mastermind Refund Part of MM Pet Summon Endurance Cost if Some Pets are Still Alive

[gabrilend]

See title.

 

If 1 pet is alive, refund 1/3rd of the cost for a t1 pet, and 1/2 the cost for a t2 pet.

 

if 2 pets are alive, refund 2/3rds of the cost of a t1 pet.

 

To balance this change, increase the endurance cost by 66% for the t1 summon and 50% for the t2 summon. (numbers tweakable)

 

Currently, you can very quickly summon streams of pets to do your bidding. However, with this change in place, you'd still be ABLE to recharge-wise, but you would be punished for doing so endurance-wise, while rewarding players who manage to keep SOME of their pets alive.

[Rudra]

No thanks. I would rather not be punished for playing a Mastermind.

[gabrilend]

A buff is a reward for being undertuned for a while.

 

A nerf is a punishment for being overpowered for a time.

 

A change is when something is altered which makes the archetype more or less powerful. In order to compensate for this, a buff or a nerf must also be applied. These buffs and nerfs are NOT punishments or rewards, they are simply adjustments in order to let the new mechanics operate effectively without changing the meta too much.

 

This particular change would be a net positive buff for Masterminds. So, to counter that change, a nerf must be applied. The easiest thing to nerf is the same mechanics that are touched by the change, so if you have any other ideas for nerfs to apply, please write them here and we can discuss them.

[Rudra]

24 minutes ago, gabrilend said:

Currently, you can very quickly summon streams of pets to do your bidding. However, with this change in place, you'd still be ABLE to recharge-wise, but you would be punished for doing so endurance-wise, while rewarding players who manage to keep SOME of their pets alive.

This is straight punishment. There are missions where the terrain will murder your pets. There are enemies that will murder your pets. You can get unlucky and see your pets die despite your efforts to keep them alive. And you are requesting that players be punished for summoning replacement pets on an AT that is very, very dependent on being able to field pets to fight and quickly replace them as they fall.

[gabrilend]

... It is not punishment to spend a resource.

 

I'm an OG villain Mastermind. I know what my pets are. Those heroes in the audience who hear this and think "No! I could never! My pets are precious to me!" or some other junk are simply deluding themselves. Pets are to be spent toward achieving tactical and strategic goals. Such is the way of a cruel, calculating, mastermind.

[Glacier Peak]

No for me

[Rudra]

46 minutes ago, gabrilend said:

I'm an OG villain Mastermind.

So am I. My first City of Villains character when the expansion came out was a Ninja/Dark MM and I lamented for what felt like forever that I was capped at level 40 until Grandville was finally added.

 

47 minutes ago, gabrilend said:

Those heroes in the audience who hear this and think "No! I could never! My pets are precious to me!" or some other junk are simply deluding themselves. Pets are to be spent toward achieving tactical and strategic goals. Such is the way of a cruel, calculating, mastermind.

This completely goes against your proposal. If you are a villainous mastermind player and you spend your pets freely to accomplish your goals, which means they are going to die, then why are you asking for an increase in pet summoning endurance cost that can only be mitigated by having your pets still alive?

[gabrilend]

5 minutes ago, Rudra said:

So am I. My first City of Villains character when the expansion came out was a Ninja/Dark MM and I lamented for what felt like forever that I was capped at level 40 until Grandville was finally added.

 

Whoa, you're kidding! Me too! What are the odds.

[Psyonico]

This is a terrible idea.  MMs already struggle at higher difficulties, this would make the problem worse.

[gabrilend]

1 hour ago, Psyonico said:

This is a terrible idea.  MMs already struggle at higher difficulties, this would make the problem worse.

 

can you explain why it would make the problem worse, and then can you offer a solution which would address the problem such that the main idea is implementable?

 

I do believe that would be the most useful for the devs, who would then have an idea for what to test so they can decide for themselves whether they want to use the main idea as presented.

