Combining similar toggles in primaries/secondaries.
By
Adeon Hawkwood,
Posted on: 2010-02-08 19:21 in Suggestions and Ideas
I'm don't think that I agree with the premise of your suggestion but i do see where you are coming from. In any case, I think the basic concept you're going for is mostly doable with the current power mechanics but I don't like it.
First off, let us consider how it would actually work. Consider the power Sniper Rifle, it has a special ability that provides bonus damage if the "Targeting Drone" toggle is active. This means that it is possible for a power to have different effects based on the presence of another toggle (or passive) power but probably not just if you happen to have a click power. In the case you suggest Penumbral Shield and Twilight Shield become passive powers that only provide their effect if Gravity Shield is active. Mechanically this is sound (with one caveat I'll discuss below) but the problem is that if the Warshade wants to skip Gravity Shield then Penumbral Shield and Twilight Shield become useless which is a clear violation of the cottage rule. I think a better option would be for the toggles to provide a small recovery bonus if other specific toggles are active. This solves the core problem of endurance management without violation of the cottage rule.
My primary concern with this mechanically is server power. Sniper rifle is a click power and so the sever is only being asked to check if targeting drone is active rarely. Most toggles on the other hand 'tick' every two seconds (plus or minus a bit depending on the toggle) so this is increasing the server load. I don't know if it would be a problem, that's a question for the devs but it is something to keep in mind.
Finally I'll note that I would be opposed to changing the power pools. They shouldn't be designed to work better or worse with any specific sets beyond the enhancement or diversification they already provide. Limit the changes to within powersets and the occasional case of different powersets for the same AT.
The biggest problem I can see from this standpoint is that, by turning all but one of the shields of a set into a passive power that simply flags the base power to contribute additional types of resistance, you're freeing up a lot of slots and making it so that some powers have nothing to enhance, not to mention that you're functionally requiring some sets actually have a specific power taken (i.e. the base toggle) because it's not possible to have powers dynamically change between toggles and passives based upon previous power selections without some serious codescrewery (i.e. using the functionality present in the VEATs that allows for either BU or FU and manipulate it so that each toggle has a passive variant that is only available if you've taken the toggle variant of another power pair which then locks out all other toggle options from the given powerset pair).
Quote:
Yeah, as I noted above you'd pretty much have to do it the other way around, the actual buff is on the passive and it keys off the toggle being active.
|
Originally Posted by Umbral
The biggest problem I can see from this standpoint is that, by turning all but one of the shields of a set into a passive power that simply flags the base power to contribute additional types of resistance, you're freeing up a lot of slots and making it so that some powers have nothing to enhance
|
The prime concern I have is, what happens if you only want to run 1 of your many toggles? On my Kat/SR, he often turns off the AoE or Melee defense toggle because he constantly runs Ninja Run (I'm respec'ing him to get more +recovery from IO bonuses and reset all his sets so he's running mostly on common IOs). He's got weave and tough too but really, he usually only needs 1 or 2 of those toggles to defeat his enemies.
In my situation, I see no way around your suggestion except making every toggle so cheap it's not an issue to run. That just cannot be done. It's not balanced. Toggles are balanced *because* they cost endurance. Making them cheap like Combat Jumping or some such would require so much rebalancing, you're better off just learning to manage your endurance like everybody else.
However, looking at it from a 'New Game' perspective, it does make sense. Why would my invulnerable guy need to 'turn on' his invulnerability to fire/cold if he already was invulnerable to smashing/lethal? Should he not simply turn on 'invulnerability' and that accounts for anything within the scope of the set? I believe so. The upgrades make sense and if the game was originally designed in such a way, it probably would turn out a bit more manageable than being forced to turn on a list of toggles if things get turned off.
As for the upgrading click powers, that's covered by IOs, is it not? The more heals you have the more heal IOs you can slot and the more +% heal bonuses you can muster. It's the same deal with my Spines/DA stalker who happens to have the presence pool who slots Fear IOs.
