Tier 1 Attacks: The Brawl treatment
By
Arcanaville,
Posted on: 2010-04-21 11:14 in Suggestions and Ideas
This is both a great idea and a terrible idea at the same time.
i could agree with that, most tier 1 attacks have such a low end cost anyway its near negligible and most tier 1 attacks do only slightly more dmg than brawl
however im sure there will be a lot of poeple claiming balance issues and stuff
The only thing I've seen this done to is Stalker Hide, since it's so essential to the functionality of the entire AT.
That said, are you looking at *only* attacks (IE, flares and the like) or any "tier 1" power? The first is blatantly unfair, the second is a bit unbalanced (think of an Emp or Thermal that never had to pay for those heals, for instance.) (Edit - or "Tier 1 of the primary?")
Actually, looking at it *either* way, you've just empowered Controllers to have a perma-Immobilize. Say, Ice - Just make an Ice/TA. Chillblain/Entangling Arrow/Chillblain/Entangling Arrow ad infinitum. Slot CB with damage and recharge, give EA a damage proc. Free damage with an immob that could be stacked so high nothing could leave.
Followup: Also by comparison, what about Masterminds? Their END cost isn't in their attacks (which so many people skip,) but in their pets (and the upgrading and maintenance thereof.)
If possible...
state both Pros and Cons...or at least state a Pro or a Con.
Quote:
Only for attacks.|
Originally Posted by Memphis_Bill
You're thinking solely of attacks. The only thing I've seen this done to is Stalker Hide, since it's so essential to the functionality of the entire AT.
That said, are you looking at *only* attacks (IE, flares and the like) or any "tier 1" power? The first is blatantly unfair, the second is a bit unbalanced (think of an Emp or Thermal that never had to pay for those heals, for instance.) Actually, looking at it *either* way, you've just empowered Controllers to have a perma-Immobilize. Say, Ice - Just make an Ice/TA. Chillblain/Entangling Arrow/Chillblain/Entangling Arrow ad infinitum. Slot CB with damage and recharge, give ET a damage proc. Free damage with an immob that could be stacked so high nothing could leave. |
How would this "empower" Controllers to have a perma-Immobilize?
This would change nothing else about the powers except the fact that it no longer costs endurance.
They can already do what you claim they would be enabled to do.
Quote:
Except that it currently costs endurance to do so. They can now ignore the END cost, and they're still getting Containment damage. Right now, if they need to stack and maintain a high mag immob, they HAVE to stop, or they have to sacrifice duration or damage for END (or otherwise make up for the cost.) |
Originally Posted by Vitality
Only for attacks.
How would this "empower" Controllers to have a perma-Immobilize? This would change nothing else about the powers except the fact that it no longer costs endurance. They can already do what you claim they would be enabled to do. |
Also, just what are you considering an attack? "Must do damage without procs?" If so, Ice/Storm. Immob/Gale/Immob/Gale. END-free kill.
Every Blaster would have a completely END free attack chain even when mezzed. (Well, except /Devices. Pretty sure all other secondary Tier1s do damage on their own.)
Meanwhile, most other ATs - Defenders, Corruptors, Khelds, VEATs, Brutes, Stalkers, Tanks and Scrappers would be getting the short end of the deal. It's basically a much bigger buff to most Blasters, Dominators, and some Controller combos.
Quote:
Actually, I've been thinking for a long time about taking the first two primary powers, and the first secondary power, and applying a recharge and endurance discount to all three (if it happens to be a passive, the discount just has no effect). Something high: 30% - 50%, but not cut to zero.|
Originally Posted by Vitality
I want to suggest giving Tier 1 attacks the brawl treatment. Remove their endurance cost.
This messes with DPE...but I think it would be a great change. Change nothing else...just remove the endurance cost. This would go along way in helping the endurance starved. What are your thoughts on this? |
I believe I can make the case that its actually better for game balance overall, but I haven't had the time to do all the leg work, and the devs are too busy with I17/GR to entertain the idea anyway. Once things settle down a bit, though, its actually the next big thing on my todo list.
[Guide to Defense] [Scrapper Secondaries Comparison] [Archetype Popularity Analysis]
In one little corner of the universe, there's nothing more irritating than a misfile...
(Please support the best webcomic about a cosmic universal realignment by impaired angelic interference resulting in identity crisis angst. Or I release the pigmy water thieves.)
