Announcements

Join the ongoing conversation on Discord: https://discord.gg/w6Tpkp2

Please read the current update for instructions on downloading the latest update. Players with Mac versions of the game will not be affected, but you will have a slightly longer wait for your version of the new maps. Please make a copy of your character folder before running the new update, just to make sure you don't lose any of your custom work.

It looks like we can give everyone a list of minimum specs for running City of Titans. Please keep in mind that this is 'for now' until we are able to add more graphics and other system refinements. Currently you will need :
Windows 10 or later required; no Intel integrated graphics like UHD, must have AMD or NVIDIA card or discrete chipset with 4Gb or more of VRAM
At least 16GB of main DRAM.
These stats may change as we continue to test.

To purchase your copy of the City of Titans Launcher, visit our store at https://store.missingworldsmedia.com/ A purchase of $50 or more will give you a link to download the Launcher for Windows or Mac based machines.

Max Range ... Min Range

27 posts / 0 new
Last post
Redlynne
Redlynne's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 day 23 hours ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/28/2013 - 21:15
Max Range ... Min Range

In City of Titans, the only "range" that mattered was Maximum Range. For all intents and purposes, Minimum Range was zero for everything.

Should that continue to hold true for City of Titans?

Granted, I'd imagine that the overwhelming majority of Powers would continue to have a Minimum Range of zero ... but there perhaps ought to be a category of Powers with a Minimum Range greater than zero. Snipe Powers perhaps?

I'm wondering if it would be considered a "fair exchange" on a lot (not all maybe, but a lot) of Interrupt Powers to simply drop the Interrupt Time and substitute in a Minimum Range. Note that if such an exchange were made, the Interrupt Reduction Enhancement would likewise most likely get converted to a Minimum Range Reduction Enhancement.

So, let's say, for the sake of argument and illustration of principles, that the nominal Maximum Range for any Power in the game is arbitrarily set to 100 ft (because, nice round number). But then you want to create a Snipe Power that reaches beyond that. So do something like a 150 ft Maximum and a 50 ft Minimum, so as to keep the original "100 ft" of Range in place. However, BOTH of those numbers can be Enhanced. So using the City of Heroes formulas for Enhancement, a +100% Maximum Range would reach out to 300 ft, and a +100% Minimum Range Reduction would modify down to 25 ft.

The first thought about a Minimum Range parameter is that if range to $Target is less than this value then the Power is unavailable and cannot be used. But an alternative would be that the Power CAN still be used, albeit with reduced effectiveness. What kind of reduced effectiveness could be tailored into each Power specifically. Simplest example I can think of would be the sort of "acceleration push" Power that gathers strength with distance traveled, such that at close ranges it merely produces a KnockDOWN, but at longer (ie. beyond Minimum) ranges it produces a KnockBACK.

Anyway, one more tool for the toolkit. Thoughts?


Verbogeny is one of many pleasurettes afforded a creatific thinkerizer.
islandtrevor72
Offline
Last seen: 5 years 1 month ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 04/28/2014 - 11:24
Red have you considered that

Red have you considered that putting a minimum range on a power limits its use in many situations? As you know, most combat in MMO's tend to take place in close quarters....even if the combat is ranged. Making a power like snipe require you to be a certain distance away limits its use to mostly just an opening salvo or catching a runner.
With it being limited to that degree I believe it will be skipped by most players and those who do take it will feel it was a waste most times.

About the reduced effectiveness for powers used under the min range... I think this is the way to go out of the two options....I do think that the metric used to decide a powers capability should take into account the fact it has reduced effectiveness in most situations and give it a greater effectiveness than the rest of the powers when used under ideal conditions.

Its an interesting suggestion but overall I'm not sure how much it would change the game experience.

whiteperegrine
whiteperegrine's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 years 9 months ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 06/19/2014 - 14:49
I am going to vote no.

I am going to vote no. minimum range works well in a tabletop setting but in a MMO? I am skeptical. what happens when the baddies "starts" outside the minimum range and then moves inside said minimum range? if there is a minimum range restriction...would these powers get something in return (dam buff or increased range, or the knock back/down buff you described?).

in addition, given not all powersets really have an actual "snipe" type power, controllers for example...not to mentioned the buffers/debuffers.

is there a way to do it? I am sure there is but I have to wonder, do we really need it? personally, I don't think so. I think we would be just creating a headache in the long run as we need to, not only, select which powers from all the powersets get this restriction, but also having to balance these newly restricted powers so people will actually use them.

Redlynne
Redlynne's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 day 23 hours ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/28/2013 - 21:15
whiteperegrine wrote:
whiteperegrine wrote:

in addition, given not all powersets really have an actual "snipe" type power, controllers for example...not to mentioned the buffers/debuffers.

In which case, those powersets would very very very likely have a Minimum Range of zero on every single Power. Non-problem solved?

Yes, it's an extra (integer) parameter in the database.
Yes, 19 times out of 20 the Minimum Range would be set to zero.
In other words, the DEFAULT assumption would be a Minimum Range of zero ... except for the exceptions.

I believe I mentioned all of this ...


Verbogeny is one of many pleasurettes afforded a creatific thinkerizer.
Redlynne
Redlynne's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 day 23 hours ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/28/2013 - 21:15
islandtrevor72 wrote:
islandtrevor72 wrote:

Red have you considered that putting a minimum range on a power limits its use in many situations?

