PvE Condition Duration
Depends on the length of the encounter.
Depends on the length of the encounter.
Why?
It’s fairly simple, actually; condition duration helps DPS far more than condition damage. Let’s say you have a bleed that ticks for 100 damage. I could increase my condition damage by a bunch and maybe get that up to 120 damage, or I could increase my condition duration by a bunch and get a second tick which brings it to 200 damage. This simple example, magnified by the application of dozens of burns/bleeds/poisons, is how condition builds compete with and beat out power builds in DPS.
Why?
Because if the enemy dies before your conditions run out, stronger conditions are better. But if the enemy doesn’t die in the length of your conditions, then condition duration would’ve been better.
[VZ] Valor Zeal – Stormbluff Isle – Looking for steady, casual-friendly NA raiders!
It’s fairly simple, actually; condition duration helps DPS far more than condition damage. Let’s say you have a bleed that ticks for 100 damage. I could increase my condition damage by a bunch and maybe get that up to 120 damage, or I could increase my condition duration by a bunch and get a second tick which brings it to 200 damage. This simple example, magnified by the application of dozens of burns/bleeds/poisons, is how condition builds compete with and beat out power builds in DPS.
But that’s bad math.
If you have a 6s bleed for 120/s versus a 12s bleed for 100/s you get 480 more out of the second bleed… If you stop attacking for the full duration. If you apply one bleed every second at 120 versus 100 you simply do 20 more damage. It’s just that simple.
But that does explain the difference in how I think about it though.
But that’s bad math.
If you have a 6s bleed for 120/s versus a 12s bleed for 100/s you get 480 more out of the second bleed… If you stop attacking for the full duration. If you apply one bleed every second at 120 versus 100 you simply do 20 more damage. It’s just that simple.
But that does explain the difference in how I think about it though.
No, you’re thinking about it a bit wonky. If you keep attacking, you’re stacking extra bleed stacks with the second build than the first, magnifying your damage. Let’s take your example further.
If you have an attack you can do once per second that applies:
- 1 stack of 6s bleed @ 120 dps
- 1 stack of 12s bleed @ 100 dps
Then over 12 seconds you have:
- 6 stacks of bleed on target @ 720 dps
- 12 stacks of bleed on target @ 1200 dps
The benefit of condition duration in that case should be obvious. The only time condition damage is better is if the fight ends in 6 seconds (some open world mobs).
[VZ] Valor Zeal – Stormbluff Isle – Looking for steady, casual-friendly NA raiders!
Condition duration means you can get higher stacks, but let’s just compare a single burn stack.
Let’s go with a Guardian’s Virtue of Justice active. At base, it’s 1 stack of Burning for 4 seconds.
With full Condition Damage exotic gear (I’m ignoring traits and food, but using Rune of Afflicted to mimic condition damage rune set), it deals a total of 1,433 damage, or 358.25 damage per tick.
With full Viper’s Exotic gear (backpeice is still Rabid/Carrion with exotic jewel, it drops down to 298.34 damage per tick. but the total damage is 1,646.
Does this answer your question?
Here’s an explanation about it:
https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/gw2/Sinister-vs-Viper/first#post5695741
But that’s bad math.
If you have a 6s bleed for 120/s versus a 12s bleed for 100/s you get 480 more out of the second bleed… If you stop attacking for the full duration. If you apply one bleed every second at 120 versus 100 you simply do 20 more damage. It’s just that simple.
But that does explain the difference in how I think about it though.
No, you’re thinking about it a bit wonky. If you keep attacking, you’re stacking extra bleed stacks with the second build than the first, magnifying your damage. Let’s take your example further.
If you have an attack you can do once per second that applies:
- 1 stack of 6s bleed @ 120 dps
- 1 stack of 12s bleed @ 100 dps
Then over 12 seconds you have:
- 6 stacks of bleed on target @ 720 dps
- 12 stacks of bleed on target @ 1200 dps
The benefit of condition duration in that case should be obvious. The only time condition damage is better is if the fight ends in 6 seconds (some open world mobs).
But your DPS is actually just whatever you do in a second regardless of compilation. It’s 120 or 100. If you have a bleed that does 120 dps then it does 120 damage every second because it ticks once a second even if it only lasts 2 seconds. If you have a bleed that lasts for an hour but does 100 dps then it does 100 damage a second. I treat my conditions as separate instances rather than compiling them to prevent the illusion.
Just different ways of thinking about it. But I do understand where you are coming from.
But that’s bad math.
If you have a 6s bleed for 120/s versus a 12s bleed for 100/s you get 480 more out of the second bleed… If you stop attacking for the full duration. If you apply one bleed every second at 120 versus 100 you simply do 20 more damage. It’s just that simple.
But that does explain the difference in how I think about it though.
No, you’re thinking about it a bit wonky. If you keep attacking, you’re stacking extra bleed stacks with the second build than the first, magnifying your damage. Let’s take your example further.
