Game Balance & The Endgame

[Blackbird71]

7 hours ago, Ralathar44 said:

IOs always felt weird for me honestly.  Before them Pretty much everything was about enhancing your powers and your power set.  So any power increases were very focused on what you were supposed to be good at and it kept a good amount of identity to each set, good or bad.  Power Pools and Epic Power Pools were your only real way of "reaching outside your specialization".  So you could lessen your weaknesses somewhat, but not too much.  And Endurance was a major consideration for how much you could pile onto your character.  Sets being endurance efficient was a notable advantage for those sets.  Even after inherent fitness.

After IOs though nobody had to have any weaknesses anymore.  Everyone can become softcapped no defense, endurance pretty much ceased to be a problem for many sets, and everything got more homogenized.  Hasten was already a big deal before, but thanks to +recharge and more endurance management the difference between a hastened character and a non-hastened one became even larger since more characters could achieve and utilize longer amounts of hasten uptime and afford to replace cheaper/faster/weaker powers with heavier/slower/more expensive powers in their attack rotations.

And, as mentioned, damage and defense gets way WAY more benefit from IOs than debuff and control, + are supported by leadership stacking (which is much easier to sustain thanks to IOs).  So offense and defense and to-hit now scales up enough to punch right through the purple patch and controls/debuffs don't.  But as mentioned it scales differently for different sets.

COH has never been the most balanced game but IOs took the balance that was there out back and shot it in the head.  And power set identity took a few bullets too, not quite dead but wounded since def debuffs, to-hit buffs, self defense buffs, endurance costs, -recharge, - speed, CC for damage mitigation and etc matter less than ever before.

This, a thousand times.  For many reasons, I would love it if IO sets were simply removed from the game.  It will never happen, but I think it would solve a lot of problems.

[Camel]

On 9/20/2020 at 12:08 PM, Greycat said:

*chuckle* It wouldn't. It could be 72 point, Bold, underlined and Red and people would still get annoyed when something didn't come through or got changed that was "promised."

Wait a minute... that’s exactly the size of font and format I used. Huh. 😂

[ShardWarrior]

13 hours ago, golstat2003 said:

There's also the fact that there are multiple types of IO builds you can make.

Just off the top of my head:

 

1. Frankensloted with Commons and sets

2. Full Set IOs

3. Purples and Set IOs

4. Attuned and Purples.

 

Which do you balance around? Do you assume most folks are going with 1? Great, but then the content is still trivial for those with 2, and sure as hell is for groups 3 and 4. Do you balance around 2, still trivial for 3 and 4, and slightly harder for 1.

 

I don't think folks are realize how much a puzzle this could end up being.

 

EDIT: And I didn't even mention proc monster builds.

You balance around common IOs, figuring most will get even level IOs at 50.  That gives you ~ 10 -12% better results than a +3 SO. 

[ShardWarrior]

12 hours ago, Blackbird71 said:

This, a thousand times.  For many reasons, I would love it if IO sets were simply removed from the game.  It will never happen, but I think it would solve a lot of problems.

Removing IOs would not solve as many problems as people think.

[Bill Z Bubba]

2 hours ago, ShardWarrior said:

Removing IOs would not solve as many problems as people think.

May want to ponder that more. How are SO builds under ED going to perform even with the existing incarnate abilities? No more softcapped defense for most combos. No more shoring up resistance. No more permahasten.

It would be a VERY different game.

[ShardWarrior]

14 minutes ago, Bill Z Bubba said:

May want to ponder that more. How are SO builds under ED going to perform even with the existing incarnate abilities? No more softcapped defense for most combos. No more shoring up resistance. No more permahasten.

It would be a VERY different game.

I did not say removing IOs would not be noticeable, just that it would not be as big a change as some might think.  As an example, you could softcap defense before there were IOs on melee ATs and Cardiac pretty much eliminates END issues in the late game.

[Mezmera]

One of my favorite things about this game is the intelligence and creativity afforded you with the IO system.  It is a completely different game with them and for the better.  That doesn't mean I don't want challenging content.  I just want a nice big track to test out my racecars not some parking lot.  

 

Hopefully they think out what they're doing with looking to tinker with PPM because it'll hurt most those that feel the need for it and have the better percentages to take advantage of the system.  I don't want the divide between certain damage dealers and everyone else to be further exacerbated by some tinkering, all that'll do is create more limitations.   

Edited October 2, 2020 by Mezmera

[Coyote]

On 9/20/2020 at 7:59 PM, Galaxy Brain said:

If you look at scrappers, Regen is incredibly popular too despite... you know lol

 

That's because everyone secretly wants to be nerfed every issue 😆

[Bill Z Bubba]

1 hour ago, Coyote said:

That's because everyone secretly wants to be nerfed every issue 😆

I'm goin with Heisenberg. They play it until they learn it sucks.

[Galaxy Brain]

3 hours ago, Mezmera said:

One of my favorite things about this game is the intelligence and creativity afforded you with the IO system.  It is a completely different game with them and for the better.  That doesn't mean I don't want challenging content.  I just want a nice big track to test out my racecars not some parking lot.  