Yes. I've even played MMORPGs that make use of the concept very elegantly.

islandtrevor72 wrote:

As you know, most combat in MMO's tend to take place in close quarters....even if the combat is ranged.

I know that a lot of MMOs tend to artificially limit the "reach" of ranged weaponry. TERA, for example, limits archery to less than 30 meters, and starts applying increasingly punitive DPS losses beyond a mere 8 meters, so as to force Players to "stay close" if they want to keep their DPS up.

islandtrevor72 wrote:

Making a power like snipe require you to be a certain distance away limits its use to mostly just an opening salvo or catching a runner.

If you're playing solo, perhaps (your mileage may vary with knockback and hovering). In Team settings, with an aggro magnet, that becomes a lot less of an issue, methinks.

Now, if the Minimum Range couldn't be adjusted via Enhancement, I'd certainly agree with you. But since I've already stipulated that it ought to be adjustable with Enhancement, I don't.


Verbogeny is one of many pleasurettes afforded a creatific thinkerizer.
islandtrevor72
Offline
Last seen: 5 years 1 month ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 04/28/2014 - 11:24
Red you are actually

Red you are actually suggesting that certain powers have the ways it can be used limited based on the assumption that powers will work the same as they did in CoH.

Its a fair question for White to ask about sets that do not feature a power with this restriction. What kind of balance do you see for that?

His entire last paragraph actually shows he understands your suggestion completely.

White...to answer the question red didn't.....

Quote:

what happens when the baddies "starts" outside the minimum range and then moves inside said minimum range? if there is a minimum range restriction...would these powers get something in return (dam buff or increased range, or the knock back/down buff you described?). .

Right now I am not sure how the game is going to be treating combat results....as in when they occur. Bear with me it takes a bit of explaining.

The combat system will most likely use one of two systems for determining how to resolve the foes position. One is either when the power is activated the other is when the power resolves. Most likely ....for simplicity sake, the result will use the foes position at the activation of the power. The same as how sometimes you would see an NPC runner get hit when he was out of line of sight in CoH.

islandtrevor72
Offline
Last seen: 5 years 1 month ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 04/28/2014 - 11:24
Quote:
Quote:

Yes. I've even played MMORPGs that make use of the concept very elegantly..

Which ones....just saying that doesn't exactly give me a frame of reference.

Quote:

I know that a lot of MMOs tend to artificially limit the "reach" of ranged weaponry. TERA, for example, limits archery to less than 30 meters, and starts applying increasingly punitive DPS losses beyond a mere 8 meters, so as to force Players to "stay close" if they want to keep their DPS up..

Is TERA one of the examples of elegance you spoke of?

I don't know if you are agreeing with my statement or if you are disagreeing with it. What is the point to referencing TERA? Is it what you want to see or not want to see in CoT?

Quote:

If you're playing solo, perhaps (your mileage may vary with knockback and hovering). In Team settings, with an aggro magnet, that becomes a lot less of an issue, methinks.
.

Given that much of CoH's combat took place in instance missions with rooms that were commonly smaller than the measurements you give for min range (or only slightly larger meaning both you and the target had to be on opposite ends) It remains an issue. Me thinks.

Unless CoT is going to make all the missions rooms that much larger then the power will find little to no use in the majority of combat and will most likely be considered a skip able power much as many of the interrupt powers were in CoH. Sure there were ways to make them more useful....like how you suggest ...through the use of enhancments (or augments as the case may be) but it still makes the power less attractive an option than one that doesn't have these restrictions. Without including some sort of balancing factor that makes these powers more attractive I would be against this level of situational powers.

Tannim222
Tannim222's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 days 21 hours ago
Developer11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 01/16/2013 - 12:47
I can settle this for you

I can settle this for you right now. The way powers are set up is in order to activate a power the target must be anywhere within the stated range between the caster to (technically) anything greater than 0) to the maximum range of the power.

Now if we want to have an effect change or (like the knockdown to knockback example) at a given range, we can already set that up. If we wanted to have reduced damage at any given ranges, or set of ranges, we could do that as well. We won't be doing that as a general rule for ranged sets though. This is about ease of play not encouranging "stay at range" or "get close" for maximum effectiveness. But we do have the option to create a set that operates that way if at some point down the line we find that to be part of a theme of set design.

Also, when it comes to stuff like switching knocks, we will do so in a manner that is consistant across all playstyles so using range to target won't be used in such a way. It's a good idea though should the switch mechanic we want to use won't work well for ranged sets.


I don't use a nerf bat, I have a magic crowbar!
- Combat Mechanic -
Tech Team.
Redlynne
Redlynne's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 day 23 hours ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/28/2013 - 21:15
islandtrevor72 wrote:
islandtrevor72 wrote:

Is TERA one of the examples of elegance you spoke of?

No. TERA is ... biased ... towards Melee Combat. Any time you stand more than a couple character height lengths away from your target, you get penalized on your DPS. That is NOT elegance in implementing a Min/Max Range like I was describing. That's a "the farther you are, the worse you are" system. I would have expected this dynamic to be self-evident based on my description of DPS loss as range increases in TERA.

To be fair, a significant reason for that is due to a consideration of Mob Density. As ranges get longer, Mobs need to be more widely spaced out on an open field/wilderness map. Double the ranges and you have to have 1/4 the Mob Density. Make the potential ranges wide open enough and not only does melee combat become threatened, but you also start facing "empty world" issues in which there are really long distances between things to fight, which can make for a somewhat boring experience to play. So TERA encourages playing in "little huddles" around Mobs so as to keep the Mob Density high in the field, which then makes the open world appear more inhabited within a Player's field of view.

islandtrevor72 wrote:

Given that much of CoH's combat took place in instance missions with rooms that were commonly smaller than the measurements you give for min range (or only slightly larger meaning both you and the target had to be on opposite ends) It remains an issue. Me thinks.

