DELETE Hasten, SLIGHTLY ALTER all enemies, SLIGHTY ALTER all player powers

[Starforge]

19 minutes ago, Steampunkette said:

What still gets me is that you're still confused by this. I've explained the thought process 4 or 5 times as of this post. Are you not reading them or is it that you don't understand?

 

'Cause I've made it about as simple as I can.

I guess I’ll simplify my position then, it’s a bad suggestion. For all of the reasons expressed in the last 15 pages of this thread.

 

Again, to reiterate something I posted earlier: 

If everything in a game is perfectly balanced, then what's the point in even having choices?

Edited September 26, 2019 by Starforge

[TraumaTrain]

2 hours ago, Steampunkette said:

I earnestly believe that when Sets were introduced Hasten should've been changed into an autopower granting 20% increased recharge, globally.

I really like this idea. Let's do this one.

[Neogumbercules]

This suggestion does not deserve this many pages of discussion. Hard /jranger. 

[Steampunkette]

1 hour ago, Lost Ninja said:

It's not your thought process that is hard to fathom but why you think changing but not changing something will make any difference.

Because perceptions guide people to make decisions.

 

People buy the "Economy Box" of laundry detergent because it's 'cheaper' than buying the smaller box. Sure you pay more at the register but you get a lot more detergent so it evens out, right? But they give you a commensurately bigger scoop so that you use more laundry detergent with the big box than the small box and run out at the same time. You spend more total money on the big box thinking it will last you longer, it lasts the same amount of time, so you spend more money. Instead of $6 every 4 weeks you're certain you'll spend $9 every 6 weeks but you wind up spending $9 every 4 weeks.

 

 

 

1 hour ago, Starforge said:

I guess I’ll simplify my position then, it’s a bad suggestion. For all of the reasons expressed in the last 15 pages of this thread.

 

Again, to reiterate something I posted earlier: 

If everything in a game is perfectly balanced, then what's the point in even having choices?

If anyone was arguing for 'Perfect Balance' that might be a worthwhile question to ask. But no one is. Or ever has. So pick up your Strawman off the ground and stop knocking him over. Poor guy.

1 hour ago, TraumaTrain said:

I really like this idea. Let's do this one.

See, that's what -I- thought, but it's just not popular. *Shrug*

Edited September 26, 2019 by Steampunkette

[DSorrow]

1 hour ago, Steampunkette said:

ED and Target/Aggro caps ultimately made the game more fun than it was, previously.

But it wasn't ED alone that made the game more fun, it was ED as a stepping stone to IOs. I can't speak for anyone else, but without IOs I would've left the game a long time ago because with ED restricted SOs build variety is actually pretty limited if you want your build to be effective. I do agree with you on the target / aggro caps because the way they worked before promoted a pretty boring playstyle.

[Corruption]

1 hour ago, Steampunkette said:

What still gets me is that you're still confused by this. I've explained the thought process 4 or 5 times as of this post. Are you not reading them or is it that you don't understand?

 

'Cause I've made it about as simple as I can.

Just because I disagree with your explanation doesn't mean I don't understand it. It's a bit condescending to suggest otherwise, especially when people have said multiple times it won't have the desired effect you're looking for. 

[Steampunkette]

2 minutes ago, DSorrow said:

But it wasn't ED alone that made the game more fun, it was ED as a stepping stone to IOs. I can't speak for anyone else, but without IOs I would've left the game a long time ago because with ED restricted SOs build variety is actually pretty limited if you want your build to be effective. I do agree with you on the target / aggro caps because the way they worked before promoted a pretty boring playstyle.

Before ED you just slotted for whatever the power gave you the most of. MAYBE an Accuracy with 5 slots of damage, but everyone took Stamina and slotted it with a boatload of endmod. I was there, too.

 

I had 6 slotted Blasters who dealt great damage and ate floor 'cause the tanks couldn't hold aggro. They were different days...

1 minute ago, Corruption said:

Just because I disagree with your explanation doesn't mean I don't understand it. It's a bit condescending to suggest otherwise, especially when people have said multiple times it won't have the desired effect you're looking for. 

Yeah... so... That wasn't a response to you. It was a response to someone who was being condescending so I responded with condescension.

