Talk:Poison

Healing "damage" discussion

No, I'm fairly certain that monsters can be healed to death - it's just the damage that is taken from healing is very, very small. I've seen Medics in particular weaken a poisoned Lichen Colony (it took fewer strikes to defeat it), and in one instance kill a fellow Medic in an arena. So healing to death is possible, but the chances of that happening is very, very, very, very rare. Saphykun 20:05, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

According to this YouTube video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hzZVVQZL59I it shows the damage ticks on monsters, indicating that they are taking damage. Unfortunately, you do not see how much damage they are taking, so we can assume that they are taking only a fraction of what they would be healed as damage (ie. Wings heal for 25HP, but it may deal 5HP in damage so it takes longer to heal to death). The best reason why Wings or Menders don't damage for 25HP+ per tick is because then poison would be overpowered, which is why it's very difficult to have an enemy heal itself (or another) to death. Undid Eek5's edit, and specified how much damage poison can deal when healed. Saphykun 17:04, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

First off, that isn't just a YouTube video, it is my youtube video. I specifically went to test poison because the wiki information seemed suspect and was misleading people into believing that poison actually worked. The damage ticks you're seeing are haze bomb explosions. Maybe I should've annotated the video but the beginning shows me killing wolvers to give an idea of how much HP enemies have and then I poison them. If you do some accounting work, the HP and damage numbers do not add up. (As in, there is no way they could have taken any damage from healing). I'm sorry but anecdotes are not proof. Did you count how much HP the lichen had? Did you compare the amount of strikes of that size lichen compared to the one that was "damaged" from healing? Did your anecdote occur before this update? Arenas are a terrible place for testing; mechaknights can deal damage to friendly targets with their charge attacks.

In either case, I've made a new video that is more clear. I added annotations specifically for you. It clearly shows that enemies take no damage from healing. In fact, not only are they NOT taking damage from healing but they are gaining health while poisoned. Please do not revert unless you can prove otherwise (and no, anecdotes and made up numbers like heals for 25 but damages for 5 is NOT proof). Thanks, Eek5 19:49, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Dude are you kidding me? Did you even watch the video? I got the mob down to TWO HP and it did NOT die. In fact it recovered over 18 HP while poisoned.. provide proof that they take damage or STOP reverting it back. Eek5 23:11, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Look at your new YouTube video at around 1:10 again - the Wolver enters the first "haze", and looking closely, there are no damage ticks from your toxic bomb. The blue ticks you see start appearing when the Wing starts healing the Wolver, and not because of the haze your bomb left. The testing occurred after March 11th's update, and if you read the last part about the poison, it says "If a monster is healed by another while poisoned, it will still take damage." As I have said before, healing a poisoned monster is not inversely related - that is, if Wings heal for 25HP, they won't damage for 25HP, they will simply deal less. 25HP -> 5HP was an example, not a fact, as stated before. As a final note, you've tested this in a relatively high depth - Depth 9, if I can make it out correctly - where Wings heal for about 12HP or less. Wings likely deal damage at a fraction of an HP in higher depths. This is why I said at the beginning of this page that the damage dealt by poison is very, very, very small, almost insignificant, but it was still something to note in the Wiki.

Unfortunately I do not have a hypercam or anything that would enable me to record proof. I will check over the video again and ask a dev about poison - if you are indeed correct, then good for you! Saphykun 23:23, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

While I appreciate both the spirited debate and the desire to figure out the specifics of things, it's not appropriate for two good wiki editors to use an article as revert war in an argument about information. Discuss here or in the GD thread and come to some sort of agreement without mashing revert/rollback butan ppl. Don't make me stop the car. --Equinox 00:51, 14 July 2011 (UTC)