Quote:
Sort of, but not quite. Every toggle would still be a toggle if no other similar toggle was active, but if a similar toggle was active, then the other toggle or toggles would fall back to "upgrade" mode, providing their benefits for little or no endurance cost.|
Originally Posted by Adeon Hawkwood
I'm don't think that I agree with the premise of your suggestion but i do see where you are coming from. In any case, I think the basic concept you're going for is mostly doable with the current power mechanics but I don't like it.
First off, let us consider how it would actually work. Consider the power Sniper Rifle, it has a special ability that provides bonus damage if the "Targeting Drone" toggle is active. This means that it is possible for a power to have different effects based on the presence of another toggle (or passive) power but probably not just if you happen to have a click power. In the case you suggest Penumbral Shield and Twilight Shield become passive powers that only provide their effect if Gravity Shield is active. |
For that warshade, any of the three shields could be activated, and the other two would recognize that active state and reduce their endurance costs. If the warshade turned on Penumbral Shield, for instance, then decided to add Gravity Shield, Gravity Shield would grant its Lethal and Smashing resistance with only a small or no increase to the character's endurance drain. Functionally, the powers would still work like toggles in this manner, but conceptually, they'd work more like "upgrades" and reflect that with lower or no endurance costs, as long as one of the other toggles was active.
Quote:
| My primary concern with this mechanically is server power. Sniper rifle is a click power and so the sever is only being asked to check if targeting drone is active rarely. Most toggles on the other hand 'tick' every two seconds (plus or minus a bit depending on the toggle) so this is increasing the server load. I don't know if it would be a problem, that's a question for the devs but it is something to keep in mind. |
If the developers decided that the best way to implement something like this was to make passive powers which dynamically "swapped in" to replace toggles on the fly, then they'd actually reduce the load on the server because passives have 10s activate periods, twenty times less work for the server than toggles.
Quote:
| Finally I'll note that I would be opposed to changing the power pools. They shouldn't be designed to work better or worse with any specific sets beyond the enhancement or diversification they already provide. Limit the changes to within powersets and the occasional case of different powersets for the same AT. |
Quote:
Well, potentially, but only if the player wants to risk not having those other powers slotted properly in an emergency. They'd still be toggles, essentially, just with a much smaller or nonexistent endurance cost if a similar toggle was up and running.|
Originally Posted by Umbral
The biggest problem I can see from this standpoint is that, by turning all but one of the shields of a set into a passive power that simply flags the base power to contribute additional types of resistance, you're freeing up a lot of slots
|
Example: That warshade takes all three of its shields and has Twilight Shield acting as the active toggle (simple to determine, just the first one activated). Gravity and Penumbral Shields then contribute their resistance buffs at a reduced or removed endurance cost. If Twilight Shield drops, say, due to lack of endurance or being deliberately turned off, then one of the other two shields "ramps up" to full toggle state, including its appropriate toggle state endurance cost. Now, if the player hasn't slotted those other shields for Endurance Reduction, then he/she is paying for it.
So yes, the player could recover some slots, but only by taking the chance of paying a higher endurance cost in the event that the more heavily slotted toggle dropped.
Quote:
| and making it so that some powers have nothing to enhance, |
Quote:
| not to mention that you're functionally requiring some sets actually have a specific power taken (i.e. the base toggle) |
Quote:
| because it's not possible to have powers dynamically change between toggles and passives based upon previous power selections without some serious codescrewery (i.e. using the functionality present in the VEATs that allows for either BU or FU and manipulate it so that each toggle has a passive variant that is only available if you've taken the toggle variant of another power pair which then locks out all other toggle options from the given powerset pair). |
Quote:
The thing is I'm not sure that this is doable with the current power mechanics hence why I suggested providing a recovery boost if multiple toggles are active. It works out roughly the same balance-wise (although obviously it isn't identical) and would fit in better with the current power mechanics.|
Originally Posted by Luminara
Sort of, but not quite. Every toggle would still be a toggle if no other similar toggle was active, but if a similar toggle was active, then the other toggle or toggles would fall back to "upgrade" mode, providing their benefits for little or no endurance cost.
|
EDIT: Actually it might be possible to do the "reduced cost" as a positive endurance boost. The problem with both this and a recovery is dealing with endurance reduction (both the power slotting and abilities like conserve power) since there is no way to stop that from keying off of the baseline endurance.
