The game is tedious
By
Ad Astra,
Posted on: 2010-05-31 24:41 in Archetypes and Powers General Discussion
Quote:
You're missing a larger point here. Those are, indeed, fringe cases. But if the tools to enable such amazing levels of performance are available, allowing one to build fringe cases, they illustrate that there's an incredible dynamic range in available potential for endurance management. Those fringe builds are usually chock full of every endurance management tool available to them, but you don't need all that to be brimming with enough endurance for much less extreme levels of play.|
Originally Posted by Ultimo_
Panzer, you're citing fringe cases, unless you're suggesting everyone can solo AVs and 8 man missions and whatnot. I'm interested in what's best for all (yes, including myself).
|
The tools are available. The effect can be mitigated, and more than sufficiently.
Blue
American Steele: 50 BS/Inv
Nightfall: 50 DDD
Sable Slayer: 50 DM/Rgn
Fortune's Shadow: 50 Dark/Psi
WinterStrike: 47 Ice/Dev
Quantum Well: 43 Inv/EM
Twilit Destiny: 43 MA/DA
Red
Shadowslip: 50 DDC
Final Rest: 50 MA/Rgn
Abyssal Frost: 50 Ice/Dark
Golden Ember: 50 SM/FA
Quote:
Would that be in the American Journal of Psychiatry or some other journal? I glanced through the most recent issue's abstracts and only noticed one study with n<50, and that was for an international survey that was predictably going to have a smallish population. Given that I was only viewing abstracts, I don't know what the response rate was, but that would need to be taken into account. |
Originally Posted by Ultimo_
I've seen many research articles published by the American Psychiatric Association with sample sizes smaller than 50. I guess you'd better tell them their research is bollocks.
|
I suppose that, if we're talking psychiatric research, we have to keep in mind that some psychiatric populations are difficult to sample, and researchers tend toward longitudinal designs. A sample size less than 50 is potentially less troubling in those circumstances, though as I'm sure you're aware, any critique of the sample size without considering the statistics used is little more than hand-waving. The sample size requirements for adequate statistical power vary from test statistic to test statistic, after all.
The key to good research, and why I'm disinclined to call things that are published in any refereed journal "bollocks," is always peer review. The peer review process is designed to maximize the probability that studies with serious methodological problems don't see publication (though there are a lot of trash journals out there...). When your peers tell you something is good enough research to publish, that's a good sign. When your peers tell you that your research is flawed, that you have self-selected your sample and defined the inclusion criteria in such a fashion that it creates the results you wanted from the beginning, that's not a good sign.
My postings to this forum are not to be used as data in any research study without my express written consent.
Quote:
Then do some math proving it's excessive. I don't care what you call it, back your statements up with analysis.|
Originally Posted by Ultimo_
I didn't say it was unmanageable, I said the effect it has is excessive. These statements aren't at odds.
|
"I think this bill will generate more revenue for the government because I feel like it will," never gets anything passed.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ultimo_
Dechs, see my response to Rush, above. I don't need to do math to have an opinion.
|
If you want your opinion to be appreciated, considered, and regarded with any semblance of respect, you will do an analysis in an attempt to prove your point.
Until then, I will continue to assume that you are too lazy to put in the effort, too ignorant to know how to approach it, or smart enough to realize that there is no problem and you're still hiding it by an emotional argument.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ultimo_
I'm not about to start a study so I can have an opinion.
|
After that, the scientist gathers data, performs experiments and analysis to learn more about his hypothesis, in an attempt to prove it. You have not done any of this, except to gather insufficient data.
Where to now?
Check out all my guides and fiction pieces on my blog.
The MFing Warshade | The Last Rule of Tanking | The Got Dam Mastermind
Everything Dark Armor | The Softcap
don'T attempt to read tHis mEssaGe, And believe Me, it is not a codE.