 

Hopefully they think out what they're doing with looking to tinker with PPM because it'll hurt most those that feel the need for it and have the better percentages to take advantage of the system.  I don't want the divide between certain damage dealers and everyone else to be further exacerbated by some tinkering, all that'll do is create more limitations.   

While I do agree, I think it is safe to say that unfortunately Recharge and Defense bonuses from IOs overshadow a lot of the creative potential the system could have provided.

[Soulbent]

In order to bring end game Elec armor back into discussions can we fix the health crash end crash is fine but health crash just means that it gets leapfrogged by every other armor set

 

[Wavicle]

5 minutes ago, Soulbent said:

In order to bring end game Elec armor back into discussions can we fix the health crash end crash is fine but health crash just means that it gets leapfrogged by every other armor set

 

Several of the armor sets have health crash tier 9 powers. Most people just don't take the crash powers and use IOs and Incarnates to shore up their defenses instead. While I agree that they should get changed, I don't think that's in store for this coming update.

Edited October 2, 2020 by Wavicle

[Soulbent]

1 hour ago, Wavicle said:

Several of the armor sets have health crash tier 9 powers. Most people just don't take the crash powers and use IOs and Incarnates to shore up their defenses instead. While I agree that they should get changed, I don't think that's in store for this coming update.

they fixed end crash on blasters why not health crashes on tanks and brutes quick fix massive replicability value 

win win

[macskull]

I think T9 powers are the weekly discussion topic this week. I think the newer armor set T9s are in a good spot - they don't provide overkill level of bonus, they don't have a harsh crash, they provide some extra benefit the set might not already offer, and they're available more often. Think Rad, Shield, Willpower, and Ice (Stalker/Scrapper version).

[Wavicle]

29 minutes ago, Soulbent said:

they fixed end crash on blasters why not health crashes on tanks and brutes quick fix massive replicability value 

win win

to be honest, I'm surprised it wasn't addressed during the SCORE years, but I do expect it to get looked at sometime in the future. Hopefully they'll also look at Stone Armor at the same time.

[ivanhedgehog]

On 9/20/2020 at 4:56 PM, Bopper said:

Those are examples of "whataboutism". Instead of discussing a change on its own merits, you're pointing to something else and saying "but what about this? this needs a change more".

 

It's not a valid argument and the devs will not listen to it. If you want to suggest Rage should get looked at, make that argument (I would point you to the Suggestions and Feedback Forum). But if you're saying Titan Weapons shouldn't be looked at because Rage should first, that's not gonna happen. The developers will prioritize buffs and nerfs on their terms, and seeing as how there have been more buffs than nerfs on Homecoming, I would trust their judgement.

if you dont compare different sets(performance, not popularity) you arent balancing anything. I watched the swtor devs kneecap classes to make them meet an internal performance metric that did not take content into account. It didnt work well.

Edited October 3, 2020 by ivanhedgehog

[ivanhedgehog]

On 9/20/2020 at 5:03 PM, FUBARczar said:

The problem isn't control.  For instance there is no problem with immob., fear, sleep, confuse.  Stuns somewhat and holds a bit harder.  The real issue is damage.  Since Dominators don't really have any debuffs to speak of it is really the AV fights that drastically slow things down the most, then EBs of course.  Doms are still really fun to play, they just don't perform to a reasonable level.

 

B;asters and Dominators should have more parity.  They do kinda of thematically, in their own ways, pretty equal but different, except damage output on totally different levels.

 

Blasters:                                 - Dominators:

Defiance (ie more Damage)  - More Control (especially w/ Domination)

& crashless nukes                

Sustain Powers                      - Mez Protection (via Domination)      

 

blasters have no defense. glass canons need to retain being a canon. Dominators have holds, which act as defense. Blaster damage should be superior.

[ivanhedgehog]

On 9/20/2020 at 6:08 PM, TC said:

Dark and Fire for sure need it; a self-rez is not a power typically worth picking up. If you're planning on dying as a character with a defensive set, you probably don't want to be a meatshield to begin with.

 

But there's more than just Electric, Energy, Super Reflexes, Ninja, and Invuln; there's Shield, Stone, Regen and Willpower as well. This goes for the PB Lightform and WS Stygian Rez too. These account for almost all defensive sets, and it's sad because the T9s are taken in jest, for aesthetics, or as a unique IO donkey. I don't remember what they did to Ice, but Hibernate could do more, IMO.

 

If you look at Rad and Bio Armor, the two newest sets, you can see the devs were headed this direction too. Bio has an all-around unique playstyle around toggles and the T9 is a new defensive toggle. Rad has a T9 that functions similarly to the others, but is a toned down version with +recovery, +15% res to all, a dmg boost, and the endo crash is small, not massive.

Look at stone. Granite has so many disadvantages and other sets can be just as tough. take away some of the disadvantages and it will not unbalance things.

[FUBARczar]

1 hour ago, ivanhedgehog said:

blasters have no defense. glass canons need to retain being a canon. Dominators have holds, which act as defense. Blaster damage should be superior.