If you have an attack you can do once per second that applies:
- 1 stack of 6s bleed @ 120 dps
- 1 stack of 12s bleed @ 100 dps
Then over 12 seconds you have:
- 6 stacks of bleed on target @ 720 dps
- 12 stacks of bleed on target @ 1200 dps
The benefit of condition duration in that case should be obvious. The only time condition damage is better is if the fight ends in 6 seconds (some open world mobs).
But your DPS is actually just whatever you do in a second regardless of compilation. It’s 120 or 100. If you have a bleed that does 120 dps then it does 120 damage every second because it ticks once a second even if it only lasts 2 seconds. If you have a bleed that lasts for an hour but does 100 dps then it does 100 damage a second. I treat my conditions as separate instances rather than compiling them to prevent the illusion.
Just different ways of thinking about it. But I do understand where you are coming from.
Then you are deluding yourself. If conditions didn’t stack intensity, you would be correct. But they do stack.
But that’s bad math.
If you have a 6s bleed for 120/s versus a 12s bleed for 100/s you get 480 more out of the second bleed… If you stop attacking for the full duration. If you apply one bleed every second at 120 versus 100 you simply do 20 more damage. It’s just that simple.
But that does explain the difference in how I think about it though.
No, you’re thinking about it a bit wonky. If you keep attacking, you’re stacking extra bleed stacks with the second build than the first, magnifying your damage. Let’s take your example further.
If you have an attack you can do once per second that applies:
- 1 stack of 6s bleed @ 120 dps
- 1 stack of 12s bleed @ 100 dps
Then over 12 seconds you have:
- 6 stacks of bleed on target @ 720 dps
- 12 stacks of bleed on target @ 1200 dps
The benefit of condition duration in that case should be obvious. The only time condition damage is better is if the fight ends in 6 seconds (some open world mobs).
But your DPS is actually just whatever you do in a second regardless of compilation. It’s 120 or 100. If you have a bleed that does 120 dps then it does 120 damage every second because it ticks once a second even if it only lasts 2 seconds. If you have a bleed that lasts for an hour but does 100 dps then it does 100 damage a second. I treat my conditions as separate instances rather than compiling them to prevent the illusion.
Just different ways of thinking about it. But I do understand where you are coming from.
So lets look at some individual seconds. Lets say with 0 condi duration bonus you can stack 1 stack of 10 second bleed every 2 seconds. this means after 2 seconds you have 2 stacks, at 4 you have 3, at 8 seconds you have 5, but at 10 seconds, the first wears off, but you apply another. Thus, you can permanently upkeep 5 stacks.
Now, lets say you have 100% duration. the same thing applies but you dont lose the first stack until second 20. this means you can upkeep 10 stacks in this scenario. So, in order for this scenario to be worse, you have to be giving up 50% of your condi damage to get the duration. Which you arent by taking vipers, and certainly not after accounting for upgrade components and food.
if we use the 120 vs 100 damage numbers this would mean at individual seconds over the long run you are looking at 600 vs 1000 damage bleed ticks based on the number of stacks.
Obviously this is only really valie for fights where duration isnt wastes on dead mobs.
(edited by That Guy.5704)
Here’s an explanation about it:
https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/gw2/Sinister-vs-Viper/first#post5695741
There is one problem with that math. It isn’t in balance. Algebraically you would need an LCD to compare the two, right, but I’ll use my 6s and 12s bleed as an example:
The full damage of the six second bleed is also written as: 720/6 = 120.
The full damage of the twelve second bleed is written as 1,200/12 =100.
When you compare the two you need like denominators.
If you raise the 720/6 by a factor of 2 you get 1,440/12 and if you divide the 1,200/12 by 2 you get 600/6. Now that you have like terms you can do whatever you’d like but it becomes relatively clear why that previous comparison doesn’t work. When you compare them without like terms you end up with an illusion as 1,200 is obviously higher than 720.
Another proof is just to find when they are equivalent over X time, generally the duration of the lowest unit, which is 1 second so 120/1 = 100x/1 where X is the difference, we do the math and come to the obvious conclusion of 20%, and you could do it backwards too where it’s 120x/1=100/1 to come out with the same result. By the way when you put them in like terms the answer is always consistently 1.2, whether it be 720/600 or 1,440/1,200 or 120/100. This is how you know the ratio is equivalent and the math is correct because there should only be one answer to this linear system.
you are comparing apples and oranges now. you re either missing successive applications or you are trying to effectively compare different skills.
we are talking about an individual application of the same skill under different stats. that application is going to have some kind of a cooldown.
When you double the numerator and denominator of 720/6 without doubling both of 1200/12, what you are saying is that 720/6 gets to cast 2x in 12 seconds while 1200/12 only gets to cast once.
Sure, if we have a 6 second cooldown here and we look at 12 seconds, 720/6 does in fact do 1440 damage over that time (120 * 12), but 1200/12 also has 6 seconds of a second stack because we are talking about a 6 second cooldown. In otherwords, 100*12 + 100*6 = 1800 total damage compared to 1440 over said 12 seconds with a further 600 damage waiting to be applied assuming your target isnt dead yet.