 

The "main idea" being "refunding part of the endurance cost of mastermind minions if some of them are still alive"

[megaericzero]

8 minutes ago, gabrilend said:

1 hour ago, Psyonico said:

This is a terrible idea.  MMs already struggle at higher difficulties, this would make the problem worse.

can you explain why it would make the problem worse,

 

 

Probably this part of your OP:

 

3 hours ago, gabrilend said:

Currently, you can very quickly summon streams of pets to do your bidding. However, with this change in place, you'd still be ABLE to recharge-wise, but you would be punished for doing so endurance-wise, while rewarding players who manage to keep SOME of their pets alive.

 

[biostem]

I'd drop the extra end cost but keep the amount refunded, (though in the latter case I'd do it based upon their total remaining HP).  

[TygerDarkstorm]

Homecoming already gave us a net gain as MM's by reducing the recharge, summoning time, and I think end cost to summon henchmen (they're not pets, pets are their own thing and not controllable), so why would we want a feature that would punish us by increasing that end cost again? MM's are already penalized in the end department. Things are fine as they are in regards to resummoning/buffing henchmen, even if it's only partial summons. Or, if you wanted to implement this, don't add an increased end cost to an AT that is already penalized with increased end costs.

[srmalloy]

14 hours ago, Rudra said:

No thanks. I would rather not be punished for playing a Mastermind.

The OP's statement about being punished is for their rapidly resummoning pets, which is what you're doing now -- under the current configuration, you pay the same End cost for summoning Tier 1 henchmen whether  you are summoning 1, 2, or all three of them. The OP's proposal appears to be to apply an endurance discount of 1/3 if you're only summoning 2 of the Tier 1 henchmen, and a discount of 2/3 if you're only summoning a single henchman. To break it out more clearly:

 

Current Arrangement:

1. Summon 3 henchmen: Full End cost
2. Summon 2 henchmen: Full End cost
3. Summon 1 henchman: Full End cost

Proposed change:

1. Summon 3 henchmen: Full End cost
2. Summon 2 henchmen: 2/3 End cost
3. Summon 1 henchman: 1/3 End cost

So with the OP's proposal, you're only paying the fraction of the base End cost for the number of henchmen you're actually summoning, instead of paying the full End cost regardless of how many you're pulling up, so it's more 'efficient' in terms of End to wait for all your Tier 1 pets to be defeated and summon them all back at once, rather than replacing them one by one as they go down. For myself, while I can see the argument for not paying the full End cost to get only one henchman, I would prefer to see a sort of "overhead" to the summons, so that the act of summoning has a cost, regardless of how many henchmen you're summoning:

1. Summon 3 henchmen: Full End cost
2. Summon 2 henchmen: 3/4 End cost
3. Summon 1 henchman: 1/2 End cost

This would make resummoning defeated henchmen a more strategic decision; you're not paying the full cost of the summons for a fraction of the effect, but it's still more 'efficient' to summon all three at one time, so the MM still has a reason to wait to summon more at once.

[TygerDarkstorm]

8 minutes ago, srmalloy said:

The OP's statement about being punished is for their rapidly resummoning pets, which is what you're doing now -- under the current configuration, you pay the same End cost for summoning Tier 1 henchmen whether  you are summoning 1, 2, or all three of them. The OP's proposal appears to be to apply an endurance discount of 1/3 if you're only summoning 2 of the Tier 1 henchmen, and a discount of 2/3 if you're only summoning a single henchman. To break it out more clearly:

 

Current Arrangement:

1. Summon 3 henchmen: Full End cost
2. Summon 2 henchmen: Full End cost
3. Summon 1 henchman: Full End cost

Proposed change:

1. Summon 3 henchmen: Full End cost
2. Summon 2 henchmen: 2/3 End cost
3. Summon 1 henchman: 1/3 End cost

So with the OP's proposal, you're only paying the fraction of the base End cost for the number of henchmen you're actually summoning, instead of paying the full End cost regardless of how many you're pulling up, so it's more 'efficient' in terms of End to wait for all your Tier 1 pets to be defeated and summon them all back at once, rather than replacing them one by one as they go down. For myself, while I can see the argument for not paying the full End cost to get only one henchman, I would prefer to see a sort of "overhead" to the summons, so that the act of summoning has a cost, regardless of how many henchmen you're summoning:

1. Summon 3 henchmen: Full End cost
2. Summon 2 henchmen: 3/4 End cost
3. Summon 1 henchman: 1/2 End cost

This would make resummoning defeated henchmen a more strategic decision; you're not paying the full cost of the summons for a fraction of the effect, but it's still more 'efficient' to summon all three at one time, so the MM still has a reason to wait to summon more at once.