Unless CoT is going to make all the missions rooms that much larger then the power will find little to no use in the majority of combat and will most likely be considered a skip able power much as many of the interrupt powers were in CoH. Sure there were ways to make them more useful....like how you suggest ...through the use of enhancments (or augments as the case may be) but it still makes the power less attractive an option than one that doesn't have these restrictions. Without including some sort of balancing factor that makes these powers more attractive I would be against this level of situational powers.

I give up. I can't engage you constructively, islandtrevor72. It just isn't possible.


Verbogeny is one of many pleasurettes afforded a creatific thinkerizer.
Redlynne
Redlynne's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 day 23 hours ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/28/2013 - 21:15
Tannim222 wrote:
Tannim222 wrote:

I can settle this for you right now. The way powers are set up is in order to activate a power the target must be anywhere within the stated range between the caster to (technically) anything greater than 0, to the maximum range of the power.

Right. Perfect. Beautiful.
Now, all you have to do is allow the Minimum Range for a Power to reference an integer variable/value for that power and almost always set it to zero by default. That way, if you WANT to set a Minimum Range at being higher than zero, you have the OPTION and you can. This then gives the Powers Team another knob to twiddle when balancing out Powers ... as I mentioned in my OP. Even if the option gets exercised for a mere 2% of the Powers in the game, having the flexibility built into the system to allow for that should have value.

Tannim222 wrote:

Now if we want to have an effect change or (like the knockdown to knockback example) at a given range, we can already set that up. If we wanted to have reduced damage at any given ranges, or set of ranges, we could do that as well. We won't be doing that as a general rule for ranged sets though.

There's a very big difference between CAN and SHOULD. As already mentioned, I would expect that for MOST Powers there wouldn't be anything akin to "range bands" in which different distances yield greater or lesser effects. Note that such considerations can work in either direction depending on how a Power is conceptualized. Specifically I'm talking about the difference between Close/Powerful vs Far/Powerful in terms of adding (or subtracting) the strengths of effects.

Quote:

But we do have the option to create a set that operates that way if at some point down the line we find that to be part of a theme of set design.

Might be something to consider with gap closing "charge" attacks involving a rush of movement. I can easily see an argument for assigning a Minimum Range to such attacks such that they can't be used at point blank range as part of a melee attack rotation. In such a conceptualization, a certain amount of minimum distance needs to be covered in order to build up enough "steam" to ram into the $Target at a high enough speed. That sort of thing would be a case where having a Minimum Range would seem to be appropriate, even if we're talking about a Minimum 10 ft/Maximum 30 ft range type of Power.

Note, however, that such a limitation could produce some rather interesting gameplay tactics ... such as using vertical movement (ie. jumping) to open range above the Minimum without mobilizing in two dimensions. Something that I routinely did (and which became a habit) on my Ice/Ice Tanker was to "hop" into the air and use Frost at the apex of my vertical leap. This then pointed the 90 degree cone of the Frost's effects vertically down at my $Target I was engaging in melee, rather than horizontally. Through this simple tactic of leaping up into the air before using Frost, I was in effect converting Frost into being a sort of "poor man's PBAoE" (at ground level) rather than being just a "pie slice" (at ground level) and missing most of the Foes surrounding me.

So if you conceptualize a Power such as a Shield Charge and stipulate that it requires starting at least 10 ft away from the $Target (so Minimum Range is 10 ft) ... if your feet never leave the ground, then you can't use the Power against a $Target that's already in melee range. But if you can jump higher than 10 ft ... then you can leap up and "Shield Charge" your way back down into the ground as a sort of "pile driver" or even "blazing comet impact" type of move.

In other words, a limitation becomes an incentive to engage in tactical mobility to work around the limitation. Play smarder not harder (and be carful of yur speling). Play "dumb" and you're only gimping yourself. Play smart (in all three dimensions) and you'll get a lot more mileage.

Furthermore, on the Powers Team side of the equation, some Ranged attacks (such as Snipes) could be allowed to slot Minimum Range Reduction, while others (such as the aforementioned Shield Charge example) might not be allowed to slot Minimum Range Reduction. Depending on where the Minimum Range is set above zero, this would allow the Minimum Range to either be flexible or fixed as needed by the dictates of the conceptualization of the Power. In other words ... OPTIONS ...

Tannim222 wrote:

Also, when it comes to stuff like switching knocks, we will do so in a manner that is consistant across all playstyles so using range to target won't be used in such a way.

I was merely using that as an easy to grasp illustration of the concept/principle, rather than as a "beg" for that specific type of effect modulation. Again, I'd expect "consistent performance" to be the default standard for MOST Powers ... however, I think it would be interesting to make allowances for "variable effects" of Powers at different Ranges and use such capabilities sparingly as a sort of special feature of how SOME Powers are conceptualized to work. That then gives you the ability to do both Strong/Close and Strong/Far setups, depending on how you define things within the Power itself.

Tannim222 wrote:

It's a good idea though should the switch mechanic we want to use won't work well for ranged sets.

Always nice to have backup options if the first course of action doesn't pan out as planned. Enjoy.