Alternatively, lets say its a 12 second cooldown. If the duration on the 120 is only 6 seconds but on a 12 second cooldown, then you actually only get 720 damage per 12 seconds: 720/12. whereas double duration at a 100 damage per stack still gives you 1200/12.
(edited by That Guy.5704)
you are comparing apples and oranges now. you re either missing successive applications or you are trying to effectively compare different skills.
we are talking about an individual application of the same skill under different stats. that application is going to have some kind of a cooldown.
When you double the numerator and denominator of 720/6 without doubling both of 1200/12, what you are saying is that 720/6 gets to cast 2x in 12 seconds while 1200/12 only gets to cast once.
Sure, if we have a 6 second cooldown here and we look at 12 seconds, 720/6 does in fact do 1440 damage over that time (120 * 12), but 1200/12 also has 6 seconds of a second stack because we are talking about a 6 second cooldown. In otherwords, 100*12 + 100*6 = 1800 total damage compared to 1440.
Alternatively, lets say its a 12 second cooldown. If the duration on the 120 is only 6 seconds but on a 12 second cooldown, then you actually only get 720 damage per 12 seconds: 720/12. whereas double duration at a 100 damage per stack still gives you 1200/12.
If the damage ticks at once per second the cooldown is 1s. That’s it. There is an equivalent number of ticks, regardless of duration, captured in an equivalent amount of time and this is where it gets interesting; if you have a 1:1 application of a bleed then the true ratio is simply ( Bleed A / Bleed B ) because when you take and expand time you’ll get different ticks.
To show this let’s say second 1, at second 1 you do 120 and 100, which is equivalent to 1 second, at second 2 you do 120 and 100 + second 1 at 120 and 100, for a total of two ticks, at second three you do second 3’s 120 + 100 and and second 2’s 120 and 100 and second 1’s 120 and 100. Simple enough.
But let me shake it up to make the proof clear, let’s say that Bleed A has a duration of 1 second @120 and Bleed B has a duration of 10 seconds @100.
Second 1: 120 | 100
Second 2: 120 | 100
Second 3: 120 | 100
Second 4: 120 | 100
Second 5: 120 | 100
Second 6: 120 | 100
Second 7: 120 | 100
Second 8: 120 | 100
Second 9: 120 | 100
Second 10: 120 | 100
The duration of the bleed has no effect. If it is applied every second the bleed of 1s will do 120 damage and if it is applied every second the bleed of 10s will still only do 100 dmg. But what you will see is very different; instead of Bleed A appearing as 1,200/10s you will see (120/1s) ten times and Bleed B will “appear to build” as such:
S1: 100
S2: 200
S3: 300
S4: 400
S5: 500
S6: 600
S7: 700
S8: 800
S9: 900
S10: 1,000
Clearly 1,000 is far greater than 120 so the 120 obviously looks inferior but again without taking things as like denominators we find that 120/1*10=1,200 and 1,200/1,000 = 1.2
Since 1.2 is the answer to the system that’s all that matters. Stacking bleeds gives an illusion of damage being dealt because it is additive but the duration of the actual tick is still 1s and so while it will tick for longer it does not actually tick more given any period of time. You can do this for 10s or 10,000 years and the answer will always be the same.
When you are dealing with one condition stack*only* yes.
Consider the following
Let’s go with a Guardian’s Virtue of Justice active. At base, it’s 1 stack of Burning for 4 seconds.
With full Condition Damage exotic gear (I’m ignoring traits and food, but using Rune of Afflicted to mimic condition damage rune set), it deals a total of 1,433 damage, or 358.25 damage per tick.
With full Viper’s Exotic gear (backpeice is still Rabid/Carrion with exotic jewel, it drops down to 298.34 damage per tick. but the total damage is 1,646.
How much time does it take to deliver that condition in both cases? Not how long it takes for the condition to run its course, I mean the amount of time it takes to apply it.
It’s the same, right (hint: if you say otherwise, you will become the laughingstock of the forums because you will be so horribly wrong)?
So, how much damage did you do per second of attacking? I mean actual casting of skills here.
So what you are saying is:
Person A applies a condition with 150 damage per tick for one second every second.
Person B applies a condition with 100 damage per tick for 20 seconds every second.
A will reach 150 dps, B will reach 100 dps?
Oh my goodness I just solved a major problem not related to this because of the way that it works. Oh, thank you, I can’t even… This is wonderful!
Alright, well, that’s it. Have a goodnight; I have some proofs to do and videos to record.
Well, time to begin.
Here’s an explanation about it:
https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/gw2/Sinister-vs-Viper/first#post5695741
There is one problem with that math. It isn’t in balance. Algebraically you would need an LCD to compare the two, right, but I’ll use my 6s and 12s bleed as an example:
The full damage of the six second bleed is also written as: 720/6 = 120.
The full damage of the twelve second bleed is written as 1,200/12 =100.When you compare the two you need like denominators.
