test content
Logo
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc
We need stricter restrictions on cross-set power selection.
spinnytop
Posts: 16,450 Arc User
One of the core ideologies in Champions Online is "Be The Hero You Want To Be", and quite simply put, for this to be as true as possible players need to be able to pick whichever power they want regardless of what powers they have picked previously. Just because you want to pick "Cosmic Explosion" for your character to use, does not mean you should have to pick "Cosmic Whimpy Beam", because simply put when you envisioned your character Cosmic Whimpy Beam was not an ability they had - sure, you could pick another power just to fill the tier requirement, but what if at that point in power selection none of those powers fit? Simply put, the game is preventing you from being the hero you want to be by forcing you to select a power that does not fit your envisioned build - which also means that you might not be able to put a power that you did envision into your build later on.
Of course, if we just lifted all the restrictions on cross-building we would likely increase the current problem of cherry picked builds that care more for numbers to be leagues ahead of cherry picking theme builds. Both builds cherry pick, but the one that doesn't even care about "being the hero you want to be" pulls ahead in terms of performance, which has many negative implications for the game even if we're only considering PvE.
So the solution that I think would work best is to base the effectiveness on a given power from a given framework on how many powers of that framework the player has. A hero who has all of his powers revolving around the production and manipulation of fire should have more powerful fire powers than another hero who only has a small part of his power portfolio devoted to fire.
So then you ask "What if I want a build that is spread among many classes, but I still envisioned my hero having that one fire ability of his actually still be pretty strong?". The answer here is that we also modify the current rank system of powers when it comes to Advantage Points. We increase the number of ranks that powers have, something like 20 or so ranks ( Advantage points gained per level would likely have to be adjusted ). Every time you pick another power from the same power set, all powers of that power set automatically go up 1 rank; if you pick 14 powers all from Fire, then all your Fire powers are automatically rank 14 before spending Advantage points. You can then spend additional points to increase the ranks of those powers; maybe anyone can bring their powers to the max rank, or maybe that is only reserved for those who invest heavily into a power set - the point being that even if you don't specialize in a power set you can still have a strong power from that set.
In addition to all current rank restrictions being removed from powers (i.e. you can pick any power at any point, regardless of which ones you've picked previously ) it would allow players to have greater freedom in customizing their builds, while at the same time lessening the worry that your neat theme build will end up being poop compared to "Numbers Man's" build. At the same time, all those players who like to crunch numbers would have a whole lot more numbers to play around with.
Of course, if we just lifted all the restrictions on cross-building we would likely increase the current problem of cherry picked builds that care more for numbers to be leagues ahead of cherry picking theme builds. Both builds cherry pick, but the one that doesn't even care about "being the hero you want to be" pulls ahead in terms of performance, which has many negative implications for the game even if we're only considering PvE.
So the solution that I think would work best is to base the effectiveness on a given power from a given framework on how many powers of that framework the player has. A hero who has all of his powers revolving around the production and manipulation of fire should have more powerful fire powers than another hero who only has a small part of his power portfolio devoted to fire.
So then you ask "What if I want a build that is spread among many classes, but I still envisioned my hero having that one fire ability of his actually still be pretty strong?". The answer here is that we also modify the current rank system of powers when it comes to Advantage Points. We increase the number of ranks that powers have, something like 20 or so ranks ( Advantage points gained per level would likely have to be adjusted ). Every time you pick another power from the same power set, all powers of that power set automatically go up 1 rank; if you pick 14 powers all from Fire, then all your Fire powers are automatically rank 14 before spending Advantage points. You can then spend additional points to increase the ranks of those powers; maybe anyone can bring their powers to the max rank, or maybe that is only reserved for those who invest heavily into a power set - the point being that even if you don't specialize in a power set you can still have a strong power from that set.
In addition to all current rank restrictions being removed from powers (i.e. you can pick any power at any point, regardless of which ones you've picked previously ) it would allow players to have greater freedom in customizing their builds, while at the same time lessening the worry that your neat theme build will end up being poop compared to "Numbers Man's" build. At the same time, all those players who like to crunch numbers would have a whole lot more numbers to play around with.
