Proposal: Hybrid Archetype

Broadsword versus ... just about anything, actually. Let's pick something that's not wildly difficult to analyze: Martial Arts.

The optimal attack chain for BS is something like Headsplitter, Hack, Disembowel, <pause>, Hack. Ideally, the <pause> should be removed, but doing so completely requires unsustainable levels of recharge in Hack.

The best Martial Arts chain is, IIRC, Storm Kick, Crippling Axe Kick, Storm Kick, [Cobra Strike OR Crane Kick]. The Martial Arts chain can be achieved with no gaps with relatively modest levels of global recharge plus a recharge-boosting Tier 4 Alpha slot, or high-ish levels of global recharge without the Alpha.

If you add up all the power damages, and then divide that buy the sum of all the power activation times*, the Martial Arts chain delivers more damage / time than the Broadsword one does.

Now, Parry is a pretty powerful defensive tool, so maybe that makes up for this difference. Martial Arts has mitigation tools, but none are quite so widely applicable as Letha/Melee defense. So maybe that explains it? Well, now we get to throw Katana in the mix.

Katana and Broadsword are, in terms of basic function, identical powersets. A long time back, Katana and Broadsword had identical attack animations. The only differences in the sets were that Katana did less damage per attack (and cost lest endurance per attack proportionally) but the attacks recharged faster. Then, Katana's animations were revamped to make them unique, and in the process they were sped up. Even though the damage of each attack was left alone, because the DPA was increased (by decreasing the activation/animation times), using its own optimal chain, Katana now does greater damage over time than Broadsword does.

Edit: The example of Super Strength versus Energy Melee takes this into whole other realms. SS has an immense AoE attack, while Energy Melee has only a very modest AoE. The size and damage scale of Footstomp compared to the more mundane size and modest damage of Whirling Hands means that, once you account for the number of targets SS can hit (and for how hard), the total damage over time of the two powersets lie in different zip codes.

* The correct time here is the listed activation time for the power plus an adjustment called "Arcanatime", which accounts for "jitter" in the start of an attacks activation and the next subsequent update in the game's internal event processing clock. You can find out more here.

Domination hasn't buffed damage in a long time. I was around for that change and I remember the hue and cry of nerf (when it was an actual buff for all but the most extreme edge cases of recharge). They increased the base damage of dominators and removed the damage buff from Domination in I12.

Originally Posted by Back Alley Brawler Did you just use "casual gamer" and "purpled-out warshade" in the same sentence?

Honestly, unless you specifically pick sets that are very similar in every way (Broadsword and Katana being the clearest example), it's hard to find two sets that ARE very close in damage output. On one end of the spectrum you have stuff like Spines built for heavy AoE, and on the other end you have Martial Arts built almost exclusively for single target (and in the case of stalkers, you remove the "almost"). One the one hand you have Energy Melee that's mediocre to terrible at everything, and on the other hand you have Titan Weapons where the primary downside is that it does SO much damage to SO many targets SO quickly that it's difficult to sustain the endurance cost. There's no pattern at all to what constitutes "acceptable" AoE damage, or burst damage, or DPS, or DPE, or control, or any meaningful metric at all really to what makes a set balanced. They're qualitatively balanced against each other: if you compare two sets, you'll generally find each has some points in their favor and you can't make a clear decision that one is "better". But there is no mathematical formula to decide that X powerset is stronger than Y powerset by Z amount. You'd have to somehow invent one to implement the system you're suggesting, and then extrapolate it to include a couple orders of magnitude more combinations than current power sets allow. If you have the genius to do that, or know someone who does, get off these boards instead and go build a fusion reactor, then use your fortune to hire a crack team of designers from your favorite games and build a new game from the ground up with your system in mind.

My post focused mostly on melee sets because I know the most about them, as I usually play melee. Note that balancing the blast and support sets would be AT LEAST as difficult.

Yes, there is, but you are DRASTICALLY oversimplifying it.

The max damage a power will do is determined by

A) The tier at which it appears in the set. SO you're not going to see KO Blow as a tier 1 power for example.