Quote:
This a thousand times over. I'll give you Ultimo_ that Endurance is an issue for the uninitiated in the 10-22 range, especially solo. I agree there is a problem there. I have taken for granted my experience overcoming these issues. After all, I've had more then five years to perfect solo leveling. My problem arises in that an experienced player has all the tools necessary to overcome these obstacles. My last few posts encouraged educating new players how to overcome these obstacles. They ARE there if you wish to utilize them. Why don't you????? |
Originally Posted by UberGuy
You're missing a larger point here. Those are, indeed, fringe cases. But if the tools to enable such amazing levels of performance are available, allowing one to build fringe cases, they illustrate that there's an incredible dynamic range in available potential for endurance management. Those fringe builds are usually chock full of every endurance management tool available to them, but you don't need all that to be brimming with enough endurance for much less extreme levels of play.
The tools are available. The effect can be mitigated, and more than sufficiently. |
Why do you continue to be so damned stubborn about using the proper tools available to overcome your own Endurance problems. They are there for the taking if you but utilize them. This isn't about concept builds. I think it's more about you wanting to be able to do as you wish without any kind of barrier to difficulty.
Educate new players. It's been a long time, but I still remember how difficult it was trying to solo my first character in the teens. He was nearly unplayable. However, since that was more then five years ago, there are so many tools available now to overcome that issue, it isn't an issue any longer.
Quote:
Then dont gloss over points that dont support your argument.|
Originally Posted by Ultimo_
SinistrDirge, if I've ignored your arguments, it was unintentionally. I try to at least comment on everyone's posts; I figure if you've taken the time to post, I should at least acknowledge that..
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ultimo_
I don't and do want something for nothing. You're splitting a semantic hair there. In terms of playability, I want endurance costs reduced and balanced. That's all.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ultimo_
I may indeed have different expectations than a majority of other players, but if this thread is any indication, it's not a great majority.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ultimo_
In the final analysis, only damage matters in this game. You can usually only cmplete missions by doing damage. Other powers are there to allow you the opportunity to do the damage you need to to finish the missions.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ultimo_
I haven't looked, but I would think my intent in saying 90% would be clear. I meant a large majority, not necessarily 90%.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ultimo_
Your analogy of a scale begins from the supposition that the scale was balanced to begin with. Likewise, you're assuming the classes are all balanced against each other, but this is not a given either.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ultimo_
I have to take issue with this. Of course I'm asking for my own benefit. Do you expect me to ask for something I don't want? It's because I want to enjoy the game that I saw a problem in the first place. That doesn't mean I can't see past my own desires to what others want. As I've said, I started this thread specifically to see if others shared my perception of things. That's hardly selfish, and it's certainly not decietful.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ultimo_
It's not that I don't want ATs. Perhaps I should explain briefly how I'd have made the game. Be aware that this is only a very brief description.
I would have started the design of the game with the environment. I would have created a world that was active and had things going on in it such as we see in comic books (fires, car chases, etc.). I would then have created the superhero "prototype." This character would have baseline attributes and access to all the powers. I would then have designed the powers so they were all categorized in two ways - offense or defense. All characters would have to choose one of each. They would all be balanced against one another so that the only differences would be presentation (for instance, Power Bolts and Fire Bolts would do the same damage - only the special effect would differ). At this point, with everything in balance, I would design the ATs based on their TEAM ROLES. Each would get an inherent power designed to be of benefit both solo and teamed. Tankers are meant to hold aggro and survive, so they would get a power that allows them to do this, and which is useful solo and teamed. Other classes would be the Scrapper (do damage), Defender (Buffs, including heals), and Controllers (Debuffs). The idea would be that all the ATs could use ANY power set. The Tanker could have Force Fields and Energy Blasts if he wanted. He's not going to do the damage of the Scrapper, and he can't buff as well as the Defender (since their inherents would allow them superiority in those areas), but he'd still be able to Tank by virtue of his inherent. If you see what I mean. I can go into more detail if you lie, but that's really a whole other thread.. |
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ultimo_
I don't have to be telepathic or have datamining to see that the streets are empty. The population is dwindling, and you can't deny it. Now, whether that's because of Endurance issues is uncertain. All I've suggested is that it's something making the game less fun to play, and people not having fun might leave. Sure, it's not the root cause, but making it less of an issue might make the game more fun, which in turn might make people choose to stay.
|
This game relies heavily on instances, where most people playing are inside missions (Has been that way since mission xp bonus was started. Street sweeping died). Also, with mission teleports, ouroboros portals, SG ports and such, people are offered many faster, and easier ways to get back and forth to where they want to go, without using the trams. The best way to find teams is to join your servers main chat channel and say hello. You can also use the team find window to great effect.
