Opinion: Tier 1 Attacks Should Cost 0 Endurance

[boggo2300]

2 hours ago, FDR's Think Tank said:

You know what would be interesting? A sort of Zero-cost "Cantrip" sort of power pool. It would have various low/no endurance cost variants of your different basic powers. It would be the "Jack of All Trades" power pool. Or something.

 

I think with the current Tier one powers, if endurance is the major consideration, you can slot it that way, instead of for damage. If you make it zero cost, you are just reducing the variety of build strategies people can employ to suit their personal tastes.

 

My issue is that for the most part, players are majorly rewarded for slotting Damage and Accuracy. Making the power Zero cost just lets people have their cake and eat it too. I remember they talked about Enhancement Diversification for YEARS to the point where I had believed it was already implemented. Then they DID implement it and people were ticked off! THEN they made the IO enhancements and everything went out the window.

 

However, there is something you have picked up on here that I think is somewhat critical to game theory... to make a game really deep, whether you are pitting players against each other or an automated environment, Resource Management isn't the ONLY set of skills you can challenge players with. In fact, if you are clever, you can make an incredibly deep system by giving players OPTIONS about which system to commit to. I don't think it would be impossible to design an attack set that taxes a players risk management abilities more than their resource management ones. However, balancing that with existing archetypes like the Brute might be daunting. Their inherent might make risky playstyle TOO rewarding. It's something to ponder.

 

(I don't know if anyone here has ever played "Warmachine"... but they had a similar dual structure with "Hordes". The games were compatible and had the same sequencing... but the factions from one set focused on Resource Management based powers and the other set focused on Risk Management. In a purely ideal system, you would try to find a third management style so you could build in dual opposing pain wheels, which, with a computer game, doesn't slow down the action but leaves the tactics and strategy very deep. Maybe the third style could be a Bluff/Counter style with blowback for bad judgement...)

 

Of course, for the purposes of making CoH more of a Superhero Simulator, I don't see any problem with making all tier one abilities have lower endurance, but you have to remember, you only said the tier one attacks. It might be terribly unbalancing to make such a sweeping benefit to attack abilities, but tell players with defense tier ones that they get nothing. Since the game is mostly PvE some people won't even notice it. And what I understand about PvP is that it's all bouncing around with alpha strikes, so it's likely this wouldn't affect it at all. It's hard to predict what else might come of it.

 

I will admit, I am biased too... Trick Arrow Defenders have VERY little going for them right now... but when the team is wiped, they are one of the few classes that gets huge benefits in combat, what with reduced costs for all attacks. If my opponents and I are both low on endurance, my ability to economize and keep debuffing and attacking is where all my hope lies. Giving everyone another free attack for nothing isn't making me happy! Perhaps that's too deeply bitter, huh?

Tier 1 powers though except in the cases of the ocd torturing flipped ones (Katana and Broadsword) are already really low end, you can literally spam your tier 1 with no slotting at all and not run out of end ever

[Myrmidon]

On 12/31/2019 at 4:39 AM, Outrider_01 said:

that's not game breaking.  Slot accuracy and the cost of endurance is negated when it hits.  There should always be a cost, other wise might as well ask for zero cost on everything.

I’ll take it.

[boggo2300]

1 hour ago, oedipus_tex said:

 

 

Sorry but I disagree. "Power creep" applies to any game change proposal that improves quality of life.

 

In most classic RPGs, characters have actions they can take they do not require expending mana/energy/a spell slot/what have you.  In the early 00's it became popular to make all or most of a characters capabilities into spells/powers. So melee characters no longer have a "basic attack" that is somewhat decent. What got lost there is suddenly there is no "all the time" action for characters.

 

 

 

There's a general pattern to all of the attack powers in the game. They were designed using the following ratios:

• Recharge time
• Endurance cost
• Damage

Animation time was not (originally) considered even though it has a large impact on DPS.

 

Accuracy is a fourth variable that is locked at the same value for the majority of powers, except for powersets where extra Accuracy is their perk. The Accuracy value does occasionally increase or decrease though to incentivize slotting. Occasionally, a power will be auto-hit, removing the need for Accuracy entirely.