They specifically said to "balance" this change by increasing the base end cost:

Quote

To balance this change, increase the endurance cost by 66% for the t1 summon and 50% for the t2 summon.

If it were a proposal to the existing system, then I don't think so many of us would be saying we're not feeling this idea.

[gabrilend]

38 minutes ago, srmalloy said:

The OP's statement about being punished is for their rapidly resummoning pets, which is what you're doing now -- under the current configuration, you pay the same End cost for summoning Tier 1 henchmen whether  you are summoning 1, 2, or all three of them. The OP's proposal appears to be to apply an endurance discount of 1/3 if you're only summoning 2 of the Tier 1 henchmen, and a discount of 2/3 if you're only summoning a single henchman. To break it out more clearly:

 

Current Arrangement:

1. Summon 3 henchmen: Full End cost
2. Summon 2 henchmen: Full End cost
3. Summon 1 henchman: Full End cost

Proposed change:

1. Summon 3 henchmen: Full End cost
2. Summon 2 henchmen: 2/3 End cost
3. Summon 1 henchman: 1/3 End cost

So with the OP's proposal, you're only paying the fraction of the base End cost for the number of henchmen you're actually summoning, instead of paying the full End cost regardless of how many you're pulling up, so it's more 'efficient' in terms of End to wait for all your Tier 1 pets to be defeated and summon them all back at once, rather than replacing them one by one as they go down. For myself, while I can see the argument for not paying the full End cost to get only one henchman, I would prefer to see a sort of "overhead" to the summons, so that the act of summoning has a cost, regardless of how many henchmen you're summoning:

1. Summon 3 henchmen: Full End cost
2. Summon 2 henchmen: 3/4 End cost
3. Summon 1 henchman: 1/2 End cost

This would make resummoning defeated henchmen a more strategic decision; you're not paying the full cost of the summons for a fraction of the effect, but it's still more 'efficient' to summon all three at one time, so the MM still has a reason to wait to summon more at once.

 

You explained what I meant much more clearly than I did. Thank you.

 

28 minutes ago, TygerDarkstorm said:

They specifically said to "balance" this change by increasing the base end cost:

If it were a proposal to the existing system, then I don't think so many of us would be saying we're not feeling this idea.

 

Yes, that was my suggestion for how to balance the change explained by @srmalloy. I prefer their solution over my original one.

[Ukase]

I confess, I've not played a mastermind very often. I've got a couple at level 50, and they sit idle because there's too much work in way of pet management for me to have any real fun. 

I guess something must have changed. It makes perfect sense to me to use endurance for each pet spawned. 

[Rudra]

1 hour ago, srmalloy said:

The OP's statement about being punished is for their rapidly resummoning pets, which is what you're doing now -- under the current configuration, you pay the same End cost for summoning Tier 1 henchmen whether  you are summoning 1, 2, or all three of them. The OP's proposal appears to be to apply an endurance discount of 1/3 if you're only summoning 2 of the Tier 1 henchmen, and a discount of 2/3 if you're only summoning a single henchman. To break it out more clearly:

 

Current Arrangement:

1. Summon 3 henchmen: Full End cost
2. Summon 2 henchmen: Full End cost
3. Summon 1 henchman: Full End cost

Proposed change:

