Announcements
Join the ongoing conversation on Discord: https://discord.gg/w6Tpkp2
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.
I'm thinking this would be the best solution as well. I admit I did mention a rating system could be generated by looking through all the beta feedback surveys and would represent the playerbase's own assessments, I don't necessarily feel that a star system is the goal of the effort and if people are wrapped up around that solution, I think they are losing sight of the original goal of difficulty rating systems in the first place. The whole reason I would want a difficulty ratings system is to help new players or inexperienced players choose power sets that let them play with the most gentle learning curve, or to point out to experienced players which sets might provide the greatest challenge. And before anyone addresses skill ceiling again, I am certainly willing to concede that any and all power sets could have an amazingly high skill ceiling at end-game when we start getting into a more horizontal progression system. I am instead referring to the player skill required throughout the levelling process as assessed by the beta feedback.
Lothic, it looks like you understand why the beginners would need to know that if they choose a difficult set no one is going to stop them; but if they get frustrated with it, then maybe it was because of the difficult powerset choice and not the game itself.
So a few choice phrases in the powerset descriptions could go a long way towards helping players understand the play style and learning curve associated with them. I know you were throwing up a couple of suggestions, but knowing this forum crowd, they are far more eager to attack your word choices than they are to attempt to understand what you tried to say. So I would stay away from descriptions like "intended for experienced players" and instead use something more akin to "this power set requires the player to balance power and momentum resources more than most others in order to get the most out of it," or the way the existing power set descriptions for [url=https://cityoftitans.com/content/protection-sets]Solid Form[/url]
and [url=https://cityoftitans.com/content/support-sets]Devices[/url]
provide a more descriptive idea of the concerns and limitations of the set. This way we're not making anyone feel any better or worse about themselves but at the same time we're making sure they know they are going to have a bit more of a challenge, or less of one, as the case may be.
[hr]I like to take your ideas and supersize them. This isn't criticism, it is flattery. I come with nothing but good will and a spirit of team-building. If you take what I write any other way, that is probably just because I wasn't very clear.
Yeah the actual words used don't matter to me as much as the need to convey the overall amount of "challenge" a typical player might face while playing a certain kind of build.
Basically we both know that some builds are so simplistically straightforward that you could probably set them up with a basic AFK macro and they'd almost play themselves for hours whereas other builds require so much "hands on" constant attention/effort that they're like juggling 5 running chainsaws at the same time. Sure the latter might be fun for someone who knows what they're getting into but a brand new player would likely just keep cutting various body parts off trying to deal with it.
So while I don't want the game to outright say "you must be an expert to play build X, Y or Z" I still want it to manage to convey, even if tacitly, that some builds are meant for "shallow-end" players while others require huge amounts of patience, experience or both.
CoH player from April 25, 2004 to November 30, 2012
[IMG=400x225]https://i.imgur.com/NHUthWM.jpeg[/IMG]
And let's not forget the experienced player who just wants some enjoyable game time without having to juggle chainsaws. Sometimes, I just like to throw on the cape and go punch bad guys, you know?
[hr]I like to take your ideas and supersize them. This isn't criticism, it is flattery. I come with nothing but good will and a spirit of team-building. If you take what I write any other way, that is probably just because I wasn't very clear.
Would listing 2-3 strengths and weaknesses respectively when comparing them to all other sets of the same type do the job of potentially conveying how "difficult" it may be to play it?
Something like that might work, like a bulleted list perhaps. I've always found, however, that when I have a task like this I always end up forcing the information to fit the format. In other words, I feel like I'd have to start reaching for, nearly inventing, strengths and weaknesses if there aren't enough to fill in the 'quota' or omitting some if the 'quota' is exceeded.