 

The reason the ratios matter is that when one of the values is out of alignment, it changes the slot-hungriness of the power. 

 

The big takeaway is that since every power is balanced using the same ratios, powers are therefor mostly interchangeable, and soon as one no longer fits the pattern of optimal DPS, it should be jettisoned. If the same ratio is used for all powers in a set, the attacks are interchangeable. The only solution for that is for some powers to be outliers. Secondary effects (stun, immobilize etc) can sometimes do that.

 

Unfortunately, for nearly all existing sets, the T1 is the most "vanilla" power with few other characteristics to set it apart.

 

Fairly typical slotting for an attack power is:

• x2 Accuracy
• x2 Damage
• x1 End Redux
• x1 Recharge

 

However each of these parameters has different implications:

• Accuracy: If a power is extra-accurate or auto-hit, you can skip all/some Accuracy slotting
• Damage: Attack powers generally always need to be enhanced for damage
• Endurance Reduction: Powers that cost no endurance do not need Endurance slotting
• Recharge: This one is all over the place and depends a lot on context. Usually skippable on powers with already-short recharges.

 

Auto-hit powers like Ice Rain let you burn less slots overall.

 

So what does lowering endurance cost of the T1 power do? 

 

For one thing it (very slightly) relieves the slot-pressure on that power. The cost of most of these powers is already low. Here are typical endurance costs for T1 powers that Recharge in 4 seconds:

• Controller, Dominator (Immobilize): 7.8
• Blaster, Defender, Corruptor, Scrapper, Stalker, Tanker, Dominator (Assault set): 5.2 

 

With 2-slotted Endurance reduction those values are roughly 4.5  and 2.3. Although truth is not a lot of people slot endurance reduction here.

 

So where I will concede is that on some archetypes where they already regularly use the T1 power a lot, the change might be too much. However, I also have to get back to my original question. Is a Controller using Chillblain really going to break the game? Really? 

 

Thank you again for the replies.

You think removing the 7.8 end cost off Chillblain is suddenly going to make everyone do nothing but spam it?

 

really?

 

I'll give you a hint, if you want, you can already spam Chillblain and not run out of end...

 

and NO not every QOL suggestion is power creep, power creep is asking for something to do more than it was designed to do, for no real need

[Myrmidon]

2 minutes ago, boggo2300 said:

You think removing the 7.8 end cost off Chillblain is suddenly going to make everyone do nothing but spam it?

 

really?

 

I'll give you a hint, if you want, you can already spam Chillblain and not run out of end...

This one is so funny it brings a tear to my eye.🤣

 

Spamming Chilblain.🤣🤣🤣

[boggo2300]

14 minutes ago, Myrmidon said:

This one is so funny it brings a tear to my eye.🤣

 

Spamming Chilblain.🤣🤣🤣

well every 5 and a bit seconds 😄

[oedipus_tex]

34 minutes ago, boggo2300 said:

You think removing the 7.8 end cost off Chillblain is suddenly going to make everyone do nothing but spam it?

 

 

 

No I don't think that. The people arguing against the change are arguing that. It won't result in that, because Chillblain represents the lowest potential attack value of the character.

 

Would I cast it if it was low cost or free? I mean, why wouldn't I? Do you think I have never run low or out of endurance and had nothing worth casting?

 

Why wouldn't you cast Chillblain if it was free and you were low on endurance? It would literally be the best option, which is the point.

 

And no I don't currently spam it, because it deals the same damage as the single target Hold, but isn't a Hold. It costs almost as much to cast as the Hold. If low on endurance it's currently a terrible option.

 

Edited January 1, 2020 by oedipus_tex

[Razor Cure]

I don't mind this idea. It is also similar to one I was pondering...making any MISSED attacks cost no (or refund some) end, when you are sub level 20. Yes, yes, I know Stamina is free, but it is still super easy to blueflatline when you have no/minimal enhancements and get a string of misses. Or even if the game could somehow refund end when you attack something that is 'dead.' Like when you fire a shot at a baddie, but a team mate did it 0.0001 seconds faster (or their attack just lands quicker) and they go splat, before your attack hits.