Blasters have more "defense" than Dominators with higher base HP, with the sustain powers, and some sets have quite a bit of control.  But yes Dominators have controls to help mitigate damage, to make them survivable enough, close enough to blasters.  In fact, that was my point, that they are comparable on this point.  But as far as being a damage dealer, Dominators are not quite where they should be.  Dominators should compare to Blasters like Tanks compare to Brutes now.  And don't worry Blasters will out damage and should out damage Dominators, but Dominators should be doing a little better than they are.  Giving them a slight bump in base damage, and in reverse of what blasters have makes sense, and is even poetic.  Blaster's dmg modifiers are Melee: 1.0 and Range: 1.125.  Dominators are currently Melee: 1.05 and Range 0.95.  Tweaking Dominators to Melee: 1.125 and Range: 1.0 I think fits nicely.  Blasters will still do superior damage to Dominators b/c Blasters inherent gives extra damage, having aim+build up, and Blasters also have way more range attacks than Dominators have melee attacks.  Not to mention there is still a lot of risk for dominators to be treading in melee range, more than enough for the reward.

[Bopper]

38 minutes ago, ivanhedgehog said:

if you dont compare different sets(performance, not popularity) you arent balancing anything. I watched the devs kneecap classes to make them meet an internal performance metric that did not take content into account. It didnt work well.

Absolutely, and in this case TW was compared to the other sets and was deemed an outlier.

[Wavicle]

6 minutes ago, FUBARczar said:

Blasters have more "defense" than Dominators with higher base HP, with the sustain powers, and some sets have quite a bit of control.  But yes Dominators have controls to help mitigate damage, to make them survivable enough, close enough to blasters.  In fact, that was my point, that they are comparable on this point.  But as far as being a damage dealer, Dominators are not quite where they should be.  Dominators should compare to Blasters like Tanks compare to Brutes now.  And don't worry Blasters will out damage and should out damage Dominators, but Dominators should be doing a little better than they are.  Giving them a slight bump in base damage, and in reverse of what blasters have makes sense, and is even poetic.  Blaster's dmg modifiers are Melee: 1.0 and Range: 1.125.  Dominators are currently Melee: 1.05 and Range 0.95.  Tweaking Dominators to Melee: 1.125 and Range: 1.0 I think fits nicely.  Blasters will still do superior damage to Dominators b/c Blasters inherent gives extra damage, having aim+build up, and Blasters also have way more range attacks than Dominators have melee attacks.  Not to mention there is still a lot of risk for dominators to be treading in melee range, more than enough for the reward.

Dominators have pets and mez protection. They are monsters as is. I can't see increasing Dominator damage before looking at Sentinels. 

[ivanhedgehog]

12 minutes ago, Bopper said:

Absolutely, and in this case TW was compared to the other sets and was deemed an outlier.

thats cool. as long as we can see what they are balancing against, not just "numbers too much, snip them down". I agree tw is too good, I dont have one but I tend to pick sets by the elusive metric "fun", not by which one is "best". its why i have never been forced to take a power set because "everyone says its best"

[FUBARczar]

1 hour ago, Wavicle said:

Dominators have pets and mez protection. They are monsters as is. I can't see increasing Dominator damage before looking at Sentinels. 

b/c it seems you didn't look at the previously related posts.  Mez protection and sustain powers can be considered comparable.  And call me silly but tweaking a damage modifier seems less involved than revamping an inherent power.  

 

Blasters:                                 - Dominators:

Defiance (ie more Damage)  - More Control (especially w/ Domination)

& crashless nukes                

Sustain Powers                      - Mez Protection (via Domination)   

 

And pets... only maybe Singularity, Poo and the dark hound are worth anything, even then at +4/8 which I pretty much only run the pets are very meh.  Can't control them, can't monitor health, hard to keep them alive, they are very marginal.

Edited October 3, 2020 by FUBARczar
pets

[Wavicle]

28 minutes ago, FUBARczar said:

Mez protection and sustain powers can be considered comparable.

lol, no.

 

28 minutes ago, FUBARczar said:

 

And pets... only maybe Singularity, Poo and the dark hound are worth anything, even then at +4/8 which I pretty much only run the pets are very meh.  Can't control them, can't monitor health, hard to keep them alive, they are very marginal.

lol

[Coyote]

1 hour ago, FUBARczar said:

But as far as being a damage dealer, Dominators are not quite where they should be. 

 

Hm. It seems to me that the damage scalar for Dominators is pretty solid considering that it's their secondary. They are a Control first, Damage second AT and therefore should be clearly inferior in damage to an AT that is Damage first, Damage second.

How useful Control is in the end game, could be an interesting discussion. There were some good ideas for making it more useful. One idea would be to have a minor -Def/-Res on mobs that can't defend themselves, which would in effect be comparable to a small bump in Dominator damage (but more useful on teams, where the greater AoE of Blasters pushes them ahead in utility). But it's a problem with the usefulness of Control, and we shouldn't use that to balance an AT so that its secondary is treated like a primary.