Since you have been around awhile, here are some other changes you may remember that have affected percieved population drops. Global channels were introduced allowing like minded people to create channels and use them as a means of communication. With the changes to how you can set up your missions, the broadcast channels are not as active now, as farmers have no need to pad missions. PI is no longer inundated with lowbies begging for pl's. The ssk changes have made bridge requests obsolete. Also, with the free character transfers given out around christmas, many people have switched toons all over the place. For instance, many pvpers decided to head to freedom.
In my opinion, many of these changes have made the game more fun to play. The mission difficulty changes, and the new ssk system have definately kept me subscribed for longer.
As far as actual numbers go, I will take quality over quantity anytime. That does not discount new players. People who are eager to learn about, and play this game are always welcome on my team.
Quote:
He harps on end burn because it gets in the way of his concepts.|
Originally Posted by Ignatz
Why do you continue to be so damned stubborn about using the proper tools available to overcome your own Endurance problems. They are there for the taking if you but utilize them. This isn't about concept builds. I think it's more about you wanting to be able to do as you wish without any kind of barrier to difficulty.
|
Last year, he tried to build a FF defender as something along the lines of a meat shield with tough and weave. He didn't want to deviate from his concept and his dream build, and he got rather testy when people threw back builds with soft-capped defense and no end problems ... because they weren't HIS build.
I.e., he didn't want things like balance and mechanics to get in the way of his vision.
My suggestion to Ultimo_?
Make your own game 'cause nothing's ever going to live up to your vision.
Quote:
And this right here is why I think you're at least partially insane. I would not want to play your game. It would be boring. Extremely boring, to me at least.|
Originally Posted by Ultimo_
It's not that I don't want ATs. Perhaps I should explain briefly how I'd have made the game. Be aware that this is only a very brief description. I would have started the design of the game with the environment. I would have created a world that was active and had things going on in it such as we see in comic books (fires, car chases, etc.). I would then have created the superhero "prototype." This character would have baseline attributes and access to all the powers. I would then have designed the powers so they were all categorized in two ways - offense or defense. All characters would have to choose one of each. They would all be balanced against one another so that the only differences would be presentation (for instance, Power Bolts and Fire Bolts would do the same damage - only the special effect would differ). At this point, with everything in balance, I would design the ATs based on their TEAM ROLES. Each would get an inherent power designed to be of benefit both solo and teamed. Tankers are meant to hold aggro and survive, so they would get a power that allows them to do this, and which is useful solo and teamed. Other classes would be the Scrapper (do damage), Defender (Buffs, including heals), and Controllers (Debuffs). The idea would be that all the ATs could use ANY power set. The Tanker could have Force Fields and Energy Blasts if he wanted. He's not going to do the damage of the Scrapper, and he can't buff as well as the Defender (since their inherents would allow them superiority in those areas), but he'd still be able to Tank by virtue of his inherent. If you see what I mean. I can go into more detail if you lie, but that's really a whole other thread. |
You'd basically have 5 sets: Blast, Melee, Armor, Control, and Buff/Debuff. Other than aesthetics, there would be no difference between any subsets of those. If everything is doing the same damage, in the same way (same number of AoEs, cones, ST attacks, etc.), then there's no need to make another Blast/Melee character, since it would perform exactly the same as the other one that you made. All of the Control sets would be the same, and have no differences between them except for some mild secondary effects and a visual.
That's not the game I want to be playing. That is why I don't like your ideas. You want homogenization in a game that allows for a greater amount of player customization than most any game out there. I want to have MORE differentiation between sets and ATs, and you seem to want less.
And, since you still haven't responded to this question that keeps being asked of you:
If Defenders do less damage per endurance point spent than Blasters, and you increase endurance globally, or reduce end costs globally, then Defenders will STILL be doing less damage per point of endurance spent than Blasters. So how would your idea fix the problem?
Let me never fall into the vulgar mistake of dreaming that I am persecuted whenever I am contradicted.
