Fighting Synergy

[cohRock]

In a now-closed thread, @Crashen wrote:

Quote

Another pool that I really really like is Fighting. I took boxing/kick/cross punch on my mind/dark controller for all those damn robots and zombies and Awakened Seers. And you know what? The Fighting synergy is really nice and really satisfying. I like that with one or two, the attacks are 'okay' but with all three, they are pretty powerful. Combined with Containment, and I feel like an even more vicious version of a Dominator. I love it. It's fun and satisfying and it all fits together really well. My 'troller feels powerful and versatile, and I feel like I have multiple ways to complete a fight. And it's because Fighting adds something different to my set. I can't compete with a Dominator for instantly hard locking enemies, and I can't compete with a Scrapper for crits and toughness. But I can still get a lot of enjoyment out of putting a group of enemies to sleep, debuffing them and then beating the crap out of them one at a time. 

So far, even without Cross Punch yet, I agree.  You failed to mention one element of the Fighting Synergy, though -- Brawl.  It apparently is not additive to the Fighting Pool attacks, but they are additive to it.  While its damage is not improved, consider:

1. with Boxing or Kick, reduces the targets attack speed and chance to hit for 10 seconds
2. with both Boxing and Kick, these effects increase
3. with Cross Punch, it will reduce the targets regeneration and recovery for 10 seconds

I first learned about this Synergy two days ago, and built a brute to test it out.  So far I'm surprised, and expect to be even more impressed with her next power, Cross Punch.  I sort of wish I had made a Sentinel instead, since the Brute already focuses on melee attacks.  My logic at the time was I'd be trading out melee attacks for melee attacks, and I didn't want to trade out the ranged attacks of a Sentinel.  But when the brute build is done, she'll have all the Dark Melee attacks except Shadow Punch and Shadow Maul.  I could have traded-out two attacks of a Sentinel instead.

Edited July 30, 2020 by cohRock

[Bill Z Bubba]

I tried it. What became weird is that I ended up with a pauseless attack chain with just boxing, cross punch and the T2 from the set I was using. So brawl ended up not entering into it. Seems like doing this on a corruptor may be even more interesting than a sent just for scourge but of course the sent can live in melee without issue.

[MTeague]

My Mind/Kin uses Boxing + Crosspunch as staples in his attack chain on his 2nd build.  (He also has selected Kick, but allocated no slots to it and never activates it).

It's... quite nice.  Esp with many stacks of Fulcrum Shift and Containment. 

 

I haven't used Brawl with it, but it does make for a very solo-friendly build.

[Gulbasaur]

If you're into damage procs (and you should be), Kick and Cross Punch both take a lot of fairly decent procs, including the +recharge one. It's a nice little power pool!

Edited July 30, 2020 by Gulbasaur

[Sir Myshkin]

Built a Defender who "only" used the Fighting Pool (AR TAoE/Cone for spawns) as its attacks. Did very well considering, but it did feel a bit static after a while since there's no dynamic change ups or anything. Also using Boxing and Cross Punch as replacements in Super Strength. Boxing is a solid right, Jab has an alt left-handed animation that is a quick, well, jab so it's a nice 1-2 combo, and Cross Punch gives a nice wind-up hitter with KO Blow being the really bamboozler. Feels so much like a boxer.

[Myrmidon]

I am using that combo as my attack chain on my Thugs/Time Mastermind. While I like the range attacks, the concept of a melee specialist won out.

[MTeague]

19 hours ago, Gulbasaur said:

If you're into damage procs (and you should be), Kick and Cross Punch both take a lot of fairly decent procs, including the +recharge one. It's a nice little power pool!

I perhaps should use Damage Proc's more than I do.  But I generally don't.

 

a) I am a Set-Bonus-Chasing FIEND, and plopping in 3-4 proc's means giving up the good set bonuses.

b) I keep expecting Damage Proc's to be seriously nerfed at some point.  If I don't load up on them now, I won't be disappointed when/if that day comes. 

 

I have nothing more than a hunch on b), and it's possible I'm flat wrong and the devs are happy with how it works now.  But it just feels to me like that cant' be what was intended.

[Sir Myshkin]

12 hours ago, MTeague said:

I have nothing more than a hunch on b), and it's possible I'm flat wrong and the devs are happy with how it works now.  But it just feels to me like that cant' be what was intended.