Math is not numbers that can be pulled and pushed into a void at will. The numbers must have meaning. You must have units. I don’t know what these denominators are, what they stand for, where they come from, what units they represent, what the units of the operation they perform become, or why it is that the “full damage” that a skill does is being cut by more than an order of magnitude.
If you raise the 720/6 by a factor of 2 you get 1,440/12
No. A factor of “2” is 2/1, which would give you 1440/6. You multiplied it by 2/2, which is equal to 1.
Another proof is just to find when they are equivalent over X time, generally the duration of the lowest unit, which is 1 second so 120/1 = 100x/1 where X is the difference, we do the math and come to the obvious conclusion of 20%, and you could do it backwards too where it’s 120x/1=100/1 to come out with the same result. By the way when you put them in like terms the answer is always consistently 1.2, whether it be 720/600 or 1,440/1,200 or 120/100. This is how you know the ratio is equivalent and the math is correct because there should only be one answer to this linear system.
I’m not even sure where to begin here. Apparently, what you’ve done is taken the entire issue of duration out of the equation, pretend it doesn’t exist, then taken intensity stacking out of the equation and pretended that doesn’t exist, and are saying that because conditions tick once per second, the overall duration of a condition is irrelevant.
I guess I’m going to have to start from basics. For this demonstration, I will give you a few things:
#1: There is a player
#2: Who is attacking once per second
#3: That applies a bleed once per attack
#4: That lasts for 5 seconds, base duration.
So an auto attacking like scenario. Stripped bare and with its most basic premises.. There are few things to look at. First, consider this: if we were to do one attack, that attack would take 1 second, and would inflict bleeding for 5 seconds. Thus, the overall damage that the attack would do is equal to 5 ticks of bleed, and since it takes one second to execute that attack, that is roughly equal to 5 ticks of bleed per second. This may seem a bit odd, but consider this: while that bleed is ticking away, you are capable of performing other actions at the same time, which may add more bleeds or do more damage. This can be considered the “DPS per skill use”, and it is one way of comparing damage.
But there are other ways. Taking into consideration the fact that we can perform multiple actions while a bleed is ticking away, we can use this time to apply more bleeds, using the same “5 ticks of bleed per second”. Over the period of 10 seconds, we would see this happen:
1st second: 1 bleed
2nd second: 2 bleeds
3rd second: 3 bleeds
4th second: 4 bleeds
5th second: 5 bleeds
6th second: 5 bleeds
7th second: 5 bleeds
8th second: 5 bleeds
9th second: 5 bleeds
10th second: 5 bleeds
The crucial part being that, once we reach 5 seconds, the first bleed that we applied has expired, and thus the new bleeds replace the old one. While the overall damage inflicted doesn’t go away, the DPS of this setup is going to be equivalent to the damage that 5 bleeds will do. So, if your bleed ticks for 120, you will be doing 600 DPS, or 120 × 5. This is called many things, such as the stacking limit or the stacking threshold, and it is the average amount of conditions you sustain going through a rotation. You may notice that the DPS we got from the stacking limit is equal to the DPS we got from considering the “DPS per skill” method above. That is not coincidence. The time it takes to reach this peak is the “ramp up time” for conditions.
Now, lets add in a comparison. Lets say that, instead of lasting for 5 seconds, the bleed lasts for 8 seconds. Looking at a 10 second period, we’d get the following:
1st second: 1 bleed
2nd second: 2 bleeds
3rd second: 3 bleeds
4th second: 4 bleeds
5th second: 5 bleeds
6th second: 6 bleeds
7th second: 7 bleeds
8th second: 8 bleeds
9th second: 8 bleeds
10th second: 8 bleeds
See what happened here? The bleed lasts longer, so you get more concurrent stacks of bleeding at the same time. Assuming the bleeds do 100 damage instead of 120, this means that from 8 seconds onward, you will be doing 800 damage per second, which is more than the 600 damage per second that the previous setup capped at.
You can also consider this a DPS per skill use: one attack inflicts 8 ticks of bleeding per second, and even given the weaker bleed, this means that in the long run, you will do more damage and have higher sustained DPS than the 5 second long but stronger bleeds.
Lets take the bleeds in isolation. One 5-second long bleed, and one 8-second long bleed. Lets put their total cumulative damage side by side.
1st second: 100 | 120
2nd second: 200 | 240
3rd second: 300 | 360
4th second: 400 | 480
5th second: 500 | 600
6th second: 600 | 600
7th second: 700 | 600
8th second: 800 | 600
9th second: 800 | 600
The 5 second long bleed stops doing damage at 5 seconds, and the 8 second long bleed stops doing damage at 8 seconds. What happened here is that, at 6 seconds, their cumulative damage became equal, and at 7 seconds, the longer bleed did more cumulative damage. So, even though the 8 second long bleed does more damage in the long run, it has a longer ramp up time, which means that in the short run it does less damage.
I don’t have opinions. I only have facts I can’t adequately prove.
(edited by Blood Red Arachnid.2493)
just look at your skill tooltips; condition damage climbs much higher with duration than damage
y=1.176095x+0
Thanks again for getting me to think on this a little.
