balor Posted Saturday at 03:09 PM Posted Saturday at 03:09 PM This is a suggestion for the Devs that were considering addressing the remaining Crashing powers. The decision is clear not address those powers for some very obvious and less obvious reasons. I'm in of the opinion that crash powers are not good in most games and my dislike of a crash system has nothing to do with what the power do but more the fact by being a crash power it has now reduced the number of creative options to choose from. I consider these powers as blank and a null choice because of the Crash mechanism. I state this up front so those that read this can understand my perspective as I continue with my suggestion. The power of player agency is very important in games and CoX is one the best at that. But games(video, pen and paper and wargames) also need to have balance and relative parity in the value of your choices. Anytime you see something that is termed as an "Auto Include" or "Auto Exclude" scrutiny needs to be given to those items in question. I find the Crash mechanism powers to be an Auto Exclude and a reduction in valid choices. I get that the community is mixed in their opinions and that is the way it should be but I have a possible path forward. The Homecoming team has already shown they can make mutually exclusive powers. Instead of making an equivalent tier 9 Super Nuke/Last stand tier power you have the chance to add a Fantasy appropriate power for that archetype with enough time and flexibility to deal with the issue of it going into both damage and tanks builds. This also allows for those tier 9 crashing power to stay 100% the way they are and keep that group happy. This is just a suggestion and one of many possible solutions that could be developed. It subverts the challenges of directly addressing the Tier 9 "Last Stand" Crashing powers. It keeps those people that enjoys the current Crashing powers happy. It also opens up another active choice for players to pick with a mutually exclusive power. If going that path yes there will be push back just like anytime something changes. It will take the most valuable resource we all have that is time. We know there was interest by the Homecoming team to address the crash system and this is one possible solution that subverts a number of the issues. Thanks for your time and spending your nights and weekends working on the game.
Bill Z Bubba Posted Sunday at 11:43 AM Posted Sunday at 11:43 AM I don't know which dev stated it, nor even if I'm just spreading inaccurate hearsay, but apparently multiple mutually exclusive power pairs in a powerset isn't on the table. Which is a bummer considering that such an option could be used to fix Kheldians for me. But I get it. When I came back after my last break, I noticed the regen rework and asked on my SG's discord, "Is it the general consensus that Reactive Regen is better than Instant Healing?" (The answer was a resounding hell yes.) Point is, I asked. I had to seek out that information. It'll be more confusing the more of these we add in and I generally know what I'm doing. New players diving in with no knowledge of Mids' or City of Data seeing multiple oddities in powersets will be even more lost. On top of that is we don't know whether it's even possible. I have to assume it is since one mutually exclusive pair can be added, why not two, or three? Why can't we have two new mutually exclusive powers in claws for those that think claws having ranged attacks is silly? Where does the line get drawn of when it's appropriate to add or not add mutually exclusive power pairs? All that said, Invulnerable doesn't have any mutually exclusive powers in it right now. They could move forward with the change there, by their own rules. But Super Reflexes on Sentinels would be screwed because they already have PB/MB in place. Electric Armor could be reworked as well. Probably some of the other crashing T9s. I'm sad to see all the work done getting tossed out, especially with the statement added that "At least at this point there are no plans to revisit them in the future." It was good idea and shouldn't be tossed to the side. 1 1
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now