Quote:
Then you run that toggle. Every other toggle would still be a toggle, it would just have a reduced or removed endurance cost if activated while a similar toggle was running.|
Originally Posted by Leo_G
The prime concern I have is, what happens if you only want to run 1 of your many toggles?
|
Quote:
|
On my Kat/SR, he often turns off the AoE or Melee defense toggle because he constantly runs Ninja Run (I'm respec'ing him to get more +recovery from IO bonuses and reset all his sets so he's running mostly on common IOs). He's got weave and tough too but really, he usually only needs 1 or 2 of those toggles to defeat his enemies. In my situation, I see no way around your suggestion except making every toggle so cheap it's not an issue to run. |
Quote:
| That just cannot be done. It's not balanced. Toggles are balanced *because* they cost endurance. Making them cheap like Combat Jumping or some such would require so much rebalancing, you're better off just learning to manage your endurance like everybody else. |
Consider that a philosophical question, if you would, so I don't have to spend a couple of weeks debating it. I'm up to season 5 of my annual review of DS9 and really want to finish it before February ends. >.<
Quote:
| As for the upgrading click powers, that's covered by IOs, is it not? The more heals you have the more heal IOs you can slot and the more +% heal bonuses you can muster. It's the same deal with my Spines/DA stalker who happens to have the presence pool who slots Fear IOs. |
Quote:
Except that there is no way to alter the endurance cost (or any of the other many base attributes that aren't effects of) of a specific power on the fly. The only workaround that use the existing power structure would be to either have the power provide global end redux or to provide an endurance refund.|
Originally Posted by Luminara
No, absolutely not. At least, not unless the developers decide to do it that way. The way I see it working, any toggle could be used as the "main" toggle, it just has to be the first one turned on. The other toggles would then check the state of that toggle and alter their endurance costs accordingly.
|
Global end redux wouldn't work because it would affect other powers such as your attacks and the endurance refund wouldn't work because the value would either be too low to have it accomplish what you're asking for or so large that you could actually generate endurance by having the power be on (ex. toggle costs .26 end/sec and ticks every 2 secs; if the base toggle is on, the toggle refunds .13 endurance every tick, with 100% end redux the toggle is free, with 200% end redux, the toggle generates .043 end/sec).
You're also ignoring that powers wouldn't be able to reliably set the "base" power (which would be accomplished via setting modes) with toggles if each toggle is attempting to set its personal mode every time it ticks. You'd need to give each power a set of statements that applies the effects of being a secondary power if any of the modes of powers within the toggle set are active and then have a series of checks to have the power apply the base functionality if none of the other modes are set.
And that's assuming you're abandoning your initial suggestion that the toggles be dynamically altered to become passive powers if the initial toggle is active (which, like I said, isn't possible within the confines of the current power structure as the devs have told us even though you insist upon ignoring that).
Powers don't work the way you currently think they do. You don't get to have powers that dynamically shift between being toggle/passive/click modes. Those attributes are set as soon as the power is defined because that determines how the power is treated. You don't get to have powers that simply shunt off their own values to another power while maintaining their own enhancement values like you keep saying. Simply saying "the devs could code it" doesn't solve the problem either because you're talking about fundamentally altering the engine itself which is a huge endeavor.
The only ways with the existing known architecture for something like this to occur would be the ways that have been brought up. You don't get to magically hand wave the problems away or magically decide that it doesn't work one way because of this problem, but otherwise it works this way because of this problem. I'm still not sure if you even know exactly what you're saying yourself since you've explicitly stated in your first post that the toggles become auto powers (which, like I've said is impossible to do dynamically) yet you've said that they are still toggles somehow.
