Focused Feedback: Energy Melee Revamp

[0th Power]

Disclaimer - this is not going to be productive post as far as feedback is concerned.  Im getting frustrated that people can not see that I have issues with it, even though they are not, and then telling me there are no issues

 

3 minutes ago, Wavicle said:

Yes, there is an optimal order. Refusing to do this optimal order will not get you the optimal performance. The problem only exists because you refuse to adjust your tactics.

It doesnt have to do with adjusting tactics or optimal performance.  When there is one right way/order to use your powers i dont think it is good design.  I dont like how people are painting me as someone who cannot adjust to the new situations and telling me im wrong because i gave feedback that is different than theirs.  <continue rant> i dont really have time to continue this.  I will continue to test and post feedback and just ignore the people letting me know my opinion is wrong.

[Saikochoro]

11 minutes ago, 0th Power said:

When there is one right way/order to use your powers i dont think it is good design.

To be fair this is true of pretty much all damage sets. People figure out optimal rotations that will produce the best results on every set. This is not unique to the new energy melee. 
 

That said, just because one rotation is the most optimal does not necessarily mean it will always be the correct rotation to use.  Sometimes you might want the extra AoE and thus energy focus gives you the choice of improving your AoE. Sometimes you want the extra burst and energy focus gives you the choice to have fast energy transfer. 
 

We aren’t getting full time fast energy transfer.  Energy focus is a good way to prevent nerfing the single target power of the set, but instead improving both single target and AoE damage. It also gives players the choice to focus on AoE or single target in any given situation. 

[Troo]

3 hours ago, Golden Azrael said:

You can play it vanilla

We can also play what’s on live. That doesn’t make it any less terrible.
The non Energy Focus ET is not good enough to try and suggest that EF>ET is skippable.

 

2 hours ago, Gobbledegook said:

ET is still a very good attack even when slow. Fast ET is amazingly good. Fast ET on a 10 second cooldown that was fast all the time would be seriously OP.

see above

I agree the fast ET (fET) with 10 sec recharge is too much (folks would learn the -hp has an impact).

Removing the EF>fET and replacing it with fET all the time would also remove the 10 recharge. (still builds recharge plenty fast with it at the old 20 sec)

[Wavicle]

22 minutes ago, 0th Power said:

Disclaimer - this is not going to be productive post as far as feedback is concerned.  Im getting frustrated that people can not see that I have issues with it, even though they are not, and then telling me there are no issues

 

It doesnt have to do with adjusting tactics or optimal performance.  When there is one right way/order to use your powers i dont think it is good design.  I dont like how people are painting me as someone who cannot adjust to the new situations and telling me im wrong because i gave feedback that is different than theirs.  <continue rant> i dont really have time to continue this.  I will continue to test and post feedback and just ignore the people letting me know my opinion is wrong.

If you stated as your opinion that you don’t like it then no one would argue with you. But that’s not what you said. You said it’s bad design to make powers work better when used in a certain order. Well I disagree.

Edited November 10, 2020 by Wavicle

[Troo]

2 hours ago, Gobbledegook said:

PC cone will be hard to hit it's target cap unless the mobs are lined up perfectly so EF on PC is not always very good.

 

Why would you want to use PC between TF-ET? ET will take one second to go off. Use PC just after it. It really isn't an issue. TF-ET-PC-EP/BS/Barrage or something like that, /repeat. If you want to clear the herd more then follow TF with PC and forget ET until mobs are down and use WH instead. If you want to clear a boss then forget PC and add another single target like gloom or BS etc.

 

I really can not see the problem. I find it very easy.

It’s a problem.

Not everyone plays the same. Not everyone is focused on optimal attack chains.

Sometimes the situation can change and folks might want to adjust accordingly.

 

Going from a set that did not have a combo mechanic to one that does is a big change.

Some folks don’t like having power selections dictated. That was a draw of the old EM set.

 

The adjustment from EF>BS to EF>Barrage did help.

• Bone Smasher not being locked behind EF too often is better.
• Unfortunately, it also made that part of the combo mechanic very skippable for most ATs.

 

[Gobbledigook]

You are never going to please everyone unfortunately.

 

I am having no issues that is all i can say. 

Edited November 10, 2020 by Gobbledegook

[ScarySai]

16 hours ago, 0th Power said:

Suggestions... (i posted them on the previous page but here they are again. bold is what i really want...)

-Remove ET from EF mode, give it fast animation and give WH a knockdown in EF mode 

-remove PC from EF mode

-Give PC a knockdown in EF for tankers(or all?)

1: Not happening, you're just straight up not getting this. I'm pretty confident in that.

 

2: Adapt your playstyle. The tanker radius and knowing how to use cone attacks should make making full use of power crash pretty easy for a tanker.

