Jump to content

Change enhanceability from a boolean to a scalar


Recommended Posts

Right now, an effect can be tagged enhanceable or unenhanceable, which pretty much do what they say on the tin.


We could replace that with a scalar multiplier instead of a on-off flag.  So "enhanceability" for a currently enhanceable effect would be 1.0, and "enhancibility" for a currently unenhanceable effect would be 0.0.  You multiply the enhancement power you get from an enhancement or from an alpha slot by the enhancibility of the effect.


But why?


We already have powers that we essentially want partial enhancibility -- we hack it together now by having, say, a heal for 7% max hp that's unenhancible and another heal for 3% max hp that's enhancible.  We could more elegantly express this as a 10% heal that's 0.3 (30%) enhancible.  This would somewhat reduce the complexity of power expressions, make the detailed info more clearer, and reduce chance of errors.


But the real reason to do this would be to explore greater-than-1 enhancibility.  For example, a possible benefit of the otherwise underperforming electric blast set is that you can put the power-transfer-chance-to-heal proc in every attack and get some healing out of your attack chain.  We could instead give a very small actual heal in each attack -- so small that its base effect isn't very useful -- but set its enhancibility to 2.0 or 3.0, meaning that healing enhancements would affect this small heal at double or triple strength, allowing people to trade off damage performance for healing in a more flexible way than the decision to slot or not slot a particular proc in every attack.


Particularly, I'm offering this suggestion alongside my damage proc suggestion

 If we want a power that currently has a very minor damage component that can be procced into a respectable damage power, we could redo that as having a very small damage component with enhancibility scalar 2.0 or 3.0 or whatever the math works out for that would allow people to make this tradeoff without using procs.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Create New...