First I will say that I truly believe they wanted a better opportunity to test the PPM mechanic further, however (Second) it is working "as intended" in the initial phase. Comment sections have been posted up for other things that have specific call outs about the math and mechanics being specific to the goal of the developers working on it (I'm terrible at names, but as I recall they were along the lines of "and this is how (dev) said we're setting this" and a couple others that were basically "this is the new WAI"). Please don't ask me for sources, it was in the code and posted up over a year ago.

 

Now given that, keep in mind that the PPM mechanic we have now had just been published to the Retail Test Servers, we had access to it for a whole whopping five minutes before NCSoft... did what they did, so any real investigation or testing of those systems just flat out didn't happen. There are definitely a few areas of the PPM function that will definitely get visited (Powerhouse has said as much) like the functionality of Procs in conjunction with Epic/Patron pools. The very thing that makes PPM good also happens to be the defining balance of those powers; longer recharge, and in some cases longer animations to offset the additional 'supplemental' utility, but not make them main-stay powers.

 

I can see some consideration being given for looking into a few other unique cases that may result in some PPM values being decreased (less frequency) on specific procs, but something to keep in mind about the "new" mechanic is it was designed specifically to give more frequency, and that no matter what we'd (at worst case) get bumped back down to where it started which "wasn't bad, but kinda eh" at the get-go. I know there are a few Elephant In The Room procs that get used, but to be honest those either get attributed in places where they're being appropriately utilized (1-2 limited use functionally to begin with per minute), or are being cycled in abilities that fire off so often they're just running the gamble of floor probability (as in if my odds are 1 in 20, then lets roll those 20 super fast and get my 1). This later aspect is what comes into play with Melee attacks. Low probability (in most cases), but they're cycled so quickly, so often that the opportunity seems to spike up a lot, but is in fact "not that often." This becomes leveraged by duplicating, triplicating, quad...licating? quadlicating no, not a word, but it will be for now! the amount of those rolls by increasing the proc count per swing. In that situation it's not a matter of a broken system, but intentionally excessive use of that system to play the odds in "law of averages."

 

In regards to the "when" of any consideration to change any part of that system, we're working with the support of just a few people dabbling in the code and quality of life has currently (most awesomely) taken majority precedence over trying to find a patch to fix a leak on an issue that comes from a bucket the size of Hoover Dam, and isn't a simple work up. Do I expect some tweaks to happen? Of course. Do I expect them to happen any time soon? Not really, no. All of these interactions and functions with procs have been out and known for almost eight+ months now, to continue waiting to utilize them or try them out is wasted opportunity to see dynamic and different ways to play.

 

edit to add: not necessarily targeting this response at you, MTeague, but as a general comment on the state of the game about this thought pattern as it creeps up from time to time.

Edited August 1, 2020 by Sir Myshkin

[MTeague]

12 hours ago, Sir Myshkin said:

edit to add: not necessarily targeting this response at you, MTeague, but as a general comment on the state of the game about this thought pattern as it creeps up from time to time.

No offense taken.  It's a good read. 

 

I still think the way massed amounts of global recharge pairs with procs is too strong.  I would have your NET recharge for a power (recharge for that power PLUS your global recharge) factored into the PPM calculation. Because right now, some things are procing WAY MORE OFTEN than their PPM.

 

I recognize this opinion is a minority view. 

I recognize this may never change, given how many people it would upset.

But when an IO that's says right on the label it should proc 3 times per minute ends up procs in excess of 15 times per minute, I can't bring myself to see that as "good design".

[DoctorDitko]

OK, this thread has been going on for a while now.

 

So, somebody sum up: Who won, us or synergy?

[zenijos10]

42 minutes ago, DoctorDitko said:

OK, this thread has been going on for a while now.

 

So, somebody sum up: Who won, us or synergy?

[Patti]

Wow.

I need that outfit.

In the game and in real life!

[Twisted Toon]

7 hours ago, zenijos10 said:

 

6 hours ago, Patti said:

Wow.

I need that outfit.

In the game and in real life!

I don't have the legs for that outfit...

[Sir Myshkin]

11 hours ago, MTeague said:

I still think the way massed amounts of global recharge pairs with procs is too strong.  I would have your NET recharge for a power (recharge for that power PLUS your global recharge) factored into the PPM calculation. Because right now, some things are procing WAY MORE OFTEN than their PPM.