Depends on the length of the encounter.
Why?
Encounters that are roughly 1-30 seconds you want the higher immediate damage because the fight’s generally TOO SHORT to take advantage of the higher cumulative damage from longer duration conditions. For a more specific example, if I’m running top-tier condi damage for my class, and my burn ticks are 500/s, and yours is say…. 400/s with viper’s, if we have the same upkeep on conditions for a short encounter, around the 30 seconds or so I mentioned, I’m doing 20% more damage than you. Once we start exceeding the easy upkeep of my build because I might be lacking duration boosts, viper builds will slowly break even with the higher burst builds and then gain the upper hand. Mind you, that’s still only cumulative damage.
just look at your skill tooltips; condition damage climbs much higher with duration than damage
You realize that’s the CUMULATIVE damage right? Skills dont show the dps of the condition unless the condition inflicted happens to LAST a second. Otherwise it’s showing dps*s.
This may be off on a tangent and even a stupid question given that I’m still new to this and don’t understand condition builds entirely, but given the fantastic comparison done by Blood Red Arachnid, I was wondering if anyone had a similar comparison for burst vs condition damage? I mean, how long would a fight have to last before the cumulative damage from conditions outweighs the damage from a burst? Or does that question even make sense?
Well, are you talking about a direct damage burst, or a condition damage burst? Both are a real thing.
This may be off on a tangent and even a stupid question given that I’m still new to this and don’t understand condition builds entirely, but given the fantastic comparison done by Blood Red Arachnid, I was wondering if anyone had a similar comparison for burst vs condition damage? I mean, how long would a fight have to last before the cumulative damage from conditions outweighs the damage from a burst? Or does that question even make sense?
Honestly, it’s nearly impossible to say as there are tons of factors involved in that question. Builds of the attackers, sure, but also tons of variables on the defender as well.
This may be off on a tangent and even a stupid question given that I’m still new to this and don’t understand condition builds entirely, but given the fantastic comparison done by Blood Red Arachnid, I was wondering if anyone had a similar comparison for burst vs condition damage? I mean, how long would a fight have to last before the cumulative damage from conditions outweighs the damage from a burst? Or does that question even make sense?
Honestly, it’s nearly impossible to say as there are tons of factors involved in that question. Builds of the attackers, sure, but also tons of variables on the defender as well.
Generally speaking, encounter length plays a role here too.
you are comparing apples and oranges now. you re either missing successive applications or you are trying to effectively compare different skills.
we are talking about an individual application of the same skill under different stats. that application is going to have some kind of a cooldown.
When you double the numerator and denominator of 720/6 without doubling both of 1200/12, what you are saying is that 720/6 gets to cast 2x in 12 seconds while 1200/12 only gets to cast once.
Sure, if we have a 6 second cooldown here and we look at 12 seconds, 720/6 does in fact do 1440 damage over that time (120 * 12), but 1200/12 also has 6 seconds of a second stack because we are talking about a 6 second cooldown. In otherwords, 100*12 + 100*6 = 1800 total damage compared to 1440.
Alternatively, lets say its a 12 second cooldown. If the duration on the 120 is only 6 seconds but on a 12 second cooldown, then you actually only get 720 damage per 12 seconds: 720/12. whereas double duration at a 100 damage per stack still gives you 1200/12.
If the damage ticks at once per second the cooldown is 1s. That’s it. There is an equivalent number of ticks, regardless of duration, captured in an equivalent amount of time and this is where it gets interesting; if you have a 1:1 application of a bleed then the true ratio is simply ( Bleed A / Bleed B ) because when you take and expand time you’ll get different ticks.
To show this let’s say second 1, at second 1 you do 120 and 100, which is equivalent to 1 second, at second 2 you do 120 and 100 + second 1 at 120 and 100, for a total of two ticks, at second three you do second 3’s 120 + 100 and and second 2’s 120 and 100 and second 1’s 120 and 100. Simple enough.
But let me shake it up to make the proof clear, let’s say that Bleed A has a duration of 1 second @120 and Bleed B has a duration of 10 seconds @100.
Second 1: 120 | 100
Second 2: 120 | 100
Second 3: 120 | 100
Second 4: 120 | 100
Second 5: 120 | 100
Second 6: 120 | 100
Second 7: 120 | 100
Second 8: 120 | 100
Second 9: 120 | 100
Second 10: 120 | 100The duration of the bleed has no effect. If it is applied every second the bleed of 1s will do 120 damage and if it is applied every second the bleed of 10s will still only do 100 dmg. But what you will see is very different; instead of Bleed A appearing as 1,200/10s you will see (120/1s) ten times and Bleed B will “appear to build” as such:
S1: 100
S2: 200
S3: 300
S4: 400
S5: 500
S6: 600
S7: 700
S8: 800
S9: 900
S10: 1,000Clearly 1,000 is far greater than 120 so the 120 obviously looks inferior but again without taking things as like denominators we find that 120/1*10=1,200 and 1,200/1,000 = 1.2
Since 1.2 is the answer to the system that’s all that matters. Stacking bleeds gives an illusion of damage being dealt because it is additive but the duration of the actual tick is still 1s and so while it will tick for longer it does not actually tick more given any period of time. You can do this for 10s or 10,000 years and the answer will always be the same.
