and Aoe dots is just silly. 

I want the damage displayed on my robot to be my real damage.  I hate having to try and guess how much real damage i've taken.  unless I can tooltip the dot(in heat of battle this would suck of course), or the UI tells me how much the dot will be doing, or i somehow learn how to reconize all the dots and their damage from memory which isn't going to happen. 

Its like this, I get one dot on me and I have to take cover until its gone.  I don't know how much damage is coming so I have to treat all dot situations as deadly. If I ignore the dots completely, i'm facing certain death.  But being catious about them makes the dots too powerful as it forces me into hiding for long periods of time while I wait it out and hope for the best. either way, dots are more powerful then direct damage because of the unknown.

just not a fun game mechanic for pvp.