Post edited by spinnytop on
0
Comments
Oh, and gradii, it's not how it used to be. In open beta, they had even less restrictions. Then they went down a very, very restrictive road. They let up on some of that, but it's still a horrible mess compared to how amazing it was in open beta.
The funny thing is is that there are people on Massively saying the same thing right now. That right after open beta, they messed up, and they kept messing up. That no new tutorial is going to have them come back to the game. What their ex-population wants is a promise to return to the balance of open beta, to build everything up from there, and to introduce new zones along the leveling path. CO's strengths were always in experimental alts, NEVER cookie cutter builds and end-game brain rot.
You want people coming into CO and rolling ten very experimental heroes and not feeling punished for it. You want them trying out various different zones. That's how retention would work in CO. And then those people would be buying costume parts to make their characters more diverse from each other. If Cryptic didn't have their head so far up the traditionalist MMO's butt, they'd see that.
Under new management, Champions Online could thrive. But it needs to go to a developer that can understand those strengths, and is able to understand that the traditional MMO died a long, long time ago. So they have to try something new. The problem is is that they want to play it safe, they see what everyone wants as too radical. So they revamp the tutorial AGAIN (for, what, the fourth time) in order to try and get people interested.
The only people still interested though are those who want CO to be more restrictive, grindy, et cetera. The things I mentioned. And that's why everyone finds CO unapproachable these days, versus its heydey in open beta where there were so many people playing it that every zone was full. These days it seems less than a hundred players in a zone at any one time, and even that's being generous. Back then, there were thousands.
So, no. We don't need more restrictions. We need LESS, on everything. No restrictions on powers, on costumes, no grind, no barrier to entry caused by need to grind, we need people to be able to get around quickly and make the wildest heroes they can imagine.
As such, I disagree with this idea vehemently.
The problem with cherrypicking to make an overperforming build is that it actually works, and that should not be possible in the first place. The reason cherrypicking works is mostly because there are a certain powers/mechanics/devices/etc that perform much better than others, there is no or not enough diminishing return on getting multiple heals and AD/AO and such, and debuffs are not handled well.
Those "people" are you.
They're not there in the beginning, but when your story ends / Gonna last with you longer than your friends
Join Date: Aug 2009 | Title: Devslayer
- Terran Colonial Marine; Date: Unknown
Here, here.
Join Date: Aug 2009 | Title: Devslayer
If it takes longer to charge, it should do more damage. If it roots you while activating, it should have a benefit over the one that doesn't root you. If it requires a charge time and a wait while another doesn't have either defect, then it should remove one of those defects and deal more damage over all to the power without a downside. If it paralyzes on tap, than other powers that work the same should be on tap. If it works the same as another power except it has shorter range and no advantages, than give it advantages and make it have stronger effect.
Join Date: Aug 2009 | Title: Devslayer
I agree with the general idea, but not with the "of the same tier" part. You can have fully half your build be t3 if you so choose, and there are a few lower tier utility stuff you'd want anyway. So if tiers are the only part that allows a significant performance difference between powers, people will just cherrypick the t3 ones.
(°∇° ) #megalodon2015
Yes, yes we all know if they cut down your pretty FC numbers you'll quit the game. it's been well documented. Keep in mind, for the record, Cross has been a muni/gad since beta and 2GM will likely be one of the powers to go DOWN in this proposal. It's not like I'm making a proposal which would affect you and not me. I'm actually making a proposal more likely to affect me 1st....but I'm cool with that because, in theory, changing the original +60% increase to something closer to +40% would still allow 2gm to be a solid power.
And I've also been bouncing around a different idea for quite a while which could work but I'm not entirely 100% certain on it, also it includes alot of "If" so please bare with me on this one. What if they did put in the Season/AA System and at T5 you could chose, as one of like 3 options, the ability to get a "Super Advantage Token" which could be applied to any T1-T3 Power and would "Bump" it up one tier(in damage/cost/everything). So you could have a T2 2Gm if your toon's main focus was leaning towards that particular power. Now I like the base idea in my proposal but also believe this could kind of have to come after the aforementioned Rebalancing...and even then it would have to be heavily tested to avoid the there being an obvious "Pick A = Become God" scenario. Still, it could be interesting...and it beats the heck out of LvL Cap Increases. :biggrin:
Join Date: Aug 2009 | Title: Devslayer
No. Reread my second paragraph.