 

3: Not seeing how this is necessary. It already stuns things.

[Troo]

1 hour ago, ScarySai said:

1: Not happening, you're just straight up not getting this. I'm pretty confident in that.

 

2: Adapt your playstyle. The tanker radius and knowing how to use cone attacks should make making full use of power crash pretty easy for a tanker.

 

3: Not seeing how this is necessary. It already stuns things.

Folks get to have differing opinions and their mileage may vary. It's good to see what folks are reporting even if we disagree with them. The initial beta version had numerous things that needed to be addressed, even though some folks gushed over it or said it was perfect. (which it was not)

 

Question @ScarySai: Why is it okay to tell someone else to adapt their play style? This is the same as telling others how to play, isn't it?

 

Regarding "knowing how to use cone attacks".. really that's very subjective.

Full use of the 16 target cone is not easy for everyone.

FYI - Jump/Cone does not always work. Some Tanker sets simply don't jump. Others can often be unable to jump at times.

[Infinitum]

2 hours ago, Troo said:

Some folks don’t like having power selections dictated. That was a draw of the old EM set.

It kinda was then too, everyone ran this...  BU. ET. TF. ET. Then whatever filler you needed.

 

If you didn't run that you weren't maximizing the set against the weaker or slower powers in it.

 

Not much is different in the new EM just the order of attack, and the lesser or slower powers are buffed EP TF WH, and you get an added AOE, a buffed slow ET that's worth using now even without focus.

 

Add in focused ET it's light years better.

 

The game has always been about optimal attack chains, even old EM.

[Infinitum]

10 minutes ago, Troo said:

The initial beta version had numerous things that needed to be addressed, even though some folks gushed over it or said it was perfect. (which it was not)

I have found the new EM to be a balanced set and compromise in every way. 

 

Those not gushing over it are the my way or the highway types, that are willing to throw away all of the good it brought in addition to fast EM under focus for an outdated and underperforming feature of fast EM all the time.

 

Thats just not going to happen - nor should it.  Looking back on it it was horribly imbalanced compared to how CPH has redesigned it.

[BrandX]

1 hour ago, Infinitum said:

I have found the new EM to be a balanced set and compromise in every way. 

 

Those not gushing over it are the my way or the highway types, that are willing to throw away all of the good it brought in addition to fast EM under focus for an outdated and underperforming feature of fast EM all the time.

 

Thats just not going to happen - nor should it.  Looking back on it it was horribly imbalanced compared to how CPH has redesigned it.

 

I don't know if I'd say it was horribly imbalanced, when I mained it on live with a WP/EM Tanker.  However, I can't say my WP/EM had it so I was using ET every other attack.

 

Set does feel better now.  Having recently made an EM/Regen Brute before the changes were ever announced, I can say, I love the sped up TF and sped up ET.  That I have to use them in some order to get it.  Works for me, as they made it so others who thought they needed more AOE, get that, so that works too.

 

Only thing I really see worth debating, is were to put that -Regen/-Special/Increased Stun into.  

[Gobbledigook]

3 minutes ago, BrandX said:

Only thing I really see worth debating, is were to put that -Regen/-Special/Increased Stun into.  

 

Or if the set even really needs it. I could certainly live without it.

[ScarySai]

3 hours ago, Troo said:

Question @ScarySai: Why is it okay to tell someone else to adapt their play style? This is the same as telling others how to play, isn't it?

Kind of. If I play STJ by spamming sweeping cross, I expect someone to come in and tell me I'm playing it wrong, I don't take offense to it.

 

If someone is not making the full use out of power crash despite having an increased target cap and radius for an already tremendous cone, they are playing it wrong and I am going to suggest working to improve it. You don't even have to jump as a tanker, again, it's a tremendous cone.

 

 

3 hours ago, Troo said:

Folks get to have differing opinions and their mileage may vary. It's good to see what folks are reporting even if we disagree with them. The initial beta version had numerous things that needed to be addressed, even though some folks gushed over it or said it was perfect. (which it was not)

I agree, and you wouldn't have reached this point if nobody challenged the earliest iterations of the spec. When a suggestion is made, it must be challenged at some point, so as to ensure the suggestion is worth consideration. That is why people should be vocal about what they like, vocal about what they don't like, and vocal about suggestions that fall into either category - with data and concerns to back them up.

Edited November 11, 2020 by ScarySai

[Moonlighter]

5 hours ago, Wavicle said:

If you stated as your opinion that you don’t like it then no one would argue with you. But that’s not what you said. You said it’s bad design to make powers work better when used in a certain order. Well I disagree.

 

Enforced attack order in sets can definitely make them less interesting and less fun.