Verbogeny is one of many pleasurettes afforded a creatific thinkerizer.
islandtrevor72
Offline
Last seen: 5 years 1 month ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 04/28/2014 - 11:24
Quote:
Quote:

This is about ease of play not encouranging "stay at range" or "get close" for maximum effectiveness..

and

Quote:

Also, when it comes to stuff like switching knocks, we will do so in a manner that is consistant across all playstyles so using range to target won't be used in such a way...

Thanks.... one of my bigger worries is always that multiple playstyles is not considered in the development of the game.

Tannim222
Tannim222's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 days 21 hours ago
Developer11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 01/16/2013 - 12:47
Redlynne wrote:
Redlynne wrote:

There's a very big difference between CAN and SHOULD. As already mentioned, I would expect that for MOST Powers there wouldn't be anything akin to "range bands" in which different distances yield greater or lesser effects. Note that such considerations can work in either direction depending on how a Power is conceptualized. Specifically I'm talking about the difference between Close/Powerful vs Far/Powerful in terms of adding (or subtracting) the strengths of effects.

I understand. We have a set of modifiers for a formula that determines output of effects. I suspect in the way you’re suggesting wouldn’t end with your desired results. There would have to be other factors involved in how everything is set up initially so close/powerful would end up far/weak or far/powerful would end up close/weak.

Redlynne wrote:

Might be something to consider with gap closing "charge" attacks involving a rush of movement. I can easily see an argument for assigning a Minimum Range to such attacks such that they can't be used at point blank range as part of a melee attack rotation. In such a conceptualization, a certain amount of minimum distance needs to be covered in order to build up enough "steam" to ram into the $Target at a high enough speed. That sort of thing would be a case where having a Minimum Range would seem to be appropriate, even if we're talking about a Minimum 10 ft/Maximum 30 ft range type of Power.

Our system could do something like this, again by stipulating the desired outputs at given ranges, or even by using time indexes based on how long or even how fast a character was moving. This falls with the “should or could” clause. It movement by speed would give preference to certain types of powers leaving others with less benefit (depending on maximum outputs and time indexes). Setting a minimum range wouldn’t be necessary as the output is determined by factors of distance and / or time.

Redlynne wrote:

Note, however, that such a limitation could produce some rather interesting gameplay tactics ... such as using vertical movement (ie. jumping) to open range above the Minimum without mobilizing in two dimensions. Something that I routinely did (and which became a habit) on my Ice/Ice Tanker was to "hop" into the air and use Frost at the apex of my vertical leap. This then pointed the 90 degree cone of the Frost's effects vertically down at my $Target I was engaging in melee, rather than horizontally. Through this simple tactic of leaping up into the air before using Frost, I was in effect converting Frost into being a sort of "poor man's PBAoE" (at ground level) rather than being just a "pie slice" (at ground level) and missing most of the Foes surrounding me.

So if you conceptualize a Power such as a Shield Charge and stipulate that it requires starting at least 10 ft away from the $Target (so Minimum Range is 10 ft) ... if your feet never leave the ground, then you can't use the Power against a $Target that's already in melee range. But if you can jump higher than 10 ft ... then you can leap up and "Shield Charge" your way back down into the ground as a sort of "pile driver" or even "blazing comet impact" type of move.

In other words, a limitation becomes an incentive to engage in tactical mobility to work around the limitation. Play smarder not harder (and be carful of yur speling). Play "dumb" and you're only gimping yourself. Play smart (in all three dimensions) and you'll get a lot more mileage.

The power builder doesn’t currently carry a minimum or null distance factor, but a limiter or improvement factor which can account for distance or time. So we could place limits on when a power can activate by distance as you described. I would find it highly unlikely to ever design powers to operate this way.
One of the philosophies of power design we’ve been using is encouraging desired game play instead of forcing desired game with hard limits like Shield Charge can’t be used unless distance to target is X feet.

What this does is leaves the possibilities open to how a player wants to play. Using your Frost at the apex of vertical leap example, if it was limited to use at a certain distance, it might not have worked with a basic leap it would need a movement power, if it could be used by basic leaping without any improvements to basic leaping ability, it most likely could be used in melee range. This way, a player can use it easily, stand in melee range, select a target, and click the power. Or a player can be a bit more advanced and make sure they get more coverage by leaping and targeting from overhead. The person leaping is far more likely to capture the full target limit than the person in melee who doesn’t bother with exact positioning, but both can easily use the power.

The Shield Charge example is another one. There isn’t any real reason to force a player to use the power at a distance over in the midst of melee. The virtue of the fact that the power relocates the player to a new position is an advantage of itself, while using the power close in doesn’t need to be restricted.

However, if you wanted to encourage a player to use an attack at a distance, you could design the power to like it was originally intended but unable to be functional in the old game’s engine; a straight-line area effect that also relocates the player character. Now selected a far target or location would attack all the targets within the line distance and also relocate the player. Can a power like this be used within melee range? Certainly. But using it a range provides more benefits.

Another way of doing this would be that a power like Shield Charge can be used within melee range, but using our distance mod, gains a benefit from using at range, to where at max range, it has increased output. Useful close, a bit better from far away, but not locked out.

Redlynne wrote:

Furthermore, on the Powers Team side of the equation, some Ranged attacks (such as Snipes) could be allowed to slot Minimum Range Reduction, while others (such as the aforementioned Shield Charge example) might not be allowed to slot Minimum Range Reduction. Depending on where the Minimum Range is set above zero, this would allow the Minimum Range to either be flexible or fixed as needed by the dictates of the conceptualization of the Power. In other words ... OPTIONS ...