~Ralph Waldo Emerson
"I was just the one with the most unsolicited sombrero." - Traegus
Quote:
This is pretty important. There's a lot of flexibility for the devs in saying that this power (or powerset) does less X and more Y. For example, they can decide that a powerset deals less "raw" damage because it applies powerful debuffs, or provides its users some kind of strong mitigation when it attacks.|
Originally Posted by Aett_Thorn
You'd basically have 5 sets: Blast, Melee, Armor, Control, and Buff/Debuff. Other than aesthetics, there would be no difference between any subsets of those. If everything is doing the same damage, in the same way (same number of AoEs, cones, ST attacks, etc.), then there's no need to make another Blast/Melee character, since it would perform exactly the same as the other one that you made. All of the Control sets would be the same, and have no differences between them except for some mild secondary effects and a visual.
|
This doesn't always make sense to players, because they may think that Y isn't important, but that X is. If the powerset in question has the lowest X of all the alternatives, those players are likely to complain that the powerset is "gimp".
But that doesn't always hold. Y may have great utility in certain situations. Is the balance between X and Y right? That's a tough question to answer. The devs seem to measure things like that, at least in one way, by looking at the speed that certain ATs or powersets level. Either they're capable enough to level "fast enough" when solo and/or desirable enough that they get on teams that can help them along. Is this a perfect window into balance? Definitely not, but it does show things that aren't likely apparent to any one player.
Blue
American Steele: 50 BS/Inv
Nightfall: 50 DDD
Sable Slayer: 50 DM/Rgn
Fortune's Shadow: 50 Dark/Psi
WinterStrike: 47 Ice/Dev
Quantum Well: 43 Inv/EM
Twilit Destiny: 43 MA/DA
Red
Shadowslip: 50 DDC
Final Rest: 50 MA/Rgn
Abyssal Frost: 50 Ice/Dark
Golden Ember: 50 SM/FA
Quote:
Very Good observations Uber-Guy |
Originally Posted by UberGuy
This is pretty important. There's a lot of flexibility for the devs in saying that this power (or powerset) does less X and more Y. For example, they can decide that a powerset deals less "raw" damage because it applies powerful debuffs, or provides its users some kind of strong mitigation when it attacks.
This doesn't always make sense to players, because they may think that Y isn't important, but that X is. If the powerset in question has the lowest X of all the alternatives, those players are likely to complain that the powerset is "gimp". But that doesn't always hold. Y may have great utility in certain situations. Is the balance between X and Y right? That's a tough question to answer. The devs seem to measure things like that, at least in one way, by looking at the speed that certain ATs or powersets level. Either they're capable enough to level "fast enough" when solo and/or desirable enough that they get on teams that can help them along. Is this a perfect window into balance? Definitely not, but it does show things that aren't likely apparent to any one player. |
You can imagine my concern about these things since I play Electric Blast on my Defender.
I also wonder what the Devs thoughts are on Tactical awareness and movement.
For instance, how much "survival" do they attribute to the fact that against most opponents, a ranged character can successfully "outwit" through movement and line-of-sight a significant amount of damage. Also, is the core design to have melee and ranged damage "typically" different and weighted toward the melee side. How do they figure this in Powerset balancing.
BIOSPARK :: DARKTHORN :: SKYGUARD :: WILDMAGE
HEATSINK :: FASTHAND :: POWERCELL :: RUNESTAFF
Quote:
Going waaay back to the game's first year, the devs used to say that "distance = defence". The reasoning is straightforward: the basic design principle is that all mobs save lieuts (snipers being the prime example) do less damage at range than melee. If you put together some of the pieces, you can find get a grand vision of how this comes together: AoE immobs coming early in control sets and recharging fast; tankers used to have lots of KB (the previous powers guy expressed surprise at how they didn't like effective damage debuff of having mobs at range); many defender primaries have slows; LOTS of KB and repel in FF and storm; Repulsion Field, believe it or not, is available to most of the game's non-Epic ATs.|
Originally Posted by Biospark
I also wonder what the Devs thoughts are on Tactical awareness and movement.
For instance, how much "survival" do they attribute to the fact that against most opponents, a ranged character can successfully "outwit" through movement and line-of-sight a significant amount of damage. Also, is the core design to have melee and ranged damage "typically" different and weighted toward the melee side. How do they figure this in Powerset balancing. |
Keeping mobs at range by any means possible was supposed to a massive benefit to survivability (FWIW, Force Bubble reliably reduces incoming DPS by 25% or so).