The rebalancing is not only based on tier but function of power. If all these powers have a maintain and are of the same tier they ought to do the same damage overall. If Haymaker can have an adv that applies trauma, why not Annihilate? Speaking of, why does Haymaker do more damage and let you move?
Why doesn't Shadow Blast perform as well as Ice Blast? Why does TGM get a buff but TK Assault don't? Why does Strafing Run get to deal so much damage on tap, yet Satellite Cannon self roots, has charge time and wait time to hit and does poor damage? Why would someone ever choose Grapple Gun Pull over Force Geyser? Because FG has range, no delay and lots of advantages. Grapple Gun Pull is worthless in every regard.
Seriously. TGM gets damage, Crippling Challenge, Nail To the Ground and gives a stack of Concentration on half maintain. That's a Tier 0 power! Most Tier 1 powers have nothing on it.
People are already cherry picking the higher tier powers. And people are already cherry picking powers of the same tier because it has an unfair advantage of other powers that are supposed to be just as useful.
Power damage should not only be based on tier but on activation time, cooldown, delay, charge and utility.
I want my Elemental mage to have the Archery Energy Builder for Theme, so I took Implosion Engine to let it me keep Strafe, the engine is not a bad power, I actually like it, I can pretend it's a Gravity Well
or in my STR-based Swordmen, I had to reach lvl 35 to get Unleashed Rage, so I can keep the Reaper's Touch (single blade EB) and take a NON martial art Lunge (Earth Slide and Mighty Leap) because I DON'T want to use neither Thunderbolt Lunge nor Smoke Bomb Lunge for those character, OUT OF THEME
The last one would be fixed if Single/Dual Sword(s) and Fighting Claws had their OWN FREAKING LUNGES CRYPTIC :mad:
Again I agree with most of that, but again not with tiers. Staying with your example, haymaker is t3 so should it perform better than the t2 annihilate just because of that?
The issue I have with tiers having any significant influence on balance is that in the end they do not influence gameplay. The only thing they influence is when you can pick one, and like I explained that is not really a meaningful restriction.
Depends on the grand scale. What if the damage on many other similar powers comes down but the cost on almost everything were to remain constant? It's not like there's a shortage on energy anywhere really(just putting this here for those few exceptions likely to crop up)
Also, if my last post was "100% crapola" then consider the source....since YOU said that...ingame...point blank...crystal clear....no room for misinterpretation...on three seperate occasions. :cool:
Join Date: Aug 2009 | Title: Devslayer
If you had read it, you'd realize my suggestion actually completely lifts cross-set power selection restrictions, and then introduces a system that rewards builds that stay in set. while not preventing cross-set builds from remaining relevant.
And then you started arguing about the cost of Force Cascade for whatever reason. Why such a focus on that one power anyway?
My super cool CC build and how to use it.
Unless they changed requirements it wouldn't have mattered if you had been all might you would have still had to wait till 35 for unleashed rage as its classed as a ultimate and there criteria is must be lvl35
It's the central focus of almost every balance discussion I've ever had with Gradii. Balance, math, fairness, logic, tiers, utility, overall design, and so on... always play second fiddle to "How it feels" and "BIG numbers" in these discussions I've learned. So yeah, that's how that came about.
Also, this is not intended to be insult, accusation, malicious, or anything negative...it's just true. Nothing more, nothing less.
Join Date: Aug 2009 | Title: Devslayer
'Tiers' can be expressed differently, however, though a different sort of mechanic. It would still involve 'investment of character growth potential' of some sort, but could be completely under the player's control and make the Tiers purely a reward, rather than an arbitrary and valueless restriction.
Make all powers available from the start for FF (or in the case of F2P AT, all the relevant powers) and balance the base mechanics of all powers for the low-level content they will initially be used in. Make a bare-bones minimum baseline for a the basic attributes of each type of power.
Example would be something like basic charge-blast type power - range 50, single target, damage X-Y based on charge time, cost X-Y based on charge time, max charge time X, roots character.
Scale the powers' mechanics based on the player's choice to invest their character's growth potential (sort of like advantage points, a resource that accumulates as the character gains experience). Have the powers able to scale up to maximums that are effective for whatever content the character might be facing.