1. Summon 3 henchmen: Full End cost
2. Summon 2 henchmen: 2/3 End cost
3. Summon 1 henchman: 1/3 End cost

So with the OP's proposal, you're only paying the fraction of the base End cost for the number of henchmen you're actually summoning, instead of paying the full End cost regardless of how many you're pulling up, so it's more 'efficient' in terms of End to wait for all your Tier 1 pets to be defeated and summon them all back at once, rather than replacing them one by one as they go down. For myself, while I can see the argument for not paying the full End cost to get only one henchman, I would prefer to see a sort of "overhead" to the summons, so that the act of summoning has a cost, regardless of how many henchmen you're summoning:

1. Summon 3 henchmen: Full End cost
2. Summon 2 henchmen: 3/4 End cost
3. Summon 1 henchman: 1/2 End cost

This would make resummoning defeated henchmen a more strategic decision; you're not paying the full cost of the summons for a fraction of the effect, but it's still more 'efficient' to summon all three at one time, so the MM still has a reason to wait to summon more at once.

The OP's proposal is that you pay less per summon per henchman tier pet you actually summon with that power, but at a 66% for T1 and 50% for T2 base endurance cost increase.

 

16 hours ago, gabrilend said:

To balance this change, increase the endurance cost by 66% for the t1 summon and 50% for the t2 summon. (numbers tweakable)

 

This part of the proposal is strictly intended to punish MMs.

16 hours ago, gabrilend said:

but you would be punished for doing so endurance-wise,

 

I don't care if the MM summon powers are changed to have a reduced endurance cost if you are summoning less than the full number of pets for that power. The issue I ahve is with the intended punishment of MMs for summoning replacements. Especially at a rapid pace to deal with high difficulty foes such as that Warrior EB that seems to have a single ST attack and the rest are extremely damaging AoEs and your MM has melee focused pets like ninjas. Or I don't know, maybe Beast Mastery that has a single pet with a single ranged attack, that still requires that pet to be in close to use because it is a cone attack. Keeping range focused pets alive is much easier than keeping melee focused pets alive, and I really enjoy my melee preferred pet power sets. Which are more dependent on being able to rapidly summon replacements for losing them in combat than a range preferred set like bots that can have the pets ordered to maintain a safe distance without a care in the world.

[gabrilend]

28 minutes ago, Ukase said:

I confess, I've not played a mastermind very often. I've got a couple at level 50, and they sit idle because there's too much work in way of pet management for me to have any real fun. 

I guess something must have changed. It makes perfect sense to me to use endurance for each pet spawned. 

 

Ah, but pet management IS the fun, for people who like Masterminds.

[gabrilend]

1 minute ago, Rudra said:

The OP's proposal is that you pay less per summon per henchman tier pet you actually summon with that power, but at a 66% for T1 and 50% for T2 base endurance cost increase.

 

No, I had two proposals.

 

The first was the pay less per summon per henchmen tier pet that you actually summon.

 

The second was to balance this buff with a nerf, and I suggested increasing the endurance cost of the summon pet spells to compensate. The numbers are explicitly mentioned as tweakable.

 

The first seems to be fine on your end. You take personal offense at the second. Can you suggest a decent nerf that could be applied in tandem with the first in order to balance the MM after receiving such a buff?

[Rudra]

5 minutes ago, gabrilend said:

The first seems to be fine on your end. You take personal offense at the second. Can you suggest a decent nerf that could be applied in tandem with the first in order to balance the MM after receiving such a buff?

Sure. For the suggested nerf to balance the reduce the END cost if you summon less than all the pets for that power, I recommend... Nothing. Absolutely nothing at all. There is no reason for there to need to be a nerf for altered summon END cost. Bear in mind that Controllers and Dominators are going to demand the same thing, but it won't apply in their case because they always summon their full array of pets when they use their summon powers. And the reduced END cost per pet still alive does not change how quickly those pets can be summoned due to power recharge, how powerful those pets are, what upgrades those pets start with, or anything else. It changes how much END you spend if you still have pets from that power available, but is not fundamentally changing anything the power itself does.

 

(Edit: I doubt you will get the 1/3 and 2/3 cost reduction, but a pro-rated END cost for summoning when you are not summoning them all is not out of reason by itself.)