 

Why are you trying to be insulted by something not aimed at you?

[PaxArcana]

10 hours ago, MunkiLord said:

This is me. Any change that is going to impact every single character I have, I need a concrete reason why it would benefit me, not other players or the game as a whole, but me. 

I hate to say this, Munki, but .... you've just invalidated everything you've tried to contribute in this discussion.

 

"Petulant spoiled child" is not a good position to have staked out.

[Steampunkette]

Just now, PaxArcana said:

I hate to say this, Munki, but .... you've just invalidated everything you've tried to contribute in this discussion.

 

"Petulant spoiled child" is not a good position to have staked out.

Let's not go there, Pax.

 

He doesn't want the change because it would negatively impact him. That's basically why everyone who is against the change is against it: It would ruin the current recharge-centric meta of which they are a part. There's some people who are against it 'cause they're against change, or think that it would be a catastrophic change that pisses off the people who are in that Meta... But yeah. Most people arguing against it are probably part of the recharge meta.

 

And there's -nothing- wrong with that. Being against something because it negatively impacts you, personally, isn't wrong.

[DSorrow]

Just now, Steampunkette said:

Before ED you just slotted for whatever the power gave you the most of. MAYBE an Accuracy with 5 slots of damage, but everyone took Stamina and slotted it with a boatload of endmod. I was there, too.

True, I remember running my Scrapper with all attacks 6 slotted for Damage because thanks to Conserve Power, Hasten and Focused Accuracy there was no need for Acc/End/Rech slotting. Similarly all my main defensive powers were slotted with 6 Res or Def depending on the power.

 

That was bland, but in my opinion ED didn't really fix the blandness, it just changed it from 6 Dam to 3 Dam / 1 Acc / 1 End / 1 Rech so the way I see it, ED was just a global nerf up until the introduction of IOs. Right now, I'd never switch ED+IOs to a world of no ED and no IOs, nor do I think it would make any sense to get rid of ED while keeping IOs.

[Steampunkette]

1 minute ago, DSorrow said:

True, I remember running my Scrapper with all attacks 6 slotted for Damage because thanks to Conserve Power, Hasten and Focused Accuracy there was no need for Acc/End/Rech slotting. Similarly all my main defensive powers were slotted with 6 Res or Def depending on the power.

 

That was bland, but in my opinion ED didn't really fix the blandness, it just changed it from 6 Dam to 3 Dam / 1 Acc / 1 End / 1 Rech so the way I see it, ED was just a global nerf up until the introduction of IOs. Right now, I'd never switch ED+IOs to a world of no ED and no IOs, nor do I think it would make any sense to get rid of ED while keeping IOs.

I disagree. Hami-Os. They used to be a big deal!

 

With Hami-Os, which are basically the precursor to IOs, you could get mix n' matched powers to push ED further while still getting some of the 'other stuff' that you needed but wouldn't have gotten when using only SOs.

[PaxArcana]

18 minutes ago, DSorrow said:

But it wasn't ED alone that made the game more fun,

Yes, it was.  I was here when it happened.  ED made the game better, all by itself, long before IOs happened.

 

ED happened with Issue 6 (actually, IIRC, a couple weeks beforehand, with a preparatory patch).

 

The Invention System did not happen until Issue 9.

 

Which means, all of Issues 6, 7, and 8 were played under ED, but without IOs.

 

---

 

8 minutes ago, Steampunkette said:

And there's -nothing- wrong with that. Being against something because it negatively impacts you, personally, isn't wrong.

Yes, and no.  The problem IMO is when you declare you would be opposed to anything that negatively impacts you no matter how much good it might otherwise do.  A more adult position to take would be, IMO, "if a change will negatively impact me, I will oppose it unless you can show me that it will hugely benefit the game as a whole."

 

Immediate edit to add:  Enhancement Diversification is an excellent example of that: it negatively impacted nearly everyone, across the entire game.  Every archetype, every powerset, every anything.  But, in the end, it was HUGELY beneficial to all of those anythings, too.

Edited September 26, 2019 by PaxArcana

[DSorrow]

1 minute ago, Steampunkette said:

I disagree. Hami-Os. They used to be a big deal!