Using your idea, I think it could look something like this:
Let's say a player was looking at the [u]Invulnerability Protection Power Set[/u]:
Strengths[list][*]Fairly straightforward protection set[*]reduces damage received so less healing is required[*]Best against Physical Damage[/list]
Weaknesses[list][*]minimal damage avoidance[*]minimal inherent healing included[*]less effective against energy and exotic damage types[/list]
and compare it to the [u]Atrophic Aura Protection Power Set[/u]:
Strengths[list][*]ability to passively deal damage back to melee attackers and nearby opponents[*]includes some healing abilities[*]no vulnerability to any damage type[/list]
Weaknesses[list][*]must use experience and judgment to know which protections to activate at any time[*]least amount of total protection provided of the protection power sets[*]most susceptible to ranged opponents[/list]
Is this kind of what you were thinking?
[hr]I like to take your ideas and supersize them. This isn't criticism, it is flattery. I come with nothing but good will and a spirit of team-building. If you take what I write any other way, that is probably just because I wasn't very clear.
That is why I wrote the descriptions that way. I wanted to impart a sense for how they play and impart that some require more effort in how they play compared to the ease of play for others.
[hr]I don't use a nerf bat, I have a magic crowbar!
- Combat Mechanic -
[color=#ff0000]Tech Team. [/color]
By the way, i don't remember you broach the "main" ability of the tanks in those description : the taunt.
Does it works like a power or does it woks winthin the powers ? (like damages around you)
[hr]
Suivez l'avancement du jeu City of Titans en Français sur https://titanscity.com
http://forum.titanscity.com | www.facebook.com/titanscity | http://twitter.com/TitansCity
[color=red]PR - Europe[/color]
Quoting a portion of my compilation relevant to what I found on taunts:
[url=https://cityoftitans.com/forum/compilation-information-city-titans](Unofficial) Compilation of Information on City of Titans[/url]
That info is out of date refarding damage reduction. Taunt like it existed in the old game is not used in CoT. You won’t see “taunt”’in Protection sets. As taunting is but one way to “tank”’for your group.
Taunt is instead a type of control mechanic which affects how powers work (who can be targeted) and does not affext AI directly by force-locking to the taunter. It is also non-binary which means there are gradations to this mechanic.
If you want a tank that acrively “taunts” targets, you will want to take the appropriate Mastery Power(s).
[hr]I don't use a nerf bat, I have a magic crowbar!
- Combat Mechanic -
[color=#ff0000]Tech Team. [/color]
Should i must understand that the "holly trinity" Tank/Dps/Support is not really maintained by default ?
I mean, the Protection Set is a tank set isn't it ? or it's just a set of protections with no taunt by default and we must put masteries and refinement to improve the taunts ?
[hr]
Suivez l'avancement du jeu City of Titans en Français sur https://titanscity.com
http://forum.titanscity.com | www.facebook.com/titanscity | http://twitter.com/TitansCity
[color=red]PR - Europe[/color]
It would seem to be the latter. A set of protections with no default taunt but a form of taunting can be obtained through masteries. This means that anyone who has protection as a secondary or a tertiary doesn't become a pseudo tank they just become tougher.
"Let the past die. Kill it if you have to."
When they say "taunt" they mean the mechanic of forcing NPC's to attack you and only you, a.k.a the snap-aggro ability.
I'm sure they will have some form of threat table were threat can be generated and maintained through a few means so that tanks can fairly easily be the "center of attention" in encounters, but it won't be done by a default taunt mechanic as it was in CoH. Here tanks will have to actively work at being top of the threat table.
Stalwart Masteries:
Living Target: You are best at drawing your enemy's attention away from allies.
Bruiser: Your attacks help debilitate foes over time.
Battle Leader: When your allies focus on you, their attention improves your ability to defend them.
Ruggedness: You can shrug off more damage.
Protector: Your team strengthens your resolve.
Grabbed this from the compilation of info thread. Seems that battle leader will likely grant you the aggro of allies targetting you, and living target would be a big ol' threat generator. The rest seem to offer just damage mitigation which is a tanks job. Not too sure about protector though...
"Let the past die. Kill it if you have to."