Again, there wouldn’t be a reason to force a minimum reduction on an attack. Use it were you will. Snipes carrying an interruptible component encourage usage from a distance at advantageous moments where being hit doesn’t force the power to cancel. It already provides an option for socketing in reducing the interruption time. Yet, it can be used where ever the player decides to use it within its given range. Plus, we have already given snipes other uses which gives some optional tactics.


I don't use a nerf bat, I have a magic crowbar!
- Combat Mechanic -
Tech Team.
islandtrevor72
Offline
Last seen: 5 years 1 month ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 04/28/2014 - 11:24
Quote:
Quote:

No. TERA is ... biased ... towards Melee Combat. Any time you stand more than a couple character height lengths away from your target, you get penalized on your DPS. That is NOT elegance in implementing a Min/Max Range like I was describing. That's a "the farther you are, the worse you are" system. I would have expected this dynamic to be self-evident based on my description of DPS loss as range increases in TERA..

I couldn't tell. I mean you want to artificially limit powers to a farther range with is similar in concept.

Still looking for those examples of MMO's with elegant limits on range.

Quote:

To be fair, a significant reason for that is due to a consideration of Mob Density. As ranges get longer, Mobs need to be more widely spaced out on an open field/wilderness map. Double the ranges and you have to have 1/4 the Mob Density. Make the potential ranges wide open enough and not only does melee combat become threatened, but you also start facing "empty world" issues in which there are really long distances between things to fight, which can make for a somewhat boring experience to play. So TERA encourages playing in "little huddles" around Mobs so as to keep the Mob Density high in the field, which then makes the open world appear more inhabited within a Player's field of view..

I agree that's probably a big factor in why they did that....but I think its also a design choice based on the devs of TERA's balance. Again never got into TERA so not sure.

Quote:

I give up. I can't engage you constructively, islandtrevor72. It just isn't possible..

We do have vastly different views on things. I'm going to keep responding to posts you make but I will no longer expect a reply.

islandtrevor72
Offline
Last seen: 5 years 1 month ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 04/28/2014 - 11:24
Quote:
Quote:

Plus, we have already given snipes other uses which gives some optional tactics..

Dagnabit...you and your hints....I suppose there is no way you are gonna expand on that right now is there?

Redlynne
Redlynne's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 day 23 hours ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/28/2013 - 21:15
If everyone will forgive me

If everyone will forgive me for derailing my own topic ... a major faux pas, I know ... there's something tangentially related that I'd appreciate clarification on from Tannim222.

In City of Heroes, there was a ... promise ... made that Range was a Blaster's "defense" (in effect). I seem to recall early on in the game's history that there was this expectation of reduced Accuracy at longer ranges (sort of like a To-hit Debuff at long distance, which then mimicked the value of having Defense) and that Blasters, being ranged specialists with their Primary, were not penalized in this fashion. However, over time, it became apparent that there was no such "distance debuff" to Accuracy going on at all, particularly once NPC rock throwing and pistols were granted "sniper" ranges to counteract Players who had adopted Hover Sniping as their preferred method of racking up arrests with little to no risk to themselves.

So I'm wondering in a broader sense ... will Range to $Target "matter" in any way in City of Titans? The simplest thing I can think of would be a basic "applies to everyone" scaling debuff to Accuracy, such that attacking things farther away will produce more MISS results than using the exact same Power at a closer distance. Not a Damage debuff (like TERA does), but an Accuracy debuff (or a To-hit debuff, depending on how you're working the math under the hood).

I ask this, because ... if there is a sort of "global" limitation on ranged attacks designed into the game that way, that then creates a design space for multiple options.

On the Player side of things, it would mean that additional Range enhancement would necessarily also "demand" additional Accuracy enhancement, just to counter the increasing debuffing at longer ranges for many Powers. Thus, having a "100%" Base Accuracy might prove to be "insufficient" to the need depending on other factors.

On the Game Design side of things, it would mean that there would be (additional?) room for differentiation between Primary/Secondary/Tertiary Powers in performance terms. What I mean by that is that there could be an expectation that Ranged Offense Primary Powersets are exempt from Accuracy debuffing by distance to $Target ... while Ranged Offense Secondary Powersets are granted a partial reduction (1/2?) to the strength of the Accuracy debuffing by distance. Ranged Offense Tertiary Powersets would receive an even smaller reduction (1/4, or even less?) to the strength of the Accuracy debuffing by distance. In essence, a sort of "Blaster" advantage to being a (pure) Ranged Offense instead of one of the other options (Manipulation or Assault, for example), and the choice of Primary/Secondary/Tertiary "matters" for otherwise identical copies of Powers offered through the different options.

Is THAT sort of thing "in the cards" for City of Titans ... and if not already, might you consider it?

Why? Because ... Quigley Down Under ... cast Tom Selleck as the Blaster Hero, and Alan Rickman as the Mastermind Villain ... ^_~


Verbogeny is one of many pleasurettes afforded a creatific thinkerizer.
Tannim222
Tannim222's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 days 21 hours ago
Developer11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 01/16/2013 - 12:47
No we're not applying

No we're not applying diminishing returns in accuracy over range to target. There will already be performance differences between primary, secondary, and tertiary sets as well as how each classification may have thier own modifers which adjust certain aspects further. There's no reason to build further restrictions into ranged attacks.
Particularly with out to-hit system it does not take range to target into account, it is agnostic in that regard.