Reward the player by granting boosted aspects of the power based on how they choose to invest in improving its 'Tiers' - for example, instead of just the current ranks or optional benefits, open the whole shebang up and offer improved 'Tiers' to specific aspects of each power that can be purchased separately, like boost damage, reduce cost, faster charge, longer maintain, longer range increment, increase area, NoRoot, maintain converted to toggle, reduce cooldown, boost healing, et cetera ad nauseum.
Use the amount of available resources at the characters amount of XP gained to determine the possible maximums, then establish investment maximums per power with a level-based calculation, so that a PC cannot spend all resources every level to make 1 power which trivializes enemies many levels above them. This will encourage rounding a character out instead of the one trick pony. The trick here is to allow some 'twinking' within reason - so a player who wants to sacrifice general utility to be extra awesome with a power can reap the benefit of having a mechanical edge against enemies up to a few levels above them in exchange for less utility, but without it breaking the game.
This would create a need for the player to have an increase in the growth potential resources offered for gaining experience. You might approach it from a standpoint of testing to find a 'sweet spot' where the character has enough growth resource to keep a certain optimal number of powers at above-average effectiveness, fewer powers at extreme effectiveness, and also have a solid pool left over to spread around for utility and optional components for various powers.
You might have to take some time to generate the baseline templates/formulas, but in essence this allows you to have improved balance, consistency for the power 'Tier' progressions, less need to maintain a bunch of different progression models (if I had to guess, you could probably rework the existing powers with something like 9 or 10 power progression templates - but I admit I am totally not sure on that), and incredibly deep player customization.
Give the player that sort of granular control to really, really customize their powers. In this way, you may have a group of characters all with the same power name, but the only thing that would be the same between them might be the animation/VFX.
Let players build their Hero how they like without requiring them to take things they don't want. This increases player agency and freedom, rewarding the player for their choice of investment in a way that has value for that player as well as their chosen concept/theme, and does not restrict or limit them needlessly.
The beauty I have see of a game like CO is the creative exercise it offers - it can reward the player for being creative, whether it regards costuming, RP bio, power building, min/maxing, or trying to reconcile two or more of these sorts of goals. I know the character that engages me the most is the one I put the most creative effort and time into trying to bring it all together in a cool-looking, combat effective, and RP-able character concept.
You want more revenue, right? The way to do it is to give your customers more reasons and incentives to get creative, and get addicted. I guarantee you that subscriptions will increase.
However, I wouldn't mind making restrictions more sensical. I.E. how every blast/combo is tier 0 is generally good, but how they can vary wildly upon utility is bad ( ricochet throw vs. Chain lightning.) Or how lightning arc is R1 and burning chi fist is R3, and LA readily outclasses BCF in range and DPS.
I disagree. I like that the powers are set up a certain way; it gives the system a certain "box of toys" feel to it, like there is an actual system of powers with some thought put into it that you're working with. Once you make it your way, it's like handing someone a box of parts that says "Much assembly required" on the side - I'm sure that people think they would like this sort of system, but I think once it was actually put in front of them they'd realize that all the flavor had been sucked out of the experience and was replaced with an empty numbers machine. Plus, this would really open up the door for players abusing the system. It's a neat idea on paper, but when I imagine it actually being in game all I can envision is a complete mess.
I'll just repeat this until I indoctrinate people.
Half your build can be t3 powers if you so choose, and you'll want quite a few <t3 powers either way. Even if you still consider that a meaningful restriction, with the fairly arbitrary tier distribution in CO tiers are just not a good system to base any balance on.
^ I agree with this. The tiers are effectively meaningless and would be a terrible guide for any balancing process.
You'll have to define what you mean by "flavors". To me, the mechanics are part of the flavor of a power.
^ And I also really like this one. It's just my personal preference, but I really like being able to see what someone's "focus" or "strength" is in their build, with other things that go along with or support said focus or strength. Not that we can't achieve that now, but these two suggestions would make the main idea(s) of one's concept stand out much more to me.
To be fair, you randomly brought up force cascade in this thread for no apparent reason. That's why I reversed your edit of cross's quote.