You are wrong and demonstrate a clear lack of understanding of what dps means. Stop posting, spend a day or 2 and think, and then delete all your wrong posts, it might confuse other people.
You are wrong and demonstrate a clear lack of understanding of what dps means. Stop posting, spend a day or 2 and think, and then delete all your wrong posts, it might confuse other people.
Without a clear explanation of how the OP is wrong or even of what DPS means in the context of condition duration, I have to assume this respondent simply wanted to rant and isn’t really interested in helping others understand.
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
just look at your skill tooltips; condition damage climbs much higher with duration than damage
You realize that’s the CUMULATIVE damage right? Skills dont show the dps of the condition unless the condition inflicted happens to LAST a second. Otherwise it’s showing dps*s.
total damage
You are wrong and demonstrate a clear lack of understanding of what dps means. Stop posting, spend a day or 2 and think, and then delete all your wrong posts, it might confuse other people.
Without a clear explanation of how the OP is wrong or even of what DPS means in the context of condition duration, I have to assume this respondent simply wanted to rant and isn’t really interested in helping others understand.
It’s not quite that. I mentioned this before, but it bears mentioning again: the train of thought the OP goes through is utterly baffling. It took me awhile to even figure out what mistakes were made, and I’m still not sure how it is that, knowing what the OP knows, he arrived at those mistakes in the first place. So if it is perplexing to me, captain explain-stuff-as-a-hobby with several years of professional experience as an educator, then to the average joe it must look like madness.
And to that madness, a case in which someone sees something is clearly wrong but cannot clearly see how someone has gotten it so wrong, what advice can they give? It wouldn’t be the first time I’ve heard someone say “just sit back and think on it for a bit”.
As the Sinister vs. Viper guy, I’ve seen many arguments on the subject.
A) The “stealing stacks” claim. Originates from the old condi system and a wiki with conflicting definitions in different places.
B) The “lower sum” claim. Originates from a minor mathematical error somewhere that results in a lower product of damage x time than it should.
C) The “thinner spread” claim. Originates from a history of other games wherein the “spreading” of a resources is dependent on a net value, and is not the product of independently growing stats like in GW2.
D) The “longer fights” claim. Originates from a PVP build tactic that emphasizes condi burst in a high cleanse environment, and forgets that in PVE and in low cleanse environments the longer duration actually makes things faster.
Until today, I have never seen the “intensity stacks are an illusion” claim, nor the “two different stat sets have to be equally divisible” claim. I think that the mistake is a variation of the “thinner spread” claim, wherein DGraves is implicitly asserting that the displayed damage isn’t the result of stacking conditions ticking simultaneously, but a mis-directing display of cumulative damage, and that all conditions actually tick apply damage sequentially in spite of ticking down concurrently. The “equally divisible” claim I think is a variation of the steal stacks claim hybridized with the thinner spread claim, borrowing from the old mechanic of sequentially damaging sequentially ticking conditions, and implies that so long as a condition is constantly refreshed it has the same DPS sustained throughout. Essentially it is a form of begging the question, wherein my explanation has to be wrong because it doesn’t agree with his.
I still don’t know how this hybridized conclusion was arrived at. At bare minimum, any player should readily see that if you apply a condition, it ticks the enemy’s health bar down at the same rate while displaying the same number, and if you apply a second condition it ticks down the enemies health bar faster at a higher displayed number. Or if you don’t use conditions, in PVP you should’ve felt the sting of a condi burst as it melts your HP in a few seconds. Even if you have old knowledge of duration stacking conditions, you should still be aware that intensity stacking conditions inflict damage concurrently as they tick down concurrently, and that the revised condi system didn’t exist just to further ruin how everything worked. Even if you don’t have the old knowledge of old conditions, you should be able to see by looking at your utility skills that skills with higher stacks of conditions have higher damage listed.
I don’t have opinions. I only have facts I can’t adequately prove.
(edited by Blood Red Arachnid.2493)
A good way to understand the importance of condition duration is to imagine your condition to be an instant damage skill which would remove (damage per second)*duration HP.
If your opponent has an infinite amount of HP (meaning, several order of magnitude more HP than your skill is going to remove), your bleeding stack which will remove 100HP per second during 12 seconds is similar to an instant skill that would deal 1200 damage. Your bleeding stack of 120 HP removed per second during 6 seconds is similar to an instant skill that would deal 720 damage.
You would say, since condition damage and duration are multiplicative while calculating the real damage, increasing one by 10% or the other by the same amount is the same. Which is false, because of the condition factor applied to the condition damage modifier (bleeding: 0.06, burning: 0.155, poison: 0.06, etc., see the wiki) plus the constant damage (bleeding: 22, burning: 131.5, poison: 33.5). A 10% increase in condition damage is lower than a 10% increase in actual damage. A 10% increase in condition duration, however, is a direct 10% increase in actual damage (if it allows another tick).
