Alt Power Selections (A work around the Rule?)
By
Adeon Hawkwood,
Posted on: 2010-04-04 20:53 in Suggestions and Ideas
Soldiers and Widows already do similar things, so... I'm for it.
NPCs: A Single Method to Greatly Expand Bases
Wait... isn't cottage rule already broken to tiny little pieces?? Energize anyone??
Edit: ...Unyielding (Stance), too...
Quote:
Yes, but there are a few holes in that:|
Originally Posted by xhris
Wait... isn't cottage rule already broken to tiny little pieces?? Energize anyone??
Edit: ...Unyielding (Stance), too... |
Unyielding used to prevent you from moving and was made back in Jack Emmert's day, if I recall, Cottage Rule was implemented after he left.
In the case of Energize, it really was, arguably, for the better. Conserve power was something tanks and scrappers could already get in APPs, and Devs are known to loathe doubling a power for PCs. Further More, Conserve power could only be slotted for Recharge reduction and no IO sets and there was no hope of ever perma-ing it.
Energize allows you to slot IO sets for it and has a faster recharge, and heals, even if the end Discount is depressingly lower and the duration shorter.
Another case of the Cottage Rule technically being broken post Jack-Era would be removing Recharge intensive pet IO set slotting from Storm Summoning's Lightning Storm. But that's more of an enhancement issue that isn't exactly counted.
Otherwise the Devs have a fairly spotless record on keeping the Cottage Rule.
Click here to find all the All Things Art Threads!
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Samuel_Tow
City of Heroes is a game about freedom of expression and variety of experiences far more so than it is about representing any one theme, topic or genre.
|
Quote:
How is Energize "breaking the cottage rule?" The basic purpose of the power was not changed. Other abilities were added *to* it. It was originally conserve power. now it's conserve power with a heal. |
Originally Posted by xhris
Wait... isn't cottage rule already broken to tiny little pieces?? Energize anyone??
Edit: ...Unyielding (Stance), too... |
Unyielding only had -def removed from it. The basic purpose of the power, again, was unchanged.
The cottage rule is basically that a power won't be completely replaced with something else. The only - *only* - time this has been broken was back in Issue 1 (or was it 0...) when Fold Space was removed. They nearly broke it when the PPPs were revamped - replacing powers with others - and the reaction they got made them realize how *bad* of an idea outright replacement is. Thus, PPPs and APPs have five powers in them now.
Quote:
| Unyielding used to prevent you from moving |
Quote:
The problems I can see are the standard code rant (although all of the technology would seem to be present in the VEATs, specifically the fact that Crabs can only take one copy of Venom Grenade despite havign access to two), the fact that it will (generally) require new animation resources and the fact that it will generate arguments between people over which powersets should get the treatment (since it is effectively a buff to the powerset in question).|
Originally Posted by AzureSkyCiel
But anyway though, that's the gist of it, so what do you guys think?
|
That being said, I'm not really sure how many powers would actually benefit from it. While there are a number of powers that I think could use a solid overhaul (Time Bomb springs to mind) I'd rather see them fixed within the bounds of the cottage rule rather than just (effectively) replacing them outright. In some cases though fixing them would require a somewhat liberal interpretation of the cottage rule to allow for changing the mechanics of HOW a power works without changing the actual purpose of a POWER and in that case I can see an argument for retaining the legacy power for those who liked the old mechanics.
A good example of this would be Time Bomb. Personally I'd like to see it replaced with Satchel Charge, a power that keeps the basic concept (a large explosion) but gets rid of the problematic portions of the powers (specifically the 8 second cast time and the 15 second delay) and has a more suitable animation (specifically throwing a satchel charge a short distance). Now personally I think that would be a much more useful power and it is still within the cottage rule (given a somewhat liberal interpretation of the cottage rule). However there are some people who like and use Time Bomb the way it is and for them this change would eliminate their current tactics. So keeping the legacy version around would make sense.
That being said I doubt we'll see it happen. As soon as the devs start doing this for the sets that really need it they will get inundated with requests to do it for all sets. Everyone has powers that they hate and even if the set itself doesn't really need the change they will feel as if it does.
Quote:
Sure, I'll go for it.
|
Originally Posted by CapnGeist
Soldiers and Widows already do similar things, so... I'm for it.
|
Quote:
Well, part of the bare original idea is that it would first go to the melee weapon sets like katana, broadsword, claws, etc. etc. and effectively use the same animations in the alternate selections, but with elemental effects replacing existing ones (Defense debuff becomes electricity's end drain), it would get tricky on things like Claws and Dual Blades which don't exactly have those things. And the main hope being that the new powers could get away with existing animations with some weapons customization filling some of the gaps. (Like finally having fiery sword choices, or laser swords)|
Originally Posted by Adeon Hawkwood
The problems I can see are the standard code rant (although all of the technology would seem to be present in the VEATs, specifically the fact that Crabs can only take one copy of Venom Grenade despite havign access to two), the fact that it will (generally) require new animation resources and the fact that it will generate arguments between people over which powersets should get the treatment (since it is effectively a buff to the powerset in question).
That being said, I'm not really sure how many powers would actually benefit from it. While there are a number of powers that I think could use a solid overhaul (Time Bomb springs to mind) I'd rather see them fixed within the bounds of the cottage rule rather than just (effectively) replacing them outright. In some cases though fixing them would require a somewhat liberal interpretation of the cottage rule to allow for changing the mechanics of HOW a power works without changing the actual purpose of a POWER and in that case I can see an argument for retaining the legacy power for those who liked the old mechanics. |
But all in all, you have opened my eyes to the big thing of all power sets deserving alternate power options, thus we also run into the creativity wall and the risk of intersecting repeated/redundant powers.