And to build in reduced accurary over distance to target causing more misses over time over range is a round-about way of reducing dps at range. It discourages ranged play in favor of closer play. Requiring sockets to improve hit rate for better performance at range is qualitively not too different than requiring damage socketing to improve damge at range (not i said qualitive not quantitive).

Yes it is realistic that the further a target is the harder it is to hit. It is just as realistic to say the more a target moves the harder it is to hit. But ae are not making a reality combat sim. Chalk it up that primary ranged attacks do more damage than non-primary ranged attacks as a covering the idea as ranges specialists can hit a target better than non ranged specialists.


I don't use a nerf bat, I have a magic crowbar!
- Combat Mechanic -
Tech Team.
Garrilon
Garrilon's picture
Offline
Last seen: 5 years 7 months ago
Joined: 02/05/2015 - 21:45
I don't like diminishing

I don't like diminishing returns at all!!! I feel that they should be banned! lol Rather than percentages, set numerical values would be best IMO for improvements to powers. Much easier to implement, I think, and its more satisfying to know that your "Golf" power build WILL send the hapless foe flying X feet/meters across the zone, allowing some adds for a high starting position...
Backing up to the topic, making too realistic in-game effects loses the "4 color comics" feel... Better to save the extra realism for a game like a FPS MMO...
And, adding accuracy, through gimmicks/devices and skill is what the enhancers were simulating... Special sights, a custom high quality barrel (perhaps extended length to give the powder expansion more time to accelerate the bullet), and years of practice, all in a neat, small package... LOL

On a different note, some missions did take place in a large, open area, at least in part, a visual mod simulating a telescopic sight / vision, could add to the realism, but, may be a big headache to the devs. There, sniping was a big help at times, but, not absolutely essential... Taunts, however, especially with the flying witches in an instance (can't remember zone name atm, north in the zone from New Salamanca) got the enemies to close/stay close for the H t H types... I hope we get a good number of different types of missions including ones with big areas for the ranged types to shine... (TP Foe and Dark Tentacles was a lot of fun when it worked...)

Nadira
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 12 months ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 01/01/2014 - 13:25
A minimum range is one more

A minimum range is one more way to make certain powers limited to once per ftght, unless the group you're in is good and can keep you out of that range. in that it adds a little potential depth to a game that other solutions to the 'alpha strike' problem are missing (like long interrupt times, long cooldown timers or 'only usable when attacking from behind').

Before the discussion about using a minimum range can take place, it still needs a discussion if certain powers should be effectively once per fight (unless skilled) or if all powers should be available all the time (unless blocked by the lockout timers).

This basically is a decision on how (ranged) fights are expected to play out, and the developers putting systems and mechanics in place to make it happen that way, just as ways need to be created to put certain limits on the usefulness of melee classes (otherwise they easily become the overpowered go-to solution from groups) and tanks need a mechanic in place to allow a decoupling between DPS and aggro (same problem otherwise)

Redlynne
Redlynne's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 day 23 hours ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/28/2013 - 21:15
+1 Nadira. Well said.

+1 Nadira. Well said.


Verbogeny is one of many pleasurettes afforded a creatific thinkerizer.
islandtrevor72
Offline
Last seen: 5 years 1 month ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 04/28/2014 - 11:24
Quote:
Quote:

Before the discussion about using a minimum range can take place, it still needs a discussion if certain powers should be effectively once per fight (unless skilled) or if all powers should be available all the time (unless blocked by the lockout timers)..

Before that discussion takes place they need to decide what this will do in regards to player choice. Will a player take a situational power? Will a player feel overly limited if the power is situational?

First and foremost is player fun. If its not fun don't it should probably have a strong reason for not being fun.

Quote:

This basically is a decision on how (ranged) fights are expected to play out, and the developers putting systems and mechanics in place to make it happen that way, just as ways need to be created to put certain limits on the usefulness of melee classes (otherwise they easily become the overpowered go-to solution from groups) and tanks need a mechanic in place to allow a decoupling between DPS and aggro (same problem otherwise).

The devs do not want a fight to 'play out as expected'. They want to keep options open for all manner of tactics.

Redlynne
Redlynne's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 day 23 hours ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/28/2013 - 21:15
islandtrevor72 wrote:
islandtrevor72 wrote:

Before that discussion takes place they need to decide what this will do in regards to player choice. Will a player take a situational power?

They certainly did in City of Heroes. There is no meaningful reason to assume they won't in City of Titans. If you have one, please articulate it and present it for peer review an analysis.

The typical language around use of Powers in City of Heroes were the "bread 'n' butter" Powers that got used all the time and became the anchoring links in attack chains that got endlessly repeated. Then there were the "situational" Powers that could be used on an "as needed" basis which were often game changing but which were not always available (typically due to long Recharge times). Both types had their merits in a diversity of build styles and options.

"Nuke" Powers tended to be highly situational, and often were (at best) useful only every 2-4 spawn groups to be engaged. Didn't stop a LOT of people from taking them and using them (as often as they could).

And then there was Oil Slick Arrow ... and Wormhole ... and a bunch of other really wacky Powers that were totally situational, and still VERY FUN to have and use ...

islandtrevor72 wrote:

Will a player feel overly limited if the power is situational?