Quote:
Ok, I'm clearly getting ahead of myself. When I said "only attacks"...I wasn't clear.|
Originally Posted by Memphis_Bill
Except that it currently costs endurance to do so. They can now ignore the END cost, and they're still getting Containment damage. Right now, if they need to stack and maintain a high mag immob, they HAVE to stop, or they have to sacrifice duration or damage for END (or otherwise make up for the cost.)
Also, just what are you considering an attack? "Must do damage without procs?" If so, Ice/Storm. Immob/Gale/Immob/Gale. END-free kill. Every Blaster would have a completely END free attack chain even when mezzed. (Well, except /Devices. Pretty sure all other secondary Tier1s do damage on their own.) |
Blaster: Tier 1 Attack end removal: Primary Only
Controller: Tier 1 Attack end removal: Primary Only
Defender: Tier 1 Attack end removal: Secondary Only
Scrapper: Tier 1 Attack end removal: Primary Only
Tanker: Tier 1 Attack end removal: Secondary Only
Along those lines.
Quote:
My main reason for suggesting this is because a lot of players have "complained" about endurance management.|
Originally Posted by Arcanaville
Actually, I've been thinking for a long time about taking the first two primary powers, and the first secondary power, and applying a recharge and endurance discount to all three (if it happens to be a passive, the discount just has no effect). Something high: 30% - 50%, but not cut to zero.
I believe I can make the case that its actually better for game balance overall, but I haven't had the time to do all the leg work, and the devs are too busy with I17/GR to entertain the idea anyway. Once things settle down a bit, though, its actually the next big thing on my todo list. |
This idea...your idea being better...is way to help with endurance management...without actually getting rid of endurance management...which is one of my favorite aspects of this game.
Quote:
Ahh. Much clearer then. And IMHO much less of an issue. I'd still be questioning "zero end," but cutting with that in mind, sure.
|
Originally Posted by Vitality
Ok, I'm clearly getting ahead of myself. When I said "only attacks"...I wasn't clear.
Blaster: Tier 1 Attack end removal: Primary Only Controller: Tier 1 Attack end removal: Primary Only Defender: Tier 1 Attack end removal: Secondary Only Scrapper: Tier 1 Attack end removal: Primary Only Tanker: Tier 1 Attack end removal: Secondary Only Along those lines. |
My Fire Corruptor can fire Flares all day, because the end cost is already so low as to not outstrip end recovery, even with a 1 second recharge time. Making it 0 cost wouldn't really have much effect.
But it could really help at low levels, so I'm for it.
Quote:
Exactly. |
Originally Posted by Eiko-chan
But it could really help at low levels, so I'm for it.
|
From what I can gather...the low levels are what seem to be the problem for players.
Quote:
In addition to this, for primary sets, what is the tier one?|
Originally Posted by Memphis_Bill
The only thing I've seen this done to is Stalker Hide, since it's so essential to the functionality of the entire AT.
That said, are you looking at *only* attacks (IE, flares and the like) or any "tier 1" power? The first is blatantly unfair, the second is a bit unbalanced (think of an Emp or Thermal that never had to pay for those heals, for instance.) (Edit - or "Tier 1 of the primary?") Actually, looking at it *either* way, you've just empowered Controllers to have a perma-Immobilize. Say, Ice - Just make an Ice/TA. Chillblain/Entangling Arrow/Chillblain/Entangling Arrow ad infinitum. Slot CB with damage and recharge, give EA a damage proc. Free damage with an immob that could be stacked so high nothing could leave. Followup: Also by comparison, what about Masterminds? Their END cost isn't in their attacks (which so many people skip,) but in their pets (and the upgrading and maintenance thereof.) |
I mean the first attack in the broadsword column is Hack, a high damage attack that deals nasty levels of damage throughout the levels, or would it be Slash? The second power in the 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.
|
its a good idea but would not work in all attack set cases
questions that have come up:
- what about mm sets? (since the attacks are mediocre anyway and some poeple skip them entirely, if 1 of them was 0 end cost it might warrent taking that one but it would be more useful if tier 1 pets had no end cost but that might be overpowered)
- what about some melee sets in which the weaker attack is the tier 2 attack is weaker?
Quote:
My question would be why bother if the endurance costs of Tier 1 attacks are currently low enough to be considered non-issues. If endurance at lower levels is an issue it would be more effective to add an unslottable endurance discount across the board for levels 1 to 12 that diminishes as you approach level 12 when DO enhancements become available. Thematically it could be explained as rookie heroes and villains holding back until they become more adept at conserving their energy. |
Originally Posted by Vitality
I want to suggest giving Tier 1 attacks the brawl treatment. Remove their endurance cost.