 

Edited September 3 by Rudra

[gabrilend]

3 minutes ago, Rudra said:

Sure. For the suggested nerf to balance the reduce the END cost if you summon less than all the pets for that power, I recommend... Nothing. Absolutely nothing at all. There is no reason for there to need to be a nerf for altered summon END cost. Bear in mind that Controllers and Dominators are going to demand the same thing, but it won't apply in their case because they always summon their full array of pets when they use their summon powers. And the reduced END cost per pet still alive does not change how quickly those pets can be summoned due to power recharge, how powerful those pets are, what upgrades those pets start with, or anything else. It changes how much END you spend if you still have pets from that power available, but is not fundamentally changing anything the power itself does.

 

(Edit: I doubt you will get the 1/3 and 2/3 cost reduction, but a pro-rated END cost for summoning when you are not summoning them all is not out of reason by itself.)

 

 

That's totally valid! You can absolutely suggest the change as a straight-up buff to Masterminds. When creating suggestions like this, I usually try to offer a "buff + nerf" so that the designers have a starting point when they're doing their tuning. But frankly some changes don't NEED a counterbalance nerf. Thank you for responding and discussing.

[megaericzero]

4 hours ago, srmalloy said:

The OP's statement about being punished is for their rapidly resummoning pets, which is what you're doing now -- under the current configuration, you pay the same End cost for summoning Tier 1 henchmen whether  you are summoning 1, 2, or all three of them. The OP's proposal appears to be to apply an endurance discount of 1/3 if you're only summoning 2 of the Tier 1 henchmen, and a discount of 2/3 if you're only summoning a single henchman. To break it out more clearly:

 

Current Arrangement:

1. Summon 3 henchmen: Full End cost
2. Summon 2 henchmen: Full End cost
3. Summon 1 henchman: Full End cost

Proposed change:

1. Summon 3 henchmen: Full End cost
2. Summon 2 henchmen: 2/3 End cost
3. Summon 1 henchman: 1/3 End cost

So with the OP's proposal, you're only paying the fraction of the base End cost for the number of henchmen you're actually summoning, instead of paying the full End cost regardless of how many you're pulling up, so it's more 'efficient' in terms of End to wait for all your Tier 1 pets to be defeated and summon them all back at once, rather than replacing them one by one as they go down. For myself, while I can see the argument for not paying the full End cost to get only one henchman, I would prefer to see a sort of "overhead" to the summons, so that the act of summoning has a cost, regardless of how many henchmen you're summoning:

1. Summon 3 henchmen: Full End cost
2. Summon 2 henchmen: 3/4 End cost
3. Summon 1 henchman: 1/2 End cost

This would make resummoning defeated henchmen a more strategic decision; you're not paying the full cost of the summons for a fraction of the effect, but it's still more 'efficient' to summon all three at one time, so the MM still has a reason to wait to summon more at once.

I don't think anyone is arguing about the discount. Most of us probably don't even care either way.

 

It's the compensatory increase in base end cost in the second half of the suggestion, which we can probably assume would be obligatory because there's no way the devs just give us a free buff like that.

 

It makes the worst-case scenario a worst-er-case scenario - if all your henchmen drop in combat, you are now paying more to resummon them than you would have been without this change. Given the choice, we'd rather keep the current status quo where we don't get any bonuses for having pets alive but we also don't have to pay more for re/summoning all six henchmen at the same time. "A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush."

[Psyonico]

1 hour ago, megaericzero said:

we don't get any bonuses for having pets alive

The strange thing about this suggestion is *there is no bonus* its a straight nerf unless you only need to resummon 1 pet, in which case things are what they are now

[gabrilend]

I've already said that the END increase is not a good idea. I agree with you. Now we just have to discuss and come up with a suitable alternative that would allow the primary suggestion (discount for summoning fewer than the maximum minions per cast) to be implemented.

 

I liked the idea that there should be an "overhead" where it's not a straight-up math equation of

"END cost of spell = number of minions dead divided by max number summonable"

but instead it's more like

"END cost of spell = (number of minions dead divided by max number summonable) + 15%" or something. Unless you're summoning all of them, in which case it's just 100%.