Quote:
It works the same, mechanically, either way. You're suggesting "If X + Y = True, then +Recovery" (simplified). I'm suggesting "If X + Y = True, then -Endurance Cost Y" (simplified). It's still checking to see if two or more toggles of a similar nature are active, then doing something else. Yours would note that two or more similar toggles were running, then "cast" a power which increased Recovery on the character. Mine would note that two or more similar toggles were running and substitute a reduced cost version of the additional toggles (or "cast" a restricted form of Conserve Power on each individual toggle). In both cases, the same checks are made, then a power is "cast" for each check that comes back as True.|
Originally Posted by Adeon Hawkwood
The thing is I'm not sure that this is doable with the current power mechanics hence why I suggested providing a recovery boost if multiple toggles are active. It works out roughly the same balance-wise (although obviously it isn't identical) and would fit in better with the current power mechanics.
|
But a reduced endurance cost will benefit the player immediately, whereas a Recovery bonus may not benefit him/her until seconds later.
Quote:
Except that you can't dynamically apply endurance reduction to an individual power. You have to apply it globally. This restricted form of Conserve Power you're depending on for this entire concept to be functional doesn't exist because there isn't a power specific end redux that is available to be cast on an individual power basis (because individual powers aren't entities that can be targeted; you have to target the character as a whole and alter those values globally).
|
Originally Posted by Luminara
Mine would note that two or more similar toggles were running and substitute a reduced cost version of the additional toggles (or "cast" a restricted form of Conserve Power on each individual toggle).
|
Quote:
I wouldn't be in a position to really debate balance anyway. But rather than shuffling through all this 'passive' and 'upgrade' business, why not just ask for a 'conjoined activation' option? You turn one toggle on and it just turns them all on without requiring all the animation time/clicking. Don't want them all on? Turning off clicks can be done without affecting other power activations.
|
Are they balanced? I mean, if they're enough of a problem that we see endurance management threads as regularly as we do, are they really balanced? Dark Armor used to have mutually exclusive shields, and that was considered balanced at the time, despite a general lack of enthusiasm among the player base due to exactly that mechanic. Are toggle-heavy powersets really balanced, then, if they... encourage the same "turn this toggle on and that toggle off for this fight" behavior that used to be true of DA? Consider that a philosophical question, if you would, so I don't have to spend a couple of weeks debating it. I'm up to season 5 of my annual review of DS9 and really want to finish it before February ends. >.< |
Quote:
As Umbral said you can't dynamically reduce the endurance cost of a single power (look at electrical attacks). You can do either a recovery bonus or a static regen amount but you can't do an end cost reduction on a single power. Also this would actually be a function of the power itself not a separate power that needs to be cast. I'd prefer the recovery bonus myself. Given the pulse rate of most toggles you'd be adding a very small amount of End frequently. A recovery bonus adds larger chunks less frequently. Although a direct payback would probably work better balance-wise since it's the same bonus regardless of your total endurance. In either case you're paying the full cost of the toggle and getting some back at a later point though.
|
Originally Posted by Luminara
It works the same, mechanically, either way. You're suggesting "If X + Y = True, then +Recovery" (simplified). I'm suggesting "If X + Y = True, then -Endurance Cost Y" (simplified). It's still checking to see if two or more toggles of a similar nature are active, then doing something else. Yours would note that two or more similar toggles were running, then "cast" a power which increased Recovery on the character. Mine would note that two or more similar toggles were running and substitute a reduced cost version of the additional toggles (or "cast" a restricted form of Conserve Power on each individual toggle). In both cases, the same checks are made, then a power is "cast" for each check that comes back as True.
But a reduced endurance cost will benefit the player immediately, whereas a Recovery bonus may not benefit him/her until seconds later. |
Quote:
Except that you're still ignoring how it would interact with end redux in the toggle itself. You can't just handwave the fact that if you make the +end effect large enough to be noticeable that with end redux you can make it so that the power generates endurance for you while it's on. It's a catch 22, which is why I brought up the more technical workaround that was handwaved away as being too complicated because that would be the only way it would work in a balanced system.
|
Originally Posted by Adeon Hawkwood
Although a direct payback would probably work better balance-wise since it's the same bonus regardless of your total endurance. In either case you're paying the full cost of the toggle and getting some back at a later point though.