So, picture the beta-era FF with 3 ST +def buffs on 2 minute timers (versus 2 on 4 minute timers). It's impossible to keep 7 TMs buffed; 3 would probably be the max for anyone without Rittellin. So ... turn on Dispersion, turn on Force Bubble. Squishies huddle under the small bubble for mez protection and some defense. The bubbler fires off the ST buffs on the team's melee toons just outside the big bubble. Focus on ST powers, probably targetting through the tanker (remember: tanker taunt used to be ST). This game is tactical. It leverages distance for squishies. Spreads aggro out so that the tanker can focus on the boss.
It's an interesting game, but obviously flawed since squishies /also/ have the tools to nail mobs to the spot with any combination of slows, holds, mobs, and stuns so they can leverage AoEs and distance. And once mobs are nailed in place, they can be destroyed, safely, by massed AoEs for far more XP / second than the spread 'em out tactical route.
All the bonuses of using Force Bubble, none of the hassles.
Anyway ... the devs baked a couple ways into the game of leveraging distance, but the playerbase only uses one of 'em because it's easier to deal with AND produces huge piles of defeated mobs quickly. For most of the game, there's no reward to playing CoX with any tactics beyond stacking every non-KB/repel AoE you've got and zerging.
One way to look at I5's nerfs (defense, control, introduction of the AoE cap) is that the devs were explicitly trying to make the game more tactical ... but they failed miserably at it as folks mostly ditched FF and started to rely more heavily on unnerfed, similar-effect ToHit debuffs which required ... mobs to be clumped together.
Thanks for the response Burning Chick,
Everything you brought up brings back memories of the time before I took a 3 year break from the game. As far as tactical balance and awareness, my feelings are that it might have been better to handle AoEs slightly differently. For instance, having an AoE as a PBAoE is less flexible than a targeted AoE. I am not suggesting a wholesale change, or that it is even needed, but there is a HUGE tactical difference between PBAOE, Cone and Targeted AoEs. There are also situations where power combinations can create inconsistency due to having various types of these AoE powers.
This whole thought is not meant to suggest an issue, just me thinking out loud and trying to get insight into what "balance" thoughts went into the different AoE powers.
For example: Electric Blasts: Ball Lightning is absolutely beautiful. Being a Targeted AoE makes it incredibly flexible. Short Circuit, on the other hand forces a lightly-protected character into close proximity. Granted that the secondary effect is the "primary" effect of the powerset, but as a whole, you could say that SC is the ONLY power (in the set) that reliably generates the secondary effect. Whereas other blast sets offer their effect more "noticeably" with their non-AoE powers as well as the AoEs. This makes Electric Blasts (To Me) a powerset that was probably very difficult for the DEVS to "balance", specifically because of the way the secondary effect works.
OK, ramble-mode off
BIOSPARK :: DARKTHORN :: SKYGUARD :: WILDMAGE
HEATSINK :: FASTHAND :: POWERCELL :: RUNESTAFF
Yes, there are sets that call upon you to deal with different AOEs. That's pretty much expected - part of the skill of playing the game is maximising those different AoEs.
And Electrical blast is a widget set.
Quote:
HUH ?!! |
Originally Posted by Talen Lee
...
And Electrical blast is a widget set... |
please elaborate.
BIOSPARK :: DARKTHORN :: SKYGUARD :: WILDMAGE
HEATSINK :: FASTHAND :: POWERCELL :: RUNESTAFF
Okay, you know how most sets have a single power that's 'out of type'? Like how Ice Blast has a pair of single target holds? Those are widgets. They're not part of the core theme of the set, but they are great tools that the players really want to have access to. Shield Charge is a widget, too.
When you have a set that is made almost wholly of widgets, it's a widget set. Electric Blast has a lot of widgets. It's almost more widgets than normal blasts.
Electrical Blast really needs looking at.
Swapping out the standard Tier 3 blast for Voltaic Sentinel isn't too bad a change. It messes up your burst damage a bit, which matters most to Blasters, but the set has plenty of other tools for neutralising threats. If this kink has to go somewhere, Electrical Blast isn't a bad place (Fire Blast for example, would really suffer if it lost Blaze to a Flaming Sentinel).