B) Any secondary effect the power may have. As a general rule, the more powerful the secondary effect, the less damage the power will do. That's not always true, but it is more often than not.

C) The AT using the power. This will affect both the base damage of the power and it's maximum potential.

My point earlier was that you absolutely HAVE to take Fulcrum Shift, Criticals, Fury, Defiance, Scourge, and Containment into account when you are designing a power. You can't design the power and then look at what those things do to it afterward. If you design a power without taking those abilities into account, there is a very good chance the power will end up too strong when buffed by those abilities.

Example: Say you design a blast set for Defenders that will be shared with Corruptors. You could add a very high damaging attack in the later tiers, but you have to look at what will happen when you add Scourge damage to it. If the attack is too powerful for a defender, it will be WAY too powerful when Scourge doubles it's damage.

Your Max Damage table you posted earlier makes a critical mistake. You put Brute max value at 1200 without Fury. I assume that means that is the max damage a power will do?

If that's the case and you make brutes that strong without taking Fury into account, when you add Fury after the fact your max damage changes from 1200 to 3000, with Fury increasing it's damage by 150% and blowing scrappers and stalkers out of the water. Criticals will not have the same effect of more than doubling the damage output at all times because their bonus is not reliable enough. It averages out to a 10% increase over a long enough period of time. So the assumption that because stalkers and scrappers have criticals it evens out is just plain wrong.

Now, if you want it to be balanced where it is just below scrappers and stalkers, you have to consider the effect Fury will have before you set an arbitrary amount. Setting the max value at 500 will have a net effect of the total damage ending up at 1250, which is close to the same amount you had, and takes Fury into account.

I'm not trying to bash you or your idea just for the sake of bashing. I firmly believe that if you are unable or unwilling to consider all the various things that could affect the balance of what you're trying to do, then you have no business trying to design it in the first place.

I have had a few power set and AT ideas myself. The most I do is "wouldn't this idea be cool?" rather than trying to design everything from the ground up myself. That's because I am very well aware that I am not qualified to be trying to balance a new AT in the context of this game. A power set is easier, but there's still a lot of stuff you have to consider doing that.

Originally Posted by Dechs Kaison See, it's gems like these that make me check Claws' post history every once in a while to make sure I haven't missed anything good lately.

Maybe his 'max damage' number means the max damage the power will do after all buffs except for the ones he mentions? For instance, a headsplitter can do 1200 if buffed to the gills by a team full of defenders, 2400 if critical?

> If that's the case and you make brutes that strong without taking Fury into account, when you add Fury after the fact your max damage changes from 1200 to 3000, with Fury increasing it's damage by 150% and blowing scrappers and stalkers out of the water.

Yea, i see! But you are not seeing the big picture now! Brutes Fury will need to be significantly decreased! Base Damage Increased! Why? Well, so much Fury was great when Brutes were just on Red Side. Now that Tanks can go red side, brutes can go blue side, brutes arent getting nearly enough Fury like they would before, because Tanks are doing what they normally do, and thats hogging most of the Aggro. Hehe, i was in a team recently and the Tank was starting to feel really bad for the brute (the brute wasnt doing nearly enough Dmg and was getting upset), then the tank just stood back and was telling the brute to aggro the grp 1st, just for a minute, then the tank would jump in! Hehehehehehehe! I had a nice long chuckle!

Yes, let's throw out the distinguishing characteristics of the ATs to facilitate this strange balance paradigm.

By the way, my SM/FA Brute was able to generate high fury about as high as we can get it now even with just one or two foes around, because I have a high recharge attack chain of fast-activating attacks. These days, Fury is easier to get to its effective "maximum" (the most we can usually hit under normal circumstances). Whoever the Brute in question was, they either had a very long-animating attack powerset or they just weren't attacking that much.

Is it like this? (recharge+cast)

Not sure what I'm looking at here. But the total cycle time of an attack is its cast time plus its net recharge time (after recharge buffs). Cast time is not accelerated by recharge.