 

With Hami-Os, which are basically the precursor to IOs, you could get mix n' matched powers to push ED further while still getting some of the 'other stuff' that you needed but wouldn't have gotten when using only SOs.

It's a good point, but I'd argue HOs were so hard to come by they were basically unaccessible to a large part of the population. Considering that you'd need probably at least ~30 to fill every slot that could meaningfully benefit from HOs it would take months of Hami raids to get them for one character. The server I played on organized one per week, IIRC, and even then it wasn't always successful.

 

1 minute ago, PaxArcana said:

ED happened with Issue 6 (actually, IIRC, a couple weeks beforehand, with a preparatory patch).

 

The Invention System did not happen until Issue 9.

 

Which means, all of Issues 6, 7, and 8 were played under ED, but without IOs

And at no point in the time between ED and Inventions did I think the new ruleset was better than what we had before. Fun is subjective and I think ED+IOs > no ED but no IOs > ED and no IOs when it comes to fun. Like I said, I don't think I would've continued to play the game for as long as I have if ED had never been fixed with IOs.

[ShardWarrior]

36 minutes ago, DSorrow said:

But it wasn't ED alone that made the game more fun, it was ED as a stepping stone to IOs.

More than apparent ED didn't make the game more "fun" for the droves of players they lost when it hit.  IOs were put in to try and undo that damage in my opinion. 

Edited September 26, 2019 by ShardWarrior

[subbacultchas]

Would it help any if hasten were a bit deeper in the speed pool, you think? Currently a lot of folks have it, and likely on hasten, from the speed pool because it's a very easy dip into it. And honestly I do think it's by far the most useful power in said pool by a pretty wide margin.

I'm not against changing it, I'm just not sure what direction I want to see it go in. And yeah, it's going to be an absolute chore to replace on every single character I have, whichever direction it goes.

[DSorrow]

1 minute ago, ShardWarrior said:

More than apparent ED didn't make the game more "fun" for the droves of players they lost when it hit.  IOs were put in to try and undo that damage in my opinion. 

If you ask me, IOs were a very successful attempt at undoing ED because I'm having much more fun with all the possibilities granted to me through IOs than I ever did before.

[Auroxis]

If you wanna make Swift also grant +20% Recharge (like Lightning Reflexes and Quickness) while nerfing Hasten to +50% that's OK. That way you're not encouraging respecs or nerfing anyone's character, just making it slightly less of an auto-pick. Especially if you buff some existing pool powers or add new ones.

[Megajoule]

Let me tell you all about SPD.

 

SPD (Speed), for those of you who never played original, tabletop Champions, was something of an uber-stat, arguably more important than any of the others.  SPD was, simply, the number of times your character got to take action in a 12-second turn.  The base starting value for a human was 2, but no one left it there - there was immense pressure to buy it up to 3 or 4, or even higher (6 was popular) for particularly speedy characters (characters who, in this game, would go further into the pool).  This was not cheap; as such a powerful stat, its cost was balanced accordingly. But people did it anyway, because they "had to".

 

As a player, this was always one of my little peeves about the game, because it was such a game thing.  Most characters, in their concept and/or origin, had no reason to be superhumanly fast.  But no one wanted to be the one sitting around while other people got to play.

 

So, on the one hand, I get it.  I really do.

On the other, I still think it's bad, and wish it wasn't a thing.  A thing that everyone seems to feel they "have to" do.

 

Edited September 26, 2019 by Megajoule

[ShardWarrior]

6 minutes ago, Auroxis said:

If you wanna make Swift also grant +20% Recharge (like Lightning Reflexes and Quickness) while nerfing Hasten to +50% that's OK. That way you're not encouraging respecs or nerfing anyone's character, just making it slightly less of an auto-pick. Especially if you buff some existing pool powers or add new ones.

It's fine but it seems like it is work just for the sake of work when the net result is the same.

[Steampunkette]

IOs weren't put in the game to "Fix" ED.

 

ED was put into the game as preparation for IOs. 

 

The current culture of "Six Slot Reds" was unhealthy and caused people to get really frustrated really fast when their attacks missed and their endurance cratered.