The real problem is the way end drain has been implemented so that the only meaningful amount comes from a very long animation PBAoE. Animation times weren't taken into account when balancing back at the start of the game, so it may have the 3 second one just because someone thought it looked right.
As originally designed, Short Circuit could be six-slotted to fully drain a group by itself, ED put paid to that. The recent-ish nerf to Power Boost suggests that the devs dont wnat Blasters draining whole groups of bosses in one shot, and fair enough.
But why oh why can't the single target blasts do a bit of decent drain, instead of a piddly 7% ?
Quote:
By this definition... you could say that Focus and Shockwave are widgets. And erm... I'd almost consider the melee attacks in Spines to be widgets. I mean, they are so unlike the rest of the set. Damage aura? Check. Ranged aoe? check, sort of. Single target ranged? Check. Ranged imob? Check. The set only really has 3 melee attacks. And that's not many for a scrapper set. Even spine burst isn't exactly melee. It's got a 15 foot range after all.
|
Originally Posted by Talen Lee
Okay, you know how most sets have a single power that's 'out of type'? Like how Ice Blast has a pair of single target holds? Those are widgets. They're not part of the core theme of the set, but they are great tools that the players really want to have access to. Shield Charge is a widget, too.
When you have a set that is made almost wholly of widgets, it's a widget set. Electric Blast has a lot of widgets. It's almost more widgets than normal blasts. |
"The danger is not that a particular class is unfit to govern. Every class is unfit to govern." Lord Acton
Madam Enigma's History
Quote:
Agreed, Ultimo_'s ideal game sounds, dare I say it, pretty unfun. I want variety, I want inequality - though not imbalance - I want things to be different. Why? Because it's interesting and fun. Which is partly why I love CoH so much: there are so many different possible characters and they all play differently.
|
Originally Posted by Aett_Thorn
And this right here is why I think you're at least partially insane. I would not want to play your game. It would be boring. Extremely boring, to me at least.
You'd basically have 5 sets: Blast, Melee, Armor, Control, and Buff/Debuff. Other than aesthetics, there would be no difference between any subsets of those. If everything is doing the same damage, in the same way (same number of AoEs, cones, ST attacks, etc.), then there's no need to make another Blast/Melee character, since it would perform exactly the same as the other one that you made. All of the Control sets would be the same, and have no differences between them except for some mild secondary effects and a visual. That's not the game I want to be playing. That is why I don't like your ideas. You want homogenization in a game that allows for a greater amount of player customization than most any game out there. I want to have MORE differentiation between sets and ATs, and you seem to want less. |
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Talen Lee
Okay, you know how most sets have a single power that's 'out of type'? Like how Ice Blast has a pair of single target holds? Those are widgets. They're not part of the core theme of the set, but they are great tools that the players really want to have access to. Shield Charge is a widget, too.
When you have a set that is made almost wholly of widgets, it's a widget set. Electric Blast has a lot of widgets. It's almost more widgets than normal blasts. |
Thanks Talen,
I had never heard that phrase used to that reference, but it makes sense.
BIOSPARK :: DARKTHORN :: SKYGUARD :: WILDMAGE
HEATSINK :: FASTHAND :: POWERCELL :: RUNESTAFF
Quote:
I wouldn't disagree that Spines is a widget set. It's got a lot of odd stuff in it; stuff that is commonplace amongst scrappers at large, but Spines concentrates them heavily in the one place. |
Originally Posted by Madam_Enigma
By this definition... you could say that Focus and Shockwave are widgets. And erm... I'd almost consider the melee attacks in Spines to be widgets. I mean, they are so unlike the rest of the set. Damage aura? Check. Ranged aoe? check, sort of. Single target ranged? Check. Ranged imob? Check. The set only really has 3 melee attacks. And that's not many for a scrapper set. Even spine burst isn't exactly melee. It's got a 15 foot range after all.
|
Claws has a widget and two arguable widgets; Shockwave serves its job as an AOE damage source (however mild or great), and Focus and Follow-Up differ from their normal compatriot powers, with heavy-hitting, level 18 unlocks like most set's PBAOE, or Build-Up. But in both cases, one is an expansion - Focus is just a longer range attack, and it does serve just fine in melee (and given its short range, it's hard to make it serve more dutifully as something else), and Follow-Up is an attack in an attack set that gives you a damage buff.