This messes with DPE...but I think it would be a great change. Change nothing else...just remove the endurance cost. This would go along way in helping the endurance starved. What are your thoughts on this? |
I am not trashing the spirit of the suggestion; I can easily see how it would help against Clockwork and Malta sappers. I am just wondering how removing the cost of the least likely offender will make that much difference for low level characters in general.
>
"I am a Tank. I am your first choice, I am your last hope." -- Rune Bull
"Durability is the quintessential super-power. " -- Sailboat
Quote:
I'm completely basing this suggestion off the "fact" that players continually "complain" about endurance management at the lower levels.|
Originally Posted by McBoo
My question would be why bother if the endurance costs of Tier 1 attacks are currently low enough to be considered non-issues. If endurance at lower levels is an issue it would be more effective to add an unslottable endurance discount across the board for levels 1 to 12 that diminishes as you approach level 12 when DO enhancements become available. Thematically it could be explained as rookie heroes and villains holding back until they become more adept at conserving their energy.
I am not trashing the spirit of the suggestion; I can easily see how it would help against Clockwork and Malta sappers. I am just wondering how removing the cost of the least likely offender will make that much difference for low level characters in general. > |
Whether this is exactly "true" or not...this was the basis of my suggestion.
Quote:
i think you should have found out if it were actually true or not first before making any suggestion like this.
|
Originally Posted by Vitality
I'm completely basing this suggestion off the "fact" that players continually "complain" about endurance management at the lower levels.
Whether this is exactly "true" or not...this was the basis of my suggestion. |
Quote:
I disagree. I, for one, can attest to the validity of endurance issues at low levels. I suppose I should not have said 'If endurance at lower levels is an issue ' in my reply. As I pointed out an endurance free attack with some meaningful damage could be a boon at lower levels and, in certain situations, at higher levels.|
Originally Posted by Sharker_Quint
i think you should have found out if it were actually true or not first before making any suggestion like this.
|
My main point was that if the practice of the exercise is to address endurance issues at lower levels then we should be looking somewhere other than the attacks that cost the least amount of endurance.
>
"I am a Tank. I am your first choice, I am your last hope." -- Rune Bull
"Durability is the quintessential super-power. " -- Sailboat
Quote:
well, my response to him fits. as for your thoughts, i would say get rid of TO's and just make DO's go from 1-30 and SO's from 20-50. that would help alot of the end issues early on. or could even just have SO's from 1-50.
|
Originally Posted by McBoo
I disagree. I, for one, can attest to the validity of endurance issues at low levels. I suppose I should not have said 'If endurance at lower levels is an issue ' in my reply. As I pointed out an endurance free attack with some meaningful damage could be a boon at lower levels and, in certain situations, at higher levels.
My main point was that if the practice of the exercise is to address endurance issues at lower levels then we should be looking somewhere other than the attacks that cost the least amount of endurance. > |
Quote:
The tier 1/2 attacks, particularly at lower levels, are actually the higher endurance drain on a EPS basis.|
Originally Posted by McBoo
I disagree. I, for one, can attest to the validity of endurance issues at low levels. I suppose I should not have said 'If endurance at lower levels is an issue ' in my reply. As I pointed out an endurance free attack with some meaningful damage could be a boon at lower levels and, in certain situations, at higher levels.
My main point was that if the practice of the exercise is to address endurance issues at lower levels then we should be looking somewhere other than the attacks that cost the least amount of endurance. |
Just for illustration purposes, consider Power Bolt: 1s act, 4s recharge, 5.2 endurance cost; and Power Blast: 1.67 act, 8s recharge, 8.684 endurance cost. If you fire them both as fast as possible, and you don't have recharge slotted, you'll be burning 5.2/5 = 1.04 eps with Power Bolt and 8.684/9.67 = 0.898 eps with Power Blast (Arcanatime not factored in). Power Bolt is actually being used often enough to overtake the endurance burn rate of power blast which costs over 60% more per use. When Power Burst becomes available (2s act, 10s recharge, 10.4 end) it will only burn 10.4/12 = 0.867 eps if its fired as often as possible (technically, if Power Burst followed the rules it would burn 0.919 eps, still under the burn rate of Power Bolt). Firing all three as often as possible, and not factoring in collisions (when two powers recharge at the same time) Power Bolt (the lowest cost power per use) will be responsible for about 37% of your endurance drain due to attacks, while Power Burst (the highest cost power per use) will be responsible for only 31%. While Power Bolt is only costing a little more than Burst, it is definitely costing more. Reducing the endurance cost of Bolt would improve endurance burn rates more than reducing the endurance cost of Burst.