But in the end, I'm fairly sure the tech exists, the other problems though have already been mentioned, such as space usage, appropriate effect replacements (though DP provides some idea that it doesn't always have to be one for one), and the creativity wall.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Adeon Hawkwood
A good example of this would be Time Bomb. Personally I'd like to see it replaced with Satchel Charge, a power that keeps the basic concept (a large explosion) but gets rid of the problematic portions of the powers (specifically the 8 second cast time and the 15 second delay) and has a more suitable animation (specifically throwing a satchel charge a short distance). Now personally I think that would be a much more useful power and it is still within the cottage rule (given a somewhat liberal interpretation of the cottage rule). However there are some people who like and use Time Bomb the way it is and for them this change would eliminate their current tactics. So keeping the legacy version around would make sense.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Adeon Hawkwood
That being said I doubt we'll see it happen. As soon as the devs start doing this for the sets that really need it they will get inundated with requests to do it for all sets. Everyone has powers that they hate and even if the set itself doesn't really need the change they will feel as if it does.
|
Click here to find all the All Things Art Threads!
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Samuel_Tow
City of Heroes is a game about freedom of expression and variety of experiences far more so than it is about representing any one theme, topic or genre.
|
I suggested this long ago, and while I still stand by my suggestion, the original example is more a case of power customization. Here's how it went:
I looked at the Fire powers enemies were using, and discovered that they had several more that didn't appear in ANY of our powersets. So I suggested giving alternatives, such as Baphomet's Flaming Foot Stomp to Fire Sword Circle or Fire Punch as used by Behemoths to Fire Sword. This wouldn't necessarily change the FUNCTION of the power as much as it would change the LOOK of the power, hence power customization.
That said, one (slight) problem I've always had with the way City of Heroes handles powersets is that there's virtually never any choice as to what to take. Certain things you can afford to skip, but you're giving up a powerset's functionality. And even if you decide to skip something, it's usually something that doesn't add all that much to a powerset anyway. While slotting could (even if it doesn't often) differ, but you can have one fire wielder specialise in fire swords entirely, while having another be almost entirely breath-based.
In general, I'm actually a BIG fan of our ability to take all primary and secondary powers without worry of gimping ourselves, so I don't really want to add still more reason to skip powers. Hence why I want to double up on as many powers in the game as possible. You have your pick of two powers, and you can only pick one. Do you want Build Up or a low-mag, passive damage buff? Do you want a heavy-hitter single-target or a weaker AoE?
I worry about how hard that is to balance, though. And it's too late in the game for it, anyway.
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.
|
I suggested somethign similar a while ago too but mine was to give "flavour" choices at different levels. A blaster with some melee options or defense options, a tank with some attack option. Something to blur the lines between teh ATs without crossing them while still allow the toons to be at least a bit more individual. Every AR toon takes the same powers more often than not. Anything that promotes diversity without resulting in gimping gets my vote 
I wonder if it would be possible to pick between AoE powers that you can target via targeting an enemy, or pointing and clicking at the location you want to attack. With multiple builds and the picking-one-power-disqualifies-picking-another mechanic in place, it might make things much more convenient for some AoEmancers.
Quote:
Only because people who don't understand the cottage rule try to invoke it.|
Originally Posted by xhris
Wait... isn't cottage rule already broken to tiny little pieces?? Energize anyone??
Edit: ...Unyielding (Stance), too... |
The cottage rule does not mean, "No changes."
What the rule means is, "the base function of a power should not be changed unless absolutely necessary."
Energize? Still has the base function of Conserve Power: The END Discount boost.
Unyielding? Still has the base function of Unyielding Stance: The mez protection.
And to go back to the example that gave the rule its example, would changing Build Up to create a small cottage INSTEAD OF giving a +DMG and +ToHit buff break the rule? Yes.
Would changing Build Up to create a small cottage AND give a +DMG and +ToHit buff break the rule? No. But it's highly unlikely since there doesn't seem to be a need for cottages.
Back to the OP, I'm not sure it's a good idea. It'll certainly bring up an entirely new set of headaches when the Devs even attempt to balance a set.
How would these alt powers be balanced against the rest of the set?
What if someone took all alt powers instead of the standards?
Would it be the same set?
Head of TRICK, the all Trick Arrow and Traps SG
Part of the Repeat Offenders
Still waiting for his Official BackAlleyBrawler No-Prize
Quote:
In the very earliest idea of alt powers I had, such was not really possible, as originally it had been meant to be one alt power every certain number of levels.|
Originally Posted by Rush_Bolt
Back to the OP, I'm not sure it's a good idea. It'll certainly bring up an entirely new set of headaches when the Devs even attempt to balance a set.
How would these alt powers be balanced against the rest of the set? What if someone took all alt powers instead of the standards? Would it be the same set? |
But in the case of using it for achieving elemental damage weapons, then it would be a perfectly viable option.
Perhaps the above system would be used in the case of elemental melee, blast sets, controls, etc. etc.?
But balancing between powers would be another issue that would have to be faced.
Perhaps I should consider a thread that suggests alt powers for each set?
Click here to find all the All Things Art Threads!
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Samuel_Tow
City of Heroes is a game about freedom of expression and variety of experiences far more so than it is about representing any one theme, topic or genre.
|
This is basically an idea I had summed for a thread in the Global board and wanted to know what you guys thought:
The draw backs I see, besides the standard code rant (though this might be slightly more possible than other suggestions), would be that this could easily multiply the data space needed for one power set by about ten.
But anyway though, that's the gist of it, so what do you guys think?
Click here to find all the All Things Art Threads!