I won't argue that they're widgets - they are odd, different, powers that behave away from the norm for the type of sets they're in. Widget sets are necessary - they're full of interesting tools that draw problem-solver players. Fire Blast is the benchmark for efficiency, but that doesn't make it by any means the most important set.
Devices is a widget set. Electric Blast's a widget set. Spines... probably also a widget set, you can make a case for it, certainly. it's very easy to avoid actually meleeing with Spines. Widgets are the kind of thing that you can only have in a game with uniform options, with sets and striations like we have. And they're wonderful, enjoyable things, things that we as players can pick up and examine from new angles, and we get our own beautiful excursion into exploration and discovery.
Quote:
Exactly! If your playing a FPS you don't always use the same gun do you? No, because they all have different capabilities. Right now maybe you want to spray a ton of bullets. But that's not always the best tactic. Maybe you need to be able to deal a lot of damage with a few shots. Then you grab a shotgun instead of the machinegun. But maybe you need precision fire from a long distance. That's when you break out the sniper rifle. While for up close precision you use a pistol.|
Originally Posted by PhroX
Agreed, Ultimo_'s ideal game sounds, dare I say it, pretty unfun. I want variety, I want inequality - though not imbalance - I want things to be different. Why? Because it's interesting and fun. Which is partly why I love CoH so much: there are so many different possible characters and they all play differently.
|
And even within one type of weapon, there can be a wide range of capabilities. Do you want a machine pistol which can fire sixty bullets within a few seconds? Each bullet might do little damage, and you'll burn through ammo fast. Maybe a glock then? Nice solid damage, nine to thirteen shots, and decent accuracy. But if you have a .45 magnum you've got still more stopping power. Only six shots, but each bullet is more likely to put the other guy down.
What type of bullet is loaded? Is it dum dums that cause high damage to unarmored foes? Or maybe armor piercing rounds which do less damage, but cut through armor like a hot knife through butter. Is it an energy weapon? If so, what type of energy? Laser weapons might be easily countered by a highly reflective surface. A plasma ejector on the other hand would melt through that same surface. Microwave blasts would bounce off tinfoil, but would be extremely dangerous in Kevlar.
For melee combat, there's just as much variety. A great sword might do a lot of damage, but their big cumbersome. You may not always have room to use it. Long swords are a good alternative, but tend to require large sweeping moments as well. Maybe a saber then? Their lighter and allow more dexterous attacks. But do less damage then a larger sword. What about knives? Great for close quarters combat. Their fast, can do some pretty good damage rapidly. But their reach stinks on ice. Still, if you can get close enough, your knife will seriously mess someone up while they can't effectivly fight with their great sword.
Do you want a saber, or rapier? Maybe a small sword instead? All three are good fencing weapons, but with slightly different capabilities. Do you want a single edged blade, or double edged blade? Basket hilt or cross hilt? Or maybe no cross-guard. Do you want a pummel which can be used offensively, or just for decoration? How long is the blade? Is it steel, iron, or bronze? Full tang or half tang? Or do you want it to be an energy sword? Each of these qualities will affect how the weapon handles and what it can do.
And that's just weapons. Then we have powers. Are you super strong? Or maybe you channel disruptive energy through your fists. Is your skin diamond hard? Or maybe your superhumanly agile and can dodge bullets. Or do you millimeter thick fields of super high gravity an inch in front of you. Each of those would act differently. While having the diamond hard skin would let you take less damage, you still get hit. Being hyper agile would let you avoid being hit, but anything that does connect is gonna hurt. The gravity field would nicely protect you against a wide range of attacks, but you'd be unable to attack back. If you have a velocity redirection field you'd be kept safe from guns, but melee and energy attacks would still be a threat. And gas attacks would affect you no matter what.
But Ultimo's game wouldn't take any of that into account.
"The danger is not that a particular class is unfit to govern. Every class is unfit to govern." Lord Acton
Madam Enigma's History
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by DrMike2000
Electrical Blast really needs looking at.