Once you have the ability to slot or acquire significant recharge, these numbers change and the high damage/high endurance cost powers begin to have a greater impact on endurance burn. But until then, the lowest tier powers tend to have a greater impact on your endurance simply because they are used far more often.
I should point out that EPS is not my primary motivator. In fact, if you decrease both recharge and endurance as I suggest you'll end up running out of endurance in a similar amount of time. But your activity rate will go up at lower levels without commensurate cost, which is the actual intent of my suggestion.
Running out of endurance is not the core problem in my opinion. Being idle is the problem, and whether that is due to having no endurance to attack, or no attacks recharged to use, the problem is the same root issue I'm looking to tackle.
[Guide to Defense] [Scrapper Secondaries Comparison] [Archetype Popularity Analysis]
In one little corner of the universe, there's nothing more irritating than a misfile...
(Please support the best webcomic about a cosmic universal realignment by impaired angelic interference resulting in identity crisis angst. Or I release the pigmy water thieves.)
Quote:
Last time I made this suggestion, I got neg-repped with "yet another "give me now!" request". These forums crack me up. |
Originally Posted by Sharker_Quint
or could even just have SO's from 1-50.
|
Quote:
Which is a shame. Because I feel that idea has a LOT of merit. Face it, who the hell slots TOs? Or really DOs for that matter? The fact is, they are grossly inferior to SOs, which you play 28 levels of the game on. It feels like a horrible leftover from the original Jackanised quasi-Korean MMO idea, like Hunts and Defeat all Praetorian arcs (The old ones. The horrible huge maps with tons of same-ish mobs to clear.)|
Originally Posted by Eiko-chan
Last time I made this suggestion, I got neg-repped with "yet another "give me now!" request". These forums crack me up.
|
The OP made me raise an eyebrow at first but, looking at replies like Arcana's, I think the idea has more merit than I first gave it credit for. Would be nice to see something along the lines like this happen. Certainly anything to make 1-22 less of a grind out of the dark ages (warning, previous setance contains opinion)
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Zwillinger
GG, I would tell you that "I am killing you with my mind", but I couldn't find an emoticon to properly express my sentiment.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Captain_Photon
NOTE: The Incarnate System is basically farming for IOs on a larger scale, and with more obtrusive lore.
 |
Quote:
Problems with dumping TOs - |
Originally Posted by Sharker_Quint
well, my response to him fits. as for your thoughts, i would say get rid of TO's and just make DO's go from 1-30 and SO's from 20-50. that would help alot of the end issues early on. or could even just have SO's from 1-50.
|
First, they're the easiest to deal with. no origins. Just "Red = Damage, Yellow = Acc" and so forth.
Second, you KNOW you'll be able to use them. No matter what origin you are. One less complication for a new person to start with. (And could the tutorial actually be coded to *give* an origin-specific DO? Don't forget you're given some there.) It also simplifies the first few stores you deal with - imagine a newbie dealing with the Elite Quartermaster and blowing what little INF they have on a set of the wrong things.
Third, they're cheap. Now, yeah, that means selling DOs at the store would give you more money - but that means they also cost more to replace as you're blazing through those early levels. TOs, who cares. They're bought and sold for a pittance.
So, TOs still serve their purposes. I wouldn't be averse to having DOs drop sooner and more often, though.
Quote:
*raises hand* |
Originally Posted by Techbot Alpha
Which is a shame. Because I feel that idea has a LOT of merit. Face it, who the hell slots TOs? Or really DOs for that matter? The fact is, they are grossly inferior to SOs, which you play 28 levels of the game on.
|
I slot them. And on the other side of that, I don't typically play 28 levels of the game on SOs. I replace them with common IOs somewhere in the 30s. So, if I run with your argument, we should be dumping all non-IOs because everything else can be phased out so quickly.
(Full disclosure - from 12, I tend to run a mix of lvl 15/20 DOs and IOs. Somewhere in the 20s, SOs get into the mix, then common and set IOs - more commons than sets.)
I want to suggest giving Tier 1 attacks the brawl treatment. Remove their endurance cost.
This messes with DPE...but I think it would be a great change.
Change nothing else...just remove the endurance cost.
This would go along way in helping the endurance starved.
What are your thoughts on this?