Another incentive to t1 attacks could be similar to Champions online, when powers could be Energy Builders.

[MunkiLord]

What about at level 1 it cost zero end and increases every level until 15 at which point it will cost the same amount of endurance as it always has?

[boggo2300]

25 minutes ago, MunkiLord said:

What about at level 1 it cost zero end and increases every level until 15 at which point it will cost the same amount of endurance as it always has?

honestly I think if we have to have a change (which I'm very against) the opposite of your proposal would be better, end reducing to zero from it's current level though personally I think it's perfectly fine as it is and shouldn't be changed at all

[Leogunner]

2 hours ago, MunkiLord said:

What about at level 1 it cost zero end and increases every level until 15 at which point it will cost the same amount of endurance as it always has?

 

2 hours ago, boggo2300 said:

honestly I think if we have to have a change (which I'm very against) the opposite of your proposal would be better, end reducing to zero from it's current level though personally I think it's perfectly fine as it is and shouldn't be changed at all

It's because there are various trains of thought here, some wanting to "fix" endurance issues early on and some wanting to make the tier 1s "attractive" to players that either never take them or remove them the moment their build will allow.

[boggo2300]

1 minute ago, Leogunner said:

 

It's because there are various trains of thought here, some wanting to "fix" endurance issues early on and some wanting to make the tier 1s "attractive" to players that either never take them or remove them the moment their build will allow.

I honestly don't see dropping the meagre end costs of these powers would make that group of players suddenly find them attractive, it's not the end cost generally speaking that makes them not use them, a point on which I think we can agree?

[MunkiLord]

2 hours ago, boggo2300 said:

honestly I think if we have to have a change (which I'm very against) the opposite of your proposal would be better, end reducing to zero from it's current level though personally I think it's perfectly fine as it is and shouldn't be changed at all

I also think it's fine as is.

[Outrider_01]

The idea of scaling cost is a good one, better then a freebie. 

 

I still dislike the idea of free fitness as much as zero cost tier 1s, looking at all the turbo incarnate builds and such Stamina isn't needed with the usual 1 slot while health gets the 2 proc endurance healing IO.  Yet so many are rolling with the leadership  and tough pools the free Stamina by itself is over taxed if melee are running thier normal defense/resist/mez toggles, as now 4 toggle power pool are replacing the old "manditory we got to give up for 3 choices" like you need the 3-4 powers.

[Monos King]

12 hours ago, oedipus_tex said:

Is a Controller using Chillblain really going to break the game? Really? 

It isn't a matter of it's direct destructive impact on the game, it's a matter of its relevance and the precedent it would set.

 

1) It is not relevant. It isn't relevant to effective gameplay, it's unnecessary. I've really never heard of a controller coughing up complaints of fatigue that would warrant a change in mechanics. And when I've seen a noob break down, I'd give them advice and they'd get better.

 

2) Precedent. As I had unveiled earlier, this would beckon all kinds of other demands and wants that would circumvent experience, reduce player creativity, and reduce player consideration in the forums because much like this idea none will ever happen. 

 

You've been trying to posit why the 0 end t1 would be a good idea. I think you would have better success pitching this idea if you could provide evidence that endurance "issues" are NOT something that are passing, easily remedied, and inherent to progression.

[boggo2300]

18 minutes ago, monos1 said:

It isn't a matter of it's direct destructive impact on the game, it's a matter of its relevance and the precedent it would set.

 

1) It is not relevant. It isn't relevant to effective gameplay, it's unnecessary. I've really never heard of a controller coughing up complaints of fatigue that would warrant a change in mechanics. And when I've seen a noob break down, I'd give them advice and they'd get better.

 

2) Precedent. As I had unveiled earlier, this would beckon all kinds of other demands and wants that would circumvent experience, reduce player creativity, and reduce player consideration in the forums because much like this idea none will ever happen. 

 

You've been trying to posit why the 0 end t1 would be a good idea. I think you would have better success pitching this idea if you could provide evidence that endurance "issues" are NOT something that are passing, easily remedied, and inherent to progression.

Better said than every attempt I've made, thank you