Swapping out the standard Tier 3 blast for Voltaic Sentinel isn't too bad a change. It messes up your burst damage a bit, which matters most to Blasters, but the set has plenty of other tools for neutralising threats. If this kink has to go somewhere, Electrical Blast isn't a bad place (Fire Blast for example, would really suffer if it lost Blaze to a Flaming Sentinel). The real problem is the way end drain has been implemented so that the only meaningful amount comes from a very long animation PBAoE. Animation times weren't taken into account when balancing back at the start of the game, so it may have the 3 second one just because someone thought it looked right. As originally designed, Short Circuit could be six-slotted to fully drain a group by itself, ED put paid to that. The recent-ish nerf to Power Boost suggests that the devs dont wnat Blasters draining whole groups of bosses in one shot, and fair enough. But why oh why can't the single target blasts do a bit of decent drain, instead of a piddly 7% ? |
I agree with you Dr.Mike.
Although I love electric blasts and even with the downsides, Short Circuit and draining is a reasonable effect as long as you plan for it. I have had three thoughts on how the Electric set could be improved.
1) Have a small chance for a "sleep" effect added to the blasts. Being random in nature would prevent Electric from being a mini-troller set, but add some mitigation during the time you are attempting to drain mobs. Also, by being a sleep, it loses alot of its potency on teams, which is where the endurance drain abilities are easier to leverage.
2) Personally I would rather have a Tier 3 blast than "sparky". Burst damage is VERY important to my playstyle, and I suspect that I am not alone in this.
3) I would like to see the *chance* to stop endurance recovery be 100%, and on every attack.
The two biggest drawbacks to end drain are A) the fact that only 100% drain counts, and B) Mobs can act on the tiniest amount of endurance. Being able to more consistently stop their recovery would help out considerably.
BIOSPARK :: DARKTHORN :: SKYGUARD :: WILDMAGE
HEATSINK :: FASTHAND :: POWERCELL :: RUNESTAFF
Quote:
Already there, when the enemy is convulsing after a blast for a few seconds? That's a Sleep effect.|
Originally Posted by Biospark
I agree with you Dr.Mike.
Although I love electric blasts and even with the downsides, Short Circuit and draining is a reasonable effect as long as you plan for it. I have had three thoughts on how the Electric set could be improved. 1) Have a small chance for a "sleep" effect added to the blasts. Being random in nature would prevent Electric from being a mini-troller set, but add some mitigation during the time you are attempting to drain mobs. Also, by being a sleep, it loses alot of its potency on teams, which is where the endurance drain abilities are easier to leverage. |
Quote:
| 3) I would like to see the *chance* to stop endurance recovery be 100%, and on every attack. |
"The danger is not that a particular class is unfit to govern. Every class is unfit to govern." Lord Acton
Madam Enigma's History
Quote:
I thought that someone (Red name) had already stated that those were just animations, and did not effect the critter's ability to act when their timer came up?|
Originally Posted by Madam_Enigma
Already there, when the enemy is convulsing after a blast for a few seconds? That's a Sleep effect.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Madam_Enigma
This I could approve of. I know it's very annoying when Mu not only drain my endurance, but shut down my endurance recovery.
|
BIOSPARK :: DARKTHORN :: SKYGUARD :: WILDMAGE
HEATSINK :: FASTHAND :: POWERCELL :: RUNESTAFF
*checks*
Huh, wonder why when it happens to me I can't attack then? Oh, and electric blast really should have a higher chance for -recovery. At least 50% IMO.
"The danger is not that a particular class is unfit to govern. Every class is unfit to govern." Lord Acton
Madam Enigma's History
Hey Rush, remember how much testing back in issue 4 people like Arcanaville did to prove that defense sets like Super Reflexes were underpreforming due to all the high strength def debuffs? And that was something that was a clear problem. Or how much testing it took to get the devs to relook at Trick Arrow after issue five hit?
If it took months to years of testing by players to submit enough evidence to the devs of real problems that could be quantified... How much testing would it take to convince them an opinion on weather or not endurance usage is too high across the board and unmanagable is worth acting upon?
"The danger is not that a particular class is unfit to govern. Every class is unfit to govern." Lord Acton
Madam Enigma's History