 

People had to be prepared for the idea that 6 slotting Damage wasn't the end all be all of how to make a character -work-. People had to be prepared for the idea that sets were coming and they wouldn't be 6 Damage IOs with full set bonuses tied to them.

 

ED was the healthiest improvement to the game. It made people make choices. Particularly around their Blue Bar...

 

But yeah. IOs weren't "Fixing" ED. ED wasn't broken. There's just people who didn't like it 'cause it made their attacks hit less hard and their defenses less powerful.

[Auroxis]

6 minutes ago, ShardWarrior said:

It's fine but it seems like it is work just for the sake of work when the net result is the same.

Due to how long it's been in the game and how many players are using it, any change made to Hasten needs to be on that scale and simplicity even if there's potential that nothing will actually change.

 

If nothing changes, no harm done or dev time wasted. If people actually start not taking it (to free up an auto-click/power slot/whatever other reason) then it's a success no matter how small the impact is.

Edited September 26, 2019 by Auroxis

[MunkiLord]

1 hour ago, PaxArcana said:

I hate to say this, Munki, but .... you've just invalidated everything you've tried to contribute in this discussion.

 

"Petulant spoiled child" is not a good position to have staked out.

That's nonsense. Every suggestion in this forum, every change made in the game, all comes from varying amounts of selfishness. People are proposing what they think would be better for the game because they feel such changes would benefit them and their play experience. And there is nothing wrong with that. Why do people propose balance changes? Because they enjoy the game and they feel it would be better for the game and keep it around longer, make it more fun, grow the community, or some other motivation that would benefit them. And there is nothing wrong with that. The people in charge weigh such ideas and what various players want and try to do what is best. But even developers are motivated by various personal benefits like their job, money, reputation, etc. And there is nothing wrong with that. People don't like it when someone is open about their selfish motivations, I get that. But we all have them. 

1 hour ago, PaxArcana said:

Yes, and no.  The problem IMO is when you declare you would be opposed to anything that negatively impacts you no matter how much good it might otherwise do.  A more adult position to take would be, IMO, "if a change will negatively impact me, I will oppose it unless you can show me that it will hugely benefit the game as a whole."

 

Immediate edit to add:  Enhancement Diversification is an excellent example of that: it negatively impacted nearly everyone, across the entire game.  Every archetype, every powerset, every anything.  But, in the end, it was HUGELY beneficial to all of those anythings, too.

I am opposed to anything that will negatively impact literally every character I have and my entire experience with the game. That is sensible and logical. And if a proposal would have that immediate negative impact, but lead to something even better like ED did with IOs, cool. Then that case needs to be made before I will happily accept said change. Is it selfish? Yes. Does that mean it's automatically bad, no.

[ShardWarrior]

3 minutes ago, Auroxis said:

Due to how long it's been in the game and how many players are using it, any change made to Hasten needs to be on that scale and simplicity even if there's potential that nothing will actually change.

Potentially nothing will change?  More like a certainty nothing will change.  People want the recharge whether they have to take Hasten or slot swift and hasten.  So to put in all of the work to change it even though the majority of people are still going to take it?   That doesn't seem to solve anything.

[MunkiLord]

Just now, ShardWarrior said:

Potentially nothing will change?  More like a certainty nothing will change.  People want the recharge whether they have to take Hasten or slot swift and hasten.  So to put in all of the work to change it even though the majority of people are still going to take it?   That doesn't seem to solve anything.

I think to have any noticeable impact on people choosing Hasten on every build the inherent change would need to be larger, like 40-50% and Hasten moved to 20-30%. If that were the change, I think it would accomplish the goal of the OP. But that is also a significant boost to base stats, so then we run head on into the power creep issue. I think. I could be wrong as I'm just speculating on what the masses will do.

[Heraclea]

57 minutes ago, ShardWarrior said:

More than apparent ED didn't make the game more "fun" for the droves of players they lost when it hit.  IOs were put in to try and undo that damage in my opinion. 

In hindsight I rather regret leaving the game for a year and a half -- inventions intrigued me but they took a while to figure out -- but leave is what I did.  It was more the flawed mechanics and artificial difficulty of World of Warcraft that sent me back, but I didn't really return completely until Cimerora. 

 

There are fortunately other servers now.