Back to your exemple : 1 bleeding stack, 6s, 100 damage per second for a total of 600 HP removed
If you up the condition duration by 100% to make it last 12s : 1200 HP remove, as stated above.
To remove the same amount of HP only by increasing the condition damage, you need to increase your condition damage by 128%.
Of course, this calcul is only worth “during” the fight, not taking in account the border cases. A building sacrificing condition duration for condition damage reaches its full damage potential faster, and has less damage loss when the boss dies with several condition stack still active. In other words : long fights, i.e. high level fractals and raids.
Note : as far as I have seen, only a couple of traits actually increase the final damage applied by a condition (such as Hidden Barb or Poison Master for the ranger). All other damage modifier increase the condition damage base stat.
===
Now, another exercise : if we keep our beloved exemple (1 bleeding stack, {6s ; 120dps} versus {12s; 100dps}, with another stack applied each second), how does fight duration influences the damage ?
Condition damage-based build
Timer — DPS — Total
1 — 120 — 120
2 — 240 — 360
3 — 360 — 720
4 — 480 — 1200
5 — 600 — 1800
6 — 720 — 2520
7 — 720 — 3240
8 — 720 — 3960
9 — 720 — 4680
10 — 720 — 5400
11 — 720 — 6120
12 — 720 — 6840
13 — 720 — 7560
14 — 720 — 8280
15 — 720 — 9000
16 — 720 — 9720
17 — 720 — 10440
18 — 720 — 11160
19 — 720 — 11880
Condition duration-based build
Timer — DPS — Total
1 — 100 — 100
2 — 200 — 300
3 — 300 — 600
4 — 400 — 1000
5 — 500 — 1500
6 — 600 — 2100
7 — 700 — 2800
8 — 800 — 3600
9 — 900 — 4500
10 — 1000 — 5500
11 — 1100 — 6600
12 — 1200 — 7800
13 — 1200 — 9000
14 — 1200 — 10200
15 — 1200 — 11400
16 — 1200 — 12600
17 — 1200 — 13800
18 — 1200 — 15000
19 — 1200 — 16200
As expected, and stated by people earlier, each build reaches its damage peak when the first stack ticks for its last time (for the lulz, try and say that aloud), which is respectively 6s and 12s.
When the damage build reaches its peak, the duration build is 320 total damage late, equivalent to slightly more than 3 of its ticks. It starts being more powerful at the 10s mark (4 ticks later).
On a side note, the damage per tick becomes better for the duration build at the 8s mark.
Conclusion : same as above, the longer the fight, the better condition duration is.
Taaun We – Vizunah Square (EUW/FR)
Let’s use a exemple with real numbers. Maybe that will make more sense.
Should you use 1000 condition damage or 1000 condition duration.
Let’s take a simple skill, Feel the Burn. It give you 4seconds of buring.
So the basic skill at zero condition damage will do 131.5 dmg/sec for 4 seconds so 526dmg total.
If you use 1000 condition damage. Then it will be 1000 × 0.155 + 131.5 = 286.5 dmg/sec for 4seconds so 1146 dmg total.
If you use 1000 expertise. Then it will be 131.5 dmg/sec. 1000 expertise / 15 = 66.66%.
4 seconds x 166.66% = 6.6 seconds. So 876dmg total.
So yes you are right. 1 condition damage is better than 1 expertise. It give better total dmg and give that damage sooner.
That said, that’s not the point. We don’t decide between condition damage and expertise. We decide between Viper and Sinister and we choose Viper over Sinister not because expertise is so much better, but because Viper have more stats points than Sinister.
Let’s use a whole ascended armor or Viper vs Sinister. Viper will give you 376 condition damage and 207 expertise. While sinister will give you 439 condition damage and zero expertise.
The same exemple here will give you in Viper 189.78 dmg/sec for kitten seconds = 863.87 total dmg.
While in sinister it will be 199.5 dmg/sec x 4seconds = 798.18 total dmg.
So yes Condition Damage is better than expertise, but Viper is better than Sinister.
Thaddeauz [xQCx]- QC GUILD
That said, that’s not the point. We don’t decide between condition damage and expertise. We decide between Viper and Sinister and we choose Viper over Sinister not because expertise is so much better, but because Viper have more stats points than Sinister.
its not that it simply gives more stats, its that the stats multiply off of each other to give more condi dps.
if there were a 3 stat combo that gave Condi/prec/expertise, i would most likely be using that over viper for condi builds even though it has less total stats, because the stats are distributed in a way that gives much higher condi dps. (but i would have to look at the numbers to see if the loss in effective power outweighs the gain in condi dps).
JQ: Rikkity
head here to discuss wvw without fear of infractions
head here to discuss wvw without fear of infractions
You are wrong and demonstrate a clear lack of understanding of what dps means. Stop posting, spend a day or 2 and think, and then delete all your wrong posts, it might confuse other people.