Depends on the Player.
For some, yes ... for others, no. There is no "universal Player" out there who conveniently represents ALL Players. In that respect, I submit that this question does not elicit the insightful answer you seem to be seeking.

islandtrevor72 wrote:

First and foremost is player fun. If its not fun don't it should probably have a strong reason for not being fun.

"FUN" is not a boolean value to be answered with a simple (Y/N) response. "FUN" is a continuum of possibilities, ranging from the Y to the N. What one Player considers to be "fun" could be incredibly boring to another. I've read plenty of threads on forums about how Player A loved Blasters but couldn't stand to play Scrappers ... while Player B loved Scrappers but could never get the hang of Controllers ... and so on. A lot of these discussions revolved around specific Archetypes being "fun" to play in specific ways, but for various reasons, not everyone reading those threads would agree that those specific ways to play would be "fun" for them to play also.

As a Developer, you want to make "Fun" available to the widest possible audience of participants, who will all have a diversity of opinions on the subject. So you need to be thinking about "Fun" not in terms of a singular viewpoint or interpretation, but rather in terms of a broad and diverse range of interpretations.

So don't phrase the question in terms of "FUN? (Y/N)" because that's asking the wrong question. Instead, you should be asking "How many types of people and playstyles would consider this Fun?" because that immediately puts you into the position of surveying a diverse landscape filled with a wide range of options and opinions.

My stance is that there's a ... place (and room!) ... for both bread 'n' butter AND situational Powers in a game like City of Titans. Indeed, the game would be POORER if it lacked the diversity of both! The real trouble is trying to "cross the streams" between the two types, in which what you're trying to do is press one into the service of the other, at which point all kinds of things stop adding up correctly and the edifice of "Fun" starts crumbling into the shaky ground you've chosen to try and build upon. However, in most cases, that sort of taking a wrong turn is the fault of the PLAYER ... not the Designer/Developer. Use the tool "wrong" and you only wind up hurting yourself, and that's YOUR fault, not the tool's.


Verbogeny is one of many pleasurettes afforded a creatific thinkerizer.
Tannim222
Tannim222's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 days 21 hours ago
Developer11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 01/16/2013 - 12:47
The better trick is to make

The better trick is to make very power in the set desirable, which means that even "situational" becomes subjective to the tactics the player may insititute within the given play style combinations of their power sets. This is something we've worked very hard for in designing power sets over the past couple of years.

There are several ways we have been able to employ the sense of situational. I can't tell you all of those ways at this time, but I can bring up one way. Momentum has been a very handy mechanic to leverage situational usage of a power. take a power that can be used regularly (lets apply a lose definition of the word for a power that can be either used nearly every fight or even powers used every couple of fights). Then, with this power, we can use our Momentum mechanic where a threshold of Momentum must be met which then changes some aspect of the power and gives it greater effects. Now those old situational powers have a more regular use and a situational use. .

As for powers like OIl Slick arrow, at launch you won't see much of anything like that. However, the underlying system for powers is already built in to not only allow for it, but expand upon. If (more like when) these type of powers come to play, they'll go from situational, to much more common usage, but with a greater degree of...lets say variability.


I don't use a nerf bat, I have a magic crowbar!
- Combat Mechanic -
Tech Team.
islandtrevor72
Offline
Last seen: 5 years 1 month ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 04/28/2014 - 11:24
Quote:
Quote:

They certainly did in City of Heroes. ..

I spoke of this in my previous posts...specifically #2 and #7. But just so you don't misrepresent it. The meaning of what I said previously is that if you make a power too restrictive in its use many people will choose to skip it...wasting a lot of effort to develop it in the first place. This is further compounded when the restrictions themselves had to be developed as well.

Quote:

There is no meaningful reason to assume they won't in City of Titans. If you have one, please articulate it and present it for peer review an analysis..

Taken into context with what was quoted before my response and statements I have made earlier in the thread it is obvious that I was referring to the idea that if a power is made situation will it make a player decide not to take it given a choice.

Or in other words...before you can decide if powers should always be available or if some should be situational you should first decide what the effect will be on the players choice in regards to power selection.

So I don't think I will give a reason to support an opinion I don't have.

Quote:

For some, yes ... for others, no. There is no "universal Player" out there who conveniently represents ALL Players. In that respect, I submit that this question does not elicit the insightful answer you seem to be seeking..

If you narrowly define the parameters in which to interpret the response then you are right. If you look at the logical aspect of a conversation and understand that it was not looking for an absolute but instead looking for estimation of overall majority.

Quote:

"Nuke" Powers tended to be highly situational, and often were (at best) useful only every 2-4 spawn groups to be engaged. Didn't stop a LOT of people from taking them and using them (as often as they could).

And then there was Oil Slick Arrow ... and Wormhole ... and a bunch of other really wacky Powers that were totally situational, and still VERY FUN to have and use ...
.

There were also situational powers that players found too restrictive and they required a change. Most obvious of these was the rez powers (both self and other).

But this isn't CoH and the powers will not be the same. Which is why when you make a suggestion that makes me think it will be too restrictive I weigh in and say

islandtrevor72 wrote:

Without including some sort of balancing factor that makes these powers more attractive I would be against this level of situational powers..

and the only response you muster is

Quote:

I give up. I can't engage you constructively, islandtrevor72. It just isn't possible..

I tried to meet in the middle. Balls in your court....wanna find a middle ground or must it be exactly what you want?

Quote:

"FUN" is not a boolean value to be answered with a simple (Y/N) response. "FUN" is a continuum of possibilities, ranging from the Y to the N..