|
Quote:
How specific sets are balanced is not relevant to whether such a balance should exist. You believe that the balance point should be at the cost of one toggle without ever having to really worry about the cost of that toggle and never having to worry about toggle juggling. On a purely "want" level, I agree with that, but this is not balanced. For one, sets with fewer toggles would suffer from this. For another, endurance management is an integral part of the game, and toggle cost vs. recovery rate is a central balancing mechanic limiting how many toggles you can have. Under your system, a character could easily run Rock Armour, Brimstone Armour, Crystal Armour, Minerals, Rooted, Mud Pots, Tough, Weave, Assault, Manoeuvres and Tactics all without too much of a worry and, crucially, without the need for Stamina or other pool powers, freeing up enough slots to run all that crap AND grab enough offensive powers to be a decent Brute.|
Originally Posted by Luminara
Are they balanced? I mean, if they're enough of a problem that we see endurance management threads as regularly as we do, are they really balanced? Dark Armor used to have mutually exclusive shields, and that was considered balanced at the time, despite a general lack of enthusiasm among the player base due to exactly that mechanic. Are toggle-heavy powersets really balanced, then, if they... encourage the same "turn this toggle on and that toggle off for this fight" behavior that used to be true of DA?
Consider that a philosophical question, if you would, so I don't have to spend a couple of weeks debating it. I'm up to season 5 of my annual review of DS9 and really want to finish it before February ends. >.< |
I will freely admit that certain powersets need to have their endurance costs reviewed. Dark Armour and Stone Melee are the ones I'd single out specifically. Invulnerability is NOT a power I would point to, however. Stone Armour has at least five toggles that you're going to need all of in a lot of cases (say, fighting Arachnos) and Dark Armour has three defence shields, another shield to combat immobilize, a damage aura and two utility toggles, one of which has a crippling cost. There really isn't that much reshuffling you can do, other than "get Stamina," and even that doesn't always help. But Invulnerability? You have Temporary Invulnerability and Unyielding with a regular cost, and Invincibility which is actually cheaper. Outside of Regeneration, what defence set has a toggle cost that's lower than this? Serious question here.
As well, your suggestion has technical problem with it, as well. For one, we know for a fact that power stats cannot be altered by conditionals. The only things that can alter power stats is buffs and enhancements. Enhancement cannot be given from one power to another (or to itself) and buffs affect all powers. As such, you can't alter the cost of a toggle. You can't get away with a recovery buff, either, as that throws off the base for recovery buffs on top of that. You could probably give the power a flat endurance return per cycle, but that would be a pretty serious hack in the powers system that I, personally, would be uncomfortable writing in.
The only real way I see this working is if we gave everyone a single "Just Toggle" and had that inherit the the effects of all proper toggles taken as they are taken. As such, you would only ever have one toggle with a flat cost, and any other toggles would just add effects to it. To be honest, that's a much cleaner way to handle it, rather than having multiple toggles that basically do different parts of the same thing littering your tray, and in a brand new game, I'd have preferred this approach. But as it stands, it removes a serious balancing mechanic from the game, penalising sets with fewer or no toggles in the process. Toggles give a constant effect that requires no player action to maintain and persists while the player is animating other actions. As such, it requires a cost to balance it. It's unreasonable to expect to get more of a benefit from it without paying a higher cost, because that begs the question - why NOT grab all of the toggles you can carry if they won't cost much more?
I know it's a meaningful build choice for me. On my Dark Armour, I skipped Cloak of Fear because its cost was too high to sustain and its effect was not good enough to be worth it, but I kept Oppressive Gloom because it cost a resource I could replenish more easily (hit points, to be precise). On my Stone Armour, I found myself wanting to run all toggles at the same time, so I picked Stamina against my will. On my Energy Aura, I picked Tough because Conserve Energy and Energy Drain allowed me to afford the additional cost. On my Invulnerability Brute, I did not take Tough, because I couldn't afford it and I had to look for other options. It is how it is. That's part of the game. Removing it outright will require other balancing to be done, and that will manifest in power magnitude cuts, which I don't want to see.
Tell you what - wait until we see what the new systems entail and maybe one of them will help with endurance costs.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Arcanaville
Samuel_Tow is the only poster that makes me want to punch him in the head more often when I'm agreeing with him than when I'm disagreeing with him.
|
This isn't something that would work in terms of replacing any existing systems, but it is an interesting idea for a specific set's gimmick. IIRC, Shield Defense in beta flirted with an interdependence between the first two toggles (or at least said so in the descriptions), and this passive add-on idea could've fit for the set. "Deflective Coating" would add elemental defense to your main shield toggle and so forth. That would've been really cool, actually.