I got a different impression from Battle leader. First, my impression requires an assumption to be true. The assumption is that we will have the ability to set a focus target. This is nearly a standard feature in MMO nowadays, but we haven't been outright told it will exist in CoT, so I have to list it as an assumption. So, my impression of Battle Leader is that it applies a damage reduction of some sort to all allies who have you as their focus target. Other games have this feature, typically a body-guard style feature in which the tank character or healer character can pick another target and take some of their damage. In this case, it may be damage sharing, or it may be resistance or subtraction or any other protection mechanic that MWM decides to put in place. That's my understanding of the description for Battle Leader, but it could very well affect the threat meter like you suppose, such that any threat generated by your allies that have you as a focus is shared with you, for instance.
[hr]I like to take your ideas and supersize them. This isn't criticism, it is flattery. I come with nothing but good will and a spirit of team-building. If you take what I write any other way, that is probably just because I wasn't very clear.
Could be the case. It could be both our interpretations, grants an aggro boost to tank, and a def boost to allies.
Edit: the aggro thing would be nice so that healers don't get targeted for doing their job.
"Let the past die. Kill it if you have to."
Neither currently grants any change to the Stalwart’s threat rating.
[hr]I don't use a nerf bat, I have a magic crowbar!
- Combat Mechanic -
[color=#ff0000]Tech Team. [/color]
Interesting... Can you shed some light on how they're planned function? Or is it too soon, or something?
"Let the past die. Kill it if you have to."
Sorry, I can’t discuss the design functions of the Mastery powers. I just wanted to point out current speculation wasn’t accurate.
[hr]I don't use a nerf bat, I have a magic crowbar!
- Combat Mechanic -
[color=#ff0000]Tech Team. [/color]
Dang. So close...
"Let the past die. Kill it if you have to."
Yes, we have focus targets. Brain dead to include.
Technical Director
Read enough Facebook and you have to make Sanity Checks. I guess FB is the Great Old One of the interent these days... - Beamrider
I would like need clarification or reason why Blaster (Hunter) wont be available for Issue #0? How come your opting to run 3 support characters and 1 "Damage" type? ( i know about the others just wondering why not go the early city of heroes route)
-AlienMafia (Justice Server)
Main: Thorns 13xx Badges
You'll notice there won't be any ATs available at launch with the "Off/Mit" type of powerset either as a Primary (used with the Pets row) or as a Secondary (used with the Manipulation column). My guess is a simple one - they simply decided not to develop that specific type of Off/Mit powerset until after launch. By concentrating only on the broad types of "Offense" and "Mitigation" that fully define the 5 ATs they will launch with they likely saved themselves a bunch of time compared to worrying about one unique AT, in this case the Ranger/Hunter.
Basically instead of a Blaster we'll get the original CoV styled Corruptor and Brute in its place (based on the [url=https://cityoftitans.com/content/mastery-sets]Masteries[/url] we've already seen). I suppose it's up to each player to decide if that's a fair enough trade-off for themselves.
CoH player from April 25, 2004 to November 30, 2012
[IMG=400x225]https://i.imgur.com/NHUthWM.jpeg[/IMG]
If memory serves I think this was discussed on the old forum, where the devs explained that it was specifically the Manipulation secondary, which was kind of like 'Control Lite' in the old game. Much like the pet class, to get it right will take some extra time. The lack of the Hunter (Blaster) at launch has been a difficult thing for me to accept, even after all these years. It was by far my favourite AT in the old game, but I understand the reasoning. If we have to choose I'd rather have it done right than done soon.
Spurn all ye kindle.
As far as I have understood it Manipulation will be a "light" version of Control, hence why it will not be a primary and why we won't get Control as a secondary, and they want to see how Control pans out before making any Manipulation sets.