Quote:

As a Developer, you want to make "Fun" available to the widest possible audience of participants, who will all have a diversity of opinions on the subject. So you need to be thinking about "Fun" not in terms of a singular viewpoint or interpretation, but rather in terms of a broad and diverse range of interpretations..

Again...not speaking in absolutes. Any more than you do when you say

Quote:

They certainly did in City of Heroes.

Do you mean to say every single player used situational power and did not decide to skip any?
Or should I see the actual meaning of your statement and understand your opinion is that situational powers were used by a portion of the player base?

or how about this one

Quote:

And then there was Oil Slick Arrow ... and Wormhole ... and a bunch of other really wacky Powers that were totally situational, and still VERY FUN to have and use ....

Every single player in CoH found those powers fun? And your use of fun.... is that to mean that fun doesn't have a boolean value except in regards to the use of these situational powers?

How about both sides of your mouth meet and agree on something.

Quote:

My stance is that there's a ... place (and room!) ... for both bread 'n' butter AND situational Powers in a game like City of Titans..

This is not in dispute. What is in dispute is HOW it should be done and WHAT should be considered before deciding WHEN to do it.

Nadira
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 12 months ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 01/01/2014 - 13:25
islandtrevor72 wrote:
islandtrevor72 wrote:

Quote:
Before the discussion about using a minimum range can take place, it still needs a discussion if certain powers should be effectively once per fight (unless skilled) or if all powers should be available all the time (unless blocked by the lockout timers)..
Before that discussion takes place they need to decide what this will do in regards to player choice. Will a player take a situational power? Will a player feel overly limited if the power is situational?
First and foremost is player fun. If its not fun don't it should probably have a strong reason for not being fun.
Quote:
This basically is a decision on how (ranged) fights are expected to play out, and the developers putting systems and mechanics in place to make it happen that way, just as ways need to be created to put certain limits on the usefulness of melee classes (otherwise they easily become the overpowered go-to solution from groups) and tanks need a mechanic in place to allow a decoupling between DPS and aggro (same problem otherwise).
The devs do not want a fight to 'play out as expected'. They want to keep options open for all manner of tactics.

1) Special circumstances and limited use powers are quite common in most MMOs (unless they are designed for a 2 button control scheme, then the number of powers drops down drastically and limited use ones become too much of a hassle).
City of Heroes certainly had them in just about every powerset.
Players do not tend to see them as a problem providing one of two conditions is met: either the power is seen as more powerful as unrestricted powers, or they are just spectacular to use. Lighting up an Oil slick was not so much powerful as plain fun to set up and execute succesfully.

2) All game designers have an idea how combat typically plays out in their game. This is generally easier done in single player games, but considerations like ranged characters being able to keep enemies at a distance or not, the balance between alpha strikes and sustained power usage, enemy group sizes and how players or teams are expected to be able to deal with them. This also spills over in the power balance between ranged and melee roles (and how much they overlap. E.g. all ranged classes in CoH had significant melee powers indicating that the designers expected that ranged combat would devolve into melee anyway), as well as the role of crowd control and support powersets.

And of course it is always the goal of a systems designer to offer as many ways to approach a combat problem (offering depth increases replayability and allows for a better interest curve), but that doesn't mean there isn't a plan to how combat is designed and how that informs the design of abilities. I have no doubt at all that the design team at MWM has been going over these issues in far greater detail than I typed out here (and far greater detail than I can even imagine), and will continue to do so till close to release date :)

islandtrevor72
Offline
Last seen: 5 years 1 month ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 04/28/2014 - 11:24
Quote:
Quote:

1) Special circumstances and limited use powers are quite common in most MMOs (unless they are designed for a 2 button control scheme, then the number of powers drops down drastically and limited use ones become too much of a hassle).
City of Heroes certainly had them in just about every powerset.
Players do not tend to see them as a problem providing one of two conditions is met: either the power is seen as more powerful as unrestricted powers, or they are just spectacular to use. Lighting up an Oil slick was not so much powerful as plain fun to set up and execute succesfully..

Agreed...I said just that earlier in the thread.

Quote:

2) All game designers have an idea how combat typically plays out in their game. This is generally easier done in single player games, but considerations like ranged characters being able to keep enemies at a distance or not, the balance between alpha strikes and sustained power usage, enemy group sizes and how players or teams are expected to be able to deal with them. This also spills over in the power balance between ranged and melee roles (and how much they overlap. E.g. all ranged classes in CoH had significant melee powers indicating that the designers expected that ranged combat would devolve into melee anyway), as well as the role of crowd control and support powersets..

Ok, this makes more sense. The use of 'make it happen that way' and the direct correlation you drew to specific classes led me to think you were speaking of limiting player choice in the Holy Trinity aspect.

Redlynne
Redlynne's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 day 23 hours ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/28/2013 - 21:15
islandtrevor72 wrote:
islandtrevor72 wrote:

How about both sides of your mouth meet and agree on something.

Nice insult. Did you buy it on sale?

islandtrevor72 ... the reason I've given up on you is that you gratuitously misunderstand just about everything said to you. You're still doing it. You keep doing it. You have made it impossible to engage you constructively, and that's putting it politely.


Verbogeny is one of many pleasurettes afforded a creatific thinkerizer.
islandtrevor72
Offline
Last seen: 5 years 1 month ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 04/28/2014 - 11:24
I would like examples of this

I would like examples of this Red. But as this is no longer about the topic at hand send them via PM.