 

But when an IO that's says right on the label it should proc 3 times per minute ends up procs in excess of 15 times per minute, I can't bring myself to see that as "good design".

I want to touch a bit on that underlined aspect here. Preface: I am making the assumption that you're statement is a bit of a hyperbole and the following is just an exploration of that statement. I tried to think of a circumstance that would even make that possible, and... it practically isn't. Many procs are 3PPM, some 3.5, a few 4, even rarer is 5, and the "hard to get" are 1, couple of 2's. A 3 PPM proc to get 15 hit chances, not success, just chances, would mean it'd have to be in a power activating every 4.75/s (including its animation and recharge together). There are quite a few abilities in the game that can achieve this, but they are all starting with a recharge that is typically 8/s or lower, putting these attacks inherently at the floor of probability (5% is floor, giving a range of 5-10% for over-compensation). To achieve 15 successful procs in one minute would be a stellar act of divine luck in random rolls.

 

If I go with an over-compensated 10%, out of 15 chances, that's 1.5 procs. Lets go ahead and round that up to 2 for simplicity as a half proc isn't really a thing. If I can get 2 procs in 60/s, and I add four of these procs into one power, I collectively have 8 total chances to cash-in on that bonus damage. At 72 damage (round up) that's 576 damage, or a paltry 9.6 DPS. That's all it boils down to.

 

Lets counter that to something that starts with a higher base recharge like 20/s. Our best case opportunity is going to bring that down (and this takes a LOT of global, keep that in mind) is around 9/s. A 3 PPM in a 20/s base is pretty much marking out at ~90% probability (super good odds). If I take that circumstance, I'm now looking at a power that has a strong chance to proc ~6 times. That's pretty good, but it's definitely not 15. At 6 chances we're looking at 432 damage, or 7.2 DPS add for this one proc. If I can manage to shove 3 (often most probable/capable to sustain) procs in here, then 1,296 damage or 21.6 DPS. That's a nice bump, sure, but it's likely costing on a great deal on endurance, damage, or accuracy depending on what got sacrificed to make the power work in that condition.

 

Now we do have some procs with higher probabilities, and some that do more significant damage and can be leveraged really well in certain places to increase their return, but the break down at the decimal is only a few points extra over the course of time. On average you're likely only talking about a median standard add of 50-60 DPS to a 4-5 attack cycle in a <9/s window of best-case runs, and that's assuming maximum proc saturation which means IO sacrifice, and potentially build sacrifice in some other areas.

 

Are things procing more often than they should? Technically no. If you try and lock the system into a binary max "You're 3PPM and you will only fire 3PPM max." That's just not feasible to try and implement in a game of this magnitude. If you try and include Global Recharge into the equation to try and create equity balance, it'll substantially alter the platform of many procs and likely floor their probability in a wide spectrum of cases for the sub-30/s recharge crowd. Even at "the floor" however you'll find that the math is actually still pretty favorable for a "shove 3-4 in and go" crowd. It may not be as much, but it's still a boost. We already know (through math, and testing) that there are plenty of powers that have longer cool downs that still have very strong (or maintain max probability) options with enhancement included because once base recharge starts growing larger than 40/s, it eventually reaches a tipping point where "enhancement no longer matters in the equation, it's going to fire anyway." In those situations though we're talking about powers that are only going off once, maybe twice in a minute in the lower case options, and we've maxed out a 3PPM in a 1-2PPM only power.

 

Short answer: It is working as it was designed to. There are (as previously mentioned) some off-cases that "unintentionally" bend/break that formula a bit too aggressively (Epics), but the core of the game is utilizing the formulas consistently, the way it was built, as intended. And yes, there are a few mad hatters out there who like to find the unique ways to bend that system dynamically in fun/different ways, but they tend to be very abnormal and abstract directions.

[Sir Myshkin]

10 hours ago, Patti said:

Wow.

I need that outfit.

In the game and in real life!

I have no idea why I invested the time to do this 🤣

[zenijos10]

8 hours ago, Sir Myshkin said:

I have no idea why I invested the time to do this 🤣

Nice!  We could make an entire Jem and the Holograms cover band!  Gewel and the Digital Illusions.