Never surrender! Never give up!
Help keep Paragon City alive with the unofficial City of Heroes Tabletop Role Playing Game!
Quote:
You know... whatever point you were hoping to make was lost when you deliberately ignored the first half the sentence you quoted from me, wherein I proposed using an existing, fully viable mechanic, then accused me of "depending on" the Conserve Power option.|
Originally Posted by Umbral
Quote:
|
That's fine. You're not interested in discussing the suggestion, the merits of the suggestion or even offering constructive criticism. No problem, I'll drop it here and discuss it with Castle later. *shrug*
Quote:
Except that I didn't. I had already debunked that idea twice earlier on in the thread, with special emphasis in the thread right before the one that I quoted.|
Originally Posted by Luminara
You know... whatever point you were hoping to make was lost when you deliberately ignored the first half the sentence you quoted from me
|
You don't get to use the martyr card whenever it's apparent that you haven't even been reading half of what I've been saying.
tl;dr - make some toggles (and possibly clicks) act like passive/auto powers if other toggles (or clicks) are present.
The very first character I played to 50 was an Inv/SS tank. I enjoyed the character, but at the same time, I found the necessity of toggle management and constant monitoring of my endurance bar to be so tedious and frustrating that I've never played another toggle-heavy character. It's an experience that many other players have shared.
Of course, we can't expect the developers to completely revamp powersets like Invulnerability, removing and replacing powers on a whim, so more often than not, we ask them to review the endurance costs of different powers and clamor for "more options" for endurance management... or we avoid those powersets entirely, as in my own case.
It occurred to me, just a few minutes ago, that there is a way to solve these problems without removing or replacing any powers, but instead by changing the way some of them function. Instead of having multiple toggles, each dedicated to a separate aspect of the same basic function, we have one toggle and upgrades which improve that one toggle.
"Are you crazy, Lumi?"
Yes, but I'm having one of my more lucid moments right now.
"Okay... then you have some kind of point, or, you know, suggestion to make?"
As a matter of fact, I do. I think. I might have a banana instead...
Let's take a warshade's secondary powerset, Umbral Aura. Three separate toggles dedicated to resistance, each with a base endurance cost of 0.26/s. Even after slotting them and your attacks for Endurance Reduction, the endurance drain is still less than appealing.
What if, instead of having three separate resistance toggles, there were one resistance toggle and two powers which added different types of resistance to that one? Gravity Shield remains the same, a base 22.5% resistance to Lethal and Smashing damage, but Penumbral Shield becomes an auto power which modifies Gravity Shield to add Fire, Cold and Toxic resistance, and Twilight Shield is similarly changed to an auto power which adds Energy and Negative Energy resistance to Gravity Shield.
This could be done for all of the powersets with multiple toggles of similar nature within a powerset. Obviously, it would require some work on the part of the developers, but it would allow them to make some changes which would please a significant number of players.
Actually, it could even be extended to all toggles which affect the same thing, allowing them to function as auto powers when a similar or identical toggle is active. The highest cost toggle would be the one considered active, and perhaps a small additional endurance cost could be added for each "upgrade" as a balance measure. That same warshade could add Tough to his/her build for a small increase in Gravity Shield's endurance cost.
If it were determined that this would lead to too much imbalance, the "upgrade" option could be restricted to only powers within the same powerset or pool. In this scenario, I'd expand the limitation slightly to include toggles within a pool, even if they didn't affect the same attribute. The Leadership pool, for instance, tends to be relatively overlooked by many players, in part due to the relatively high endurance costs for the toggles. Having the ability to run two or three of the toggles for little more than what a single toggle would cost may convince more players to dip into this pool.
Now that I think about it, this "upgrade" mechanic could be extended to some click powers as well. A character with Taunt, for example, who also picked up Provoke could gain an increase in Taunt's radius, magnitude or duration. A character with a single-target healing power could take Aid Other and gain a bonus to +Heal for their original healing power.