 

Let's look at Martial Arts versus Dual Blades.

 

Martial Arts is actually a very good set currently for two reasons: 1.) it can be built in several different ways while still getting good performance. 2.) The design rewards moment to moment decisions.

 

Dual Blades, on the other hand, punishes moment to moment gameplay decisions by imposing a penalty for straying from an exact order.

 

With MA, I often change up attack order depending on the situation. Do I want to EC then CAK to impart extra crit on CAK and concentrate on killing a problematic enemy in the crowd as fast as possible? Do I want to EC followed by Dragon's Tail to impart extra crit on multiple targets? Do I want to open up with Dragon's Tail to mitigate the return alpha strike? Do I want to use a short attack on this enemy who has a sliver of health left because EC is overkill?

 

That's even assuming I am on my character that uses Eagle's Claw; I also have a character that relies on the high recharge CAK - SK - Cobra chain and that plays differently, but I constantly weave in different combinations and can decide when to hit Dragon's Tail for good effect.

 

That the set encourages moment to moment game decisions is a strength of the set.

 

 

To compare, let's look at my Dual Blade scrapper who uses Blinding Feint -> Attack Vitals. Because the set was designed with a combo system, the game imposes a fairly substantial penalty for making moment to moment decisions during the game. The only decision I make is whether to hit Typhoon's Edge right after BF. That's it. When I log in tonight and play that character? I know my next attack sequence will be BF - Attack Vitals. When enemies shift around me what will I do? BF - Attack Vitals. What will I do for Council, Nemesis, and Carnies? BF - Attack Vitals. There is a penalty for adjusting my chain to take advantage for the moment to moment play; the design forces the player into a rigid combination of key presses in a way that MA, Mace, and Katana does not.

 

That does not make DB more interesting. To wit, my DB scrapper is fairly boring to play in comparison to MA or Mace.

 

(Fortunately for DB you can also build a higher recharge attack chain with good performance that uses BF more often, so the problem is lessened for that set but that isn't really relevant to the point that adding combinations don't necessarily make a set more interesting.)

 

Energy Combat is much less restrictive so I think it will be fine. But I sympathize with a player that is trying to communicate the way that adding these set gimmicks actually restricts rather than enhances moment to moment play, and also exaggerate the effects of misses on DPS. I think it is short sighted to dismiss those points and adopting that stance that set gimmicks that enforce attack order are somehow "more interesting" to game play when I actually find just the opposite.

 

As an aside, one of the reasons I am chiming in is I am somewhat concerned that the devs will update more melee sets by making them "interesting" by adding gimmicks like this.

 

 

 

Edited November 10, 2020 by Moonlighter

[Wavicle]

Having "mini games" that give you better damage if you do your rotation correctly is one of the main ways MMOs make classes interesting to play. NOT having them is one of the things in CoH that is generally boring, to be honest. Differentiation and specificity is better, imo.

[Pzn]

4 hours ago, ScarySai said:

1: Not happening, you're just straight up not getting this. I'm pretty confident in that.

 

2: Adapt your playstyle. The tanker radius and knowing how to use cone attacks should make making full use of power crash pretty easy for a tanker.

 

3: Not seeing how this is necessary. It already stuns things.

Please keep feedback on topic as it's been repeatedly requested. This is a thread for players to leave their opinions for developers, not for you to make flippant and disrespectful remarks.

[Saikochoro]

12 minutes ago, josh1622 said:

Please keep feedback on topic as it's been repeatedly requested. This is a thread for players to leave their opinions for developers, not for you to make flippant and disrespectful remarks.

Those three points were on topic with feedback. 

 

Point 1: A huge portion of the feedback and discussion has been about ET being fast full time versus part time. People have stated they want it full time. The comment was a counter to that same as many others. On topic. 
 

Point 2: Discusses the new cone power crash and how to use it effectively. On topic. 
 

Point 3: A counter to the suggestion of adding new secondary effects to the powerset in question. On topic. 
 

@ScarySaimay come off as harsh at times, but they certainly aren’t the only one in this thread that have done that. 

Edited November 11, 2020 by Saikochoro

[Moonlighter]

9 minutes ago, Wavicle said:

Having "mini games" that give you better damage if you do your rotation correctly is one of the main ways MMOs make classes interesting to play. NOT having them is one of the things in CoH that is generally boring, to be honest. Differentiation and specificity is better, imo.

 

*Because* those games enforce the holy trinity and focus on big target play. Playing DPS would be so boring in that scenario that they need to impose mini-games to make those feel rewarding. The mini-games are compensating for a game design that does not exist in CoH.

 

I am in a raiding guild and love me some DPS raiding, but WoW is trying to overcome the boredom of a restrictive and, quite frankly, stale content design.

