Det, SS, Crit

[T0rin]

Well, I'm generalizing, of course. The true cause of the visually noticeable difference in DoT damage is unknown to me. From my understanding, I assume it boils down to to truncated damage, simply on the merit of not having anything better to believe.

I would not be surprised to hear that DTR affects all skills 'equally', in that it applies a % modifier increase to damage dealt, but in the case of DoTs, the increase is spread out over the course of the spell. If that is the case, then not only is truncating an issue between the 'wide' break points between +0 and +1 damage applied to each tick, but the benefit of DTR would be spread over a longer period of time, further adding to the issue of truncated damage.

I guess I have a hard time believing that truncated damage can 'carry over' to the next DoT tick, I think the damage calculations would just be more simple than that.

DTR damage adds being spread over the course of the whole DoT would also explain why it 'seems' that it takes a good deal of DTR in order to increase DoT ticks by +1 damage, as opposed to a 'normal' spell that deals everything upfront. Assuming that is potentially the case, it would be pretty significant evidence for DTR being an inferior damage booster for DoT spells. I of course have no actual proof that this is the case, but it would help line up the reality of how much DTR is necessary to increase DoT damage by +1.

[EasymodeX]

the benefit of DTR would be spread over a longer period of time, further adding to the issue of truncated damage.

This is false and completely irrelevant.

You're basically saying DoTs are bad because they deal damage over a long period of time.

I guess I have a hard time believing that truncated damage can 'carry over' to the next DoT tick, I think the damage calculations would just be more simple than that.

FF14 seems to have obnoxiously overcomplicated equations in certain ways. That aside, the concept of the DoT "remainders" carrying over is very minor and not a huge impact. It's the least of the 4 assumptions re: DoT tick truncation; there's no reason to get hung up on it.

DTR damage adds being spread over the course of the whole DoT would also explain why it 'seems' that it takes a good deal of DTR in order to increase DoT ticks by +1 damage,

The point is that this is no different than Int.

I could say that Int sucks for Summoners because it takes a lot of Int to "barely" add +1 or +2 damage to Summoner DoT ticks. Facepalm.

[T0rin]

I think you're mis-interpreting what I'm trying to say.

If you had enough DTR to increase damage by 10%, Ruin would go from 80 potency to 88 potency. You cast ruin, you get 80+8 potency all delivered at once.

But a DoT has a potency value that is delivered on each server 'tick'. So, let's take Bio for instance, which has 40 potency. Perhaps the DTR increase of 10% is delivered over the course of the spell, so 10% of 40 potency over 18 seconds worth of ticks. (6) So, 0.6666666667 potency added per tick, as opposed to 4 (10% of 40) added to each tick.

Might help explain why it seems to take a larger than 'normal' (the amount necessary to see a damage bump on non-DoT skill) amount of DTR to show an increase of +1 on a DoT, and would make the problem of truncating DoTs an even bigger issue.

The thing about truncating, is that it is almost impossible to tell the difference between potentially rolled over truncated damage, and the simple RNG aspect of damage.

[EasymodeX]

Might help explain why it seems to take a larger than 'normal' (the amount necessary to see a damage bump on non-DoT skill) amount of DTR to show an increase of +1 on a DoT,

This is completely expected.

and would make the problem of truncating DoTs an even bigger issue.

It's significantly less of an issue than you think it is even if it's true.

[T0rin]

Well, it seems significant that you could potentially need 30+ DTR to show an increase of +1 damage on a DoT, and any minor optimization of secondary stats would essentially result in no change to DoT damage. There are way too many unknowns to say for sure, but is the damage add from DTR is being spread over the full course of a DoT as opposed to applying fully on each tick, that alone makes DTR pretty weak on DoTs, and especially weak on longer DoTs.

[EasymodeX]

Well, it seems significant that you could potentially need 30+ DTR to show an increase of +1 damage on a DoT,

You need random(0..30) DTR to show the first +1 and then +"30"-ish for every +1 after that.

In addition, you have multiple DoTs with different potencies. Each would have a different cutoff for breaching truncation thresholds. As a result you would see incremental increases at smaller intervals of DTR. For example, every 5-15 DTR you'd see one of your DoTs increase in tick damage.

any minor optimization of secondary stats would essentially result in no change to DoT damage.

The stat weights you referenced lead to a major optimization of secondary stats away from DTR, on the order of ~60-120 depending on SMN itemization.

That's like 2-6 damage per DoT tick.

if the damage add from DTR is being spread over the full course of a DoT [...] that alone makes DTR pretty weak on DoTs, and especially weak on longer DoTs.

Not directly. Only from potential truncation of individual ticks.

Either way the statement is false: it's not "especially weak" on "longer" DoTs. It's possibly more difficult and less reliable to itemize for on DoTs with low potency per tick.

[Exstal]

Took me 67 INT to make Bio tick from 65 low end to 78 low end. 20 DTR seemed like nothing happened with Bio.