Without a clear explanation of how the OP is wrong or even of what DPS means in the context of condition duration, I have to assume this respondent simply wanted to rant and isn’t really interested in helping others understand.
He is simply describing dps between t0-t1. A metric only useful if the fight happens to last 1 second. If a fight did happen to only last 1 second, I’m pretty sure no one would care about how much damage you’re doing, congrats on killing that ambient creature! What matters is dps between t0-tn, where n is the amount of time it takes the target to die. Arbitrarily picking the first second and saying it proves his point is wrong and shows a clear lack of understanding of what matters (time to kill).
Or in other words, the OP should read the following:
https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Effect_stacking
And more specfically the section about intensity stacking.
A good way to understand the importance of condition duration is to imagine your condition to be an instant damage skill which would remove (damage per second)*duration HP.
If your opponent has an infinite amount of HP (meaning, several order of magnitude more HP than your skill is going to remove), your bleeding stack which will remove 100HP per second during 12 seconds is similar to an instant skill that would deal 1200 damage. Your bleeding stack of 120 HP removed per second during 6 seconds is similar to an instant skill that would deal 720 damage.
You would say, since condition damage and duration are multiplicative while calculating the real damage, increasing one by 10% or the other by the same amount is the same. Which is false, because of the condition factor applied to the condition damage modifier (bleeding: 0.06, burning: 0.155, poison: 0.06, etc., see the wiki) plus the constant damage (bleeding: 22, burning: 131.5, poison: 33.5). A 10% increase in condition damage is lower than a 10% increase in actual damage. A 10% increase in condition duration, however, is a direct 10% increase in actual damage (if it allows another tick).
Back to your exemple : 1 bleeding stack, 6s, 100 damage per second for a total of 600 HP removed
If you up the condition duration by 100% to make it last 12s : 1200 HP remove, as stated above.
To remove the same amount of HP only by increasing the condition damage, you need to increase your condition damage by 128%.Of course, this calcul is only worth “during” the fight, not taking in account the border cases. A building sacrificing condition duration for condition damage reaches its full damage potential faster, and has less damage loss when the boss dies with several condition stack still active. In other words : long fights, i.e. high level fractals and raids.
Note : as far as I have seen, only a couple of traits actually increase the final damage applied by a condition (such as Hidden Barb or Poison Master for the ranger). All other damage modifier increase the condition damage base stat.
===
Now, another exercise : if we keep our beloved exemple (1 bleeding stack, {6s ; 120dps} versus {12s; 100dps}, with another stack applied each second), how does fight duration influences the damage ?Condition damage-based build
Timer — DPS — Total
1 — 120 — 120
2 — 240 — 360
3 — 360 — 720
4 — 480 — 1200
5 — 600 — 1800
6 — 720 — 2520
7 — 720 — 3240
8 — 720 — 3960
9 — 720 — 4680
10 — 720 — 5400
11 — 720 — 6120
12 — 720 — 6840
13 — 720 — 7560
14 — 720 — 8280
15 — 720 — 9000
16 — 720 — 9720
17 — 720 — 10440
18 — 720 — 11160
19 — 720 — 11880Condition duration-based build
Timer — DPS — Total
1 — 100 — 100
2 — 200 — 300
3 — 300 — 600
4 — 400 — 1000
5 — 500 — 1500
6 — 600 — 2100
7 — 700 — 2800
8 — 800 — 3600
9 — 900 — 4500
10 — 1000 — 5500
11 — 1100 — 6600
12 — 1200 — 7800
13 — 1200 — 9000
14 — 1200 — 10200
15 — 1200 — 11400
16 — 1200 — 12600
17 — 1200 — 13800
18 — 1200 — 15000
19 — 1200 — 16200As expected, and stated by people earlier, each build reaches its damage peak when the first stack ticks for its last time (for the lulz, try and say that aloud), which is respectively 6s and 12s.
When the damage build reaches its peak, the duration build is 320 total damage late, equivalent to slightly more than 3 of its ticks. It starts being more powerful at the 10s mark (4 ticks later).
On a side note, the damage per tick becomes better for the duration build at the 8s mark.Conclusion : same as above, the longer the fight, the better condition duration is.
I won’t contradict the conclusion of the debate but just be careful with the examples given, in term of stats:
a bleeding stack of 6 s at 120 means 1633 condi damage, 0 expertise
the same bleeding stack of 12 s at 100 requires 1300 condi damage, so -333 but +1500 expertise, so it is not a simple exchange of 1 stat to the other.
On the other hand, food gives generally a 100/70 stat bonus but the veggie pizza gives 300/70. The same goes with build bonuses where +33% condi duration increase is a 495 bonus stat, compared to the classic +150 for other stats. Also it’s worth to note that Sinister → is not an exchange of condi damage to expertise but rather an slight decrease in one for a totally new one.
All in all I think that expertise is not the key factor here but rather its total availability and it’s scaling. If condi duration bonus were in the same order of magnitude than other stats, traits would only give 10% condi duration and pizza would not be 20 % but 6 %…. the story would be slightly different.