[siolfir]

21 minutes ago, Wavicle said:

Having "mini games" that give you better damage if you do your rotation correctly is one of the main ways MMOs make classes interesting to play. NOT having them is one of the things in CoH that is generally boring, to be honest. Differentiation and specificity is better, imo.

That highlighted part? It's really important. Others can, and have, disagreed. That doesn't make their feedback less important than yours.

[Gobbledigook]

Yes lets keep it civil please, everyone has their own opinions.

 

But just to point out...You are all wrong and i am always right! My missus says so anyway 🙂

[Wavicle]

8 minutes ago, siolfir said:

That highlighted part? It's really important. Others can, and have, disagreed. That doesn't make their feedback less important than yours.

That’s WHY I included that part. I didn’t say anything that implied or suggested otherwise in any way.

[Moonlighter]

15 minutes ago, siolfir said:

That highlighted part? It's really important. Others can, and have, disagreed. That doesn't make their feedback less important than yours.

I felt Wavicle's response has been more than respectful.

 

 

[Saikochoro]

20 minutes ago, siolfir said:

That highlighted part? It's really important. Others can, and have, disagreed. That doesn't make their feedback less important than yours.

All feedback in this thread is based on experience and opinion. I don’t see where they said in that post that their view was more important than an alternative view. Only that it is their view and thus they are stating it opposite what some others have stated.
 

It is no different than if @Waviclehad first stated they liked specific rotations and then someone had countered by saying they don’t enjoy that. Two view points were shared and neither claimed more importance than the other. 
 

In this regard, it is my opinion that mechanic sets don’t really limit freedom any more than non-mechanic sets.  MA was an example of freedom, but using eagles claw to buff either crippling axe kick or dragons tail is actually very similar to TF buffing either ET or power crash for the same reasons.  The BF + attack vitals combo for dual blades doesn’t change honestly not so much because it is a combo, but more so because it is the most efficient rotation for both single target AND aoe purposes. So there isn’t really a reason to switch to another combo. 
 

It could then be argued that dual blades other combos should be equalized in power because it restricts freedom, but honestly non-mechanic sets only have the illusion of freedom. There will always be a specific rotation that is the most optimal regardless of the set. Most of the time the single target rotation is different than the AoE rotation, but in cases like dual blades they are the same. Sometimes the optimal rotation even involves replacing primary power picks with pool powers. 

 

I just think that people are getting hung up on losing freedom, when there will always be an optimal rotation regardless of mechanics and regardless of the set in question. War mace doesn’t really have a mechanic and yet there is still an optimal rotation for it. Optimal rotations aren’t always the correct choice in every situation, but they are those that have been tested to provide the most dps. People do however, have the freedom of choosing whether or not to follow the optimal rotation for whatever reason they choose. 
 

I do understand not liking that the game is telling you part of what the optimal rotation is. I understand that complaint. I’m just pointing out that even if the game didn’t tell you part of the rotation there would still be an optimal rotation. 

[DreadShinobi]

8 hours ago, Gobbledegook said:

 

The only thing i would remove if any would be Energy Focus from Barrage as i don't think it is needed really. I can't ever imagine using it over a fast ET.

 

 

 

 

 

There is a leveling range where you have TF and do not yet have ET until lvl 38 on tankers.

[Grimz]

1 hour ago, Wavicle said:

Having "mini games" that give you better damage if you do your rotation correctly is one of the main ways MMOs make classes interesting to play. NOT having them is one of the things in CoH that is generally boring, to be honest. Differentiation and specificity is better, imo.

You bringing up the concept of mini-games from other MMOs doesn't really mean much when you consider that games like WoW, FF14, SWToR and Rift still have base rotations... some even more restrictive than CoH's in terms of optimal damage. Additionally, though this is not based on the opinion stated above, I recall the increase in RNG being a large complaint within the WoW community (Something Classic also doesn't have as much of). In my opinion, fun in a MMO comes from group play, community, visual flair (the SFX kind) and strategy. My personal from of enjoyment is actually one of the main reasons for my altoholism (I have a hard time dealing with leveling since it's often slow and tends to not have many group options). Not to say I don't like gimmicks, a challenge is always worth the effort imo.

 

To keep this in the topic of Energy Melee, I think the changes are fine and that the set needed the extra AoE attack (I would personally argue it needs a third, but that's just me). The set in current live plays fine and will benefit greatly from the changes. This will also buff the viability of Energy Melee Tankers.

 

Disclaimer: I am not trying to disvalue Wavicle's opinion, simply questioning some of his logic in hopes of obtaining clarity on his end while also giving my own opinion in the process.

Edited November 11, 2020 by Grimz