Well when you look at the chart the only three original CoH ATs that used [b][i]any[/i][/b] version of the "Off/Mit" type powersets was the Blaster (as its Manipulation secondary), the Stalker (as its Manipulation secondary) and the Mastermind (as its Pets primary). Then when you consider how specifically difficult it was to make the Mastermind (with the pet AI) and the Stalker (with its "one-hit-kill" balancing issues) you see the ONLY AT left that was remotely "easy" of the three to create was the Blaster.
So the CoT Devs were left with a choice - should they spend a bunch of extra time trying to get a completely unique type of powerset, the "Off/Mit" (with its traditional mix of Melee, Ranged, Control and "weird" extras like Build Up type powers) working for just ONE AT (the Ranger/Hunter) or should they concentrate on getting the other main categories ("Offense" and "Mitigation") working for the other five ATs they decided to launch with? It seems like the choice was relatively clear.
For what it's worth Blasters were probably not my favorite AT from the old game but they were easily in my top five (I got several of them to 50 before the shutdown) and I feel bad for those players who really loved them. In the long run we'll probably be able to build Ranger/Partisans with enough Melee and/or Control attacks from tertiary powersets to create something fairly close to an old school Blaster.
CoH player from April 25, 2004 to November 30, 2012
[IMG=400x225]https://i.imgur.com/NHUthWM.jpeg[/IMG]
Aye. Please understand we've yet to put non binary controls through their paces as primaries. Let the Devs get some data to mine and we ALL get a better chance at them getting it right the first time. And also remember control sets will be available as tertiary sets too.
Control Sets won’t be Tertiaries. Manipulation Sets will though .only if the set is a secondary placement will it have a Tertiary version.
And yes, we purposefully held off on the Manip Sets becuase they require some more consideration design wise. Especially considering that sets are designed around a mechanic and not a visual appearance, and the Offensive Maniparions will consist of a variety of effect types.
A Melee Set mainly concentrated on damage but may have other effects. Offensive Manipualtion will have multiple powers from damage to control to buffs and debuffs. Taking those variations and making them work under a cohesive mechanical theme takes time. Having sets designed around a main play style with a cohesive mechanical effect allows us to see how well (or not) everything functions before we try to connect separate main effects under one set .
[hr]I don't use a nerf bat, I have a magic crowbar!
- Combat Mechanic -
[color=#ff0000]Tech Team. [/color]
o.O I don't recall Stalkers having any Manipulation powers. They had Melee/Defense. They then replaced Taunt in Offense with Placate and another power with a Big Hitter that wasn't made right until much later after release. Their Defense set had a stealth power that replaced, usually a passive or damage toggle.
Where was the manipulation for Stalkers?
Ninjutsu had Blinding Powder, Caltrops and Smoke Flash for manipulation.
Dark Armor had Cloak of Fear and Oppressive Gloom.
It wasn't consistent across all sets but it was definitely there.
"My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings: Look on my Works, ye Mighty, and despair!"
Oh, then Scrappers and Tankers had it as well. :)
You're sort of confusing the collective apples and oranges a bit here.
If you go back and check out the list of [url=https://paragonwiki.com/wiki/Stalker]Stalker Secondaries[/url] on the Titan Network wiki you'll see that even though Stalkers technically used many of the same "defensive" powersets as Scrappers, Tankers and Brutes when you look deeper at each specific powerset page you'll see that the exact "mix" of powers available to Stalkers was always unique to them. This is why in terms of CoT Stalkers have been more correctly listed under the "Off/Mit" column because they technically don't (and never did) share the exact same "formulation" of powers that the other ATs did.
Effectively if nothing else their "Hide" powers were not strictly "mitigation" the same way the other ATs defined that concept. Like Blasters their secondaries were "weirdly unique" to them alone.
CoH player from April 25, 2004 to November 30, 2012
[IMG=400x225]https://i.imgur.com/NHUthWM.jpeg[/IMG]
Correction there are no “CoT stalkers”. Their Protection-Manipulation Sets (which will have a better label than that as it’s a mouth full), won’t have a stealth requirement.
Protection-Manipualtion will be Sets with buffs (based on protections), debuff and / or controls.
Offensive-Manipualtion will be Sets with damage, buffs (based on offense), with debuffs and / or controls.
And things may need to change for Protection-Manipualtion as during development of our current sets it was determined we can have Support Sets also buff the originator. The Enforcer / Support Specification will essentially, be able to pick Support Sets with Protections and also debuffs or the odd control utility.
Which will require revisiting the basic design of Protection-Manipulation in some manner. I have several concepts to explore.
[hr]I don't use a nerf bat, I have a magic crowbar!
- Combat Mechanic -
[color=#ff0000]Tech Team. [/color]
alright so I have a question. Will there ever be a point where we'll have a specification for a Ranged/Defensive Manipulation ranger?
not my video just one I lke ===> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U6-SdIN0hsM
[CENTER][URL=http://www.nodiatis.com/personality.htm][IMG]http://www.nodiatis.com/pub/24.jpg[/IMG][/URL][/CENTER]
How is manipulation defensive? I must've lost something because as I understand manipulation is melee and control
[hr]
[color=red]PR, Forum Moderator[/color]
[url=http://cityoftitans.com/forum/desvipers-creative-impulsivity]My Non-Canon Backstories[/url]
Avatar by MikeNovember
At this point Defensive Manipulation isn't even a part of announced classes. If there was to be such a thing, I assume it wouldn't be explored until all the other announced specialties, including Commander and it's three, were finished.
edit: a word
Then for clarity can we call it something else :p
Assault: ranged damage melee damage
Manipulation: melee damage and control
Defense and melee? Seige? idk, titles aren't my forte :p
[hr]
[color=red]PR, Forum Moderator[/color]
[url=http://cityoftitans.com/forum/desvipers-creative-impulsivity]My Non-Canon Backstories[/url]
Avatar by MikeNovember
For now the labels are Offensive Manipualtion and Protection Manipulation.
They will likely get changed. I’ve been down this road before with the team internally and trust me when I say, don’t worry about the labels for now, they are what they are.
Read my descriptions of each up thread to understand what they are meant to be designed around and leave it at that.
There aren’t any plans for such a combination. As I said earlier, Support Sets with buffs will work on the originator, and some come with control utilities. In essence, they provide somewhat similar functions to a protection manip. set up.
When I get to fully designing the protection manip. sets, they will most likely done so with horn Enforcers play in mind with some unique mechanics to differentiate them from Support Sets.
[hr]I don't use a nerf bat, I have a magic crowbar!
- Combat Mechanic -
[color=#ff0000]Tech Team. [/color]
Whoops! That's what I get for posting in a rush. Thanks for the correction Tannim222.
You can design "manipulation" to mainly be defensive or offensive in nature, that is what makes them defensive or offensive respectively, as in that instead of damaging attacks you get group/personal buffs.
From what I gather Prot-Manip is barely off the drawing board as a concept, compared to Off-Manip which has an established design path and is basically waiting on data from Control before the actual sets can be designed.
You mean how Dark Armor for Scrappers/Tankers/Brutes was pretty much the same for Stalkers, except Stalkers got complete invisibility while the others just got a Stealth?
Stalker secondary sets where not manipulation sets. Yes, Ninjitsu had a few manipulation aspects to it as part of it's defense, but Stalker sets weren't that much different than their original sets, with the difference usually being the replacement of one power for a toggle invisibility.
Ninjitsu was the template other sets shouldnhave followed as it was designed to work with the Stalker AT from the outside of the design. The other sets were not. Often the devs ended up having to add extra code “rules” to certain powers in other sets tonhave them work better around the stealth concept.
The result was, for the most part, sets being hampered by the stealth and assasin strike concepts rather than supporting them. Over time the stalker AT ended up requiring more ways to engage in combat outside of stealth to be effective.
Basically, since most sets were designed from other ATs who were meant to constantly engage in combat, the AT that was designed to not be that way ended up playing that way more often than not.
The basis for our design structure is Ninjitsu. Not exactly designed around stealth or a burst attack, but around the concept of a protection set leveraging controls and / or debuffs with the intention of making them work around a unique unifying mechanic.
[hr]I don't use a nerf bat, I have a magic crowbar!
- Combat Mechanic -
[color=#ff0000]Tech Team. [/color]
I don't know. I didn't feel any of the defense sets as lacking or needing control powers to work, as you could just avoid getting hit, which was needed to get back into Hide.
Willpower was still the best on Stalker imo. I wish my Scrapper could've had the Stalker version, that's how much better I considered it. :)
It wasn’t about “needing control powers to work” it was the fact that the stalker AT had only 1 Power Set designed from the ground up to work with the concept of the AT.
The other sets weren’t. The result was that over time, the devs had to make changes to certain powers in other sets for stalkers, and had to keep making changes to stalkers to make them more viable in general play (especially wit teams) that moved them away from the core, original concept of the AT.
Had all stalker secondaries been designed as a whole to work with the concept of the AT, all those changes may not have been as necessary as they had become. Instead the sets were shoe-horned with a stealth power and that was pretty much it.
[hr]I don't use a nerf bat, I have a magic crowbar!
- Combat Mechanic -
[color=#ff0000]Tech Team. [/color]
well we do need a better name for them other than "offensive manipulation/ defensive manipulation" likw the other set ypes are all one word, and those two sets aren't and don't really roll off the tongue that well. Maybe we could think of a better name for them?
not my video just one I lke ===> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U6-SdIN0hsM
[CENTER][URL=http://www.nodiatis.com/personality.htm][IMG]http://www.nodiatis.com/pub/24.jpg[/IMG][/URL][/CENTER]
See, have to disagree. Ninja Stalkers were considered to be in just as bad of shape as any other Stalker.
It wasn't just secondary. They lacked DPS and the burst they did have, wasn't that great and easily interrupted when trying to use it after the initial attack. And if I recall, it was also a loss of DPS to even use Assassin Strike after a placate in all melee sets except one (think it was Energy Melee).
Well to be fair the Striker would be more like spiderman than anything close to a stalker since there isn't really a stalker like class in the game but rather a night widow build you can try to go for.
not my video just one I lke ===> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U6-SdIN0hsM
[CENTER][URL=http://www.nodiatis.com/personality.htm][IMG]http://www.nodiatis.com/pub/24.jpg[/IMG][/URL][/CENTER]
Also I have an idea for the names for the manipulations sets if you're interested. Call the Defensive sets "Maneuvers" and offensive sets "Tactics"
not my video just one I lke ===> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U6-SdIN0hsM
[CENTER][URL=http://www.nodiatis.com/personality.htm][IMG]http://www.nodiatis.com/pub/24.jpg[/IMG][/URL][/CENTER]
But what if you prefer tactical defense and strategic offense?
Foradain, Mage of Phoenix Rising.
[url=https://cityoftitans.com/forum/foradains-character-conclave]Foradain's Character Conclave[/url]
.
Avatar courtesy of [s]Satellite9[/s] [url=https://www.instagram.com/irezoomie/]Irezoomie[/url]
That's about how I felt about Stalkers, that they were be just generally worse in DPS performance than the Bane Spider VEAT, which isn't how I felt about the blueside ATs when compared to HEATs. I leveled a Claws/Elec Armor/Mu Stalker who was perfectly acceptable to play, I never felt that it was painful at all. But man, when I rolled a Bane, it was hard to say if I ever played another Stalker again. Despite my initial 'eh' about playing redside, I loved my Arbiter who was amazing at damage, even when not using the stealth mechanic.
Part of the reason was because you only had Ninjitsu. The entire rest of the secondaries were designed with more engaged combat ATs in mind and shoe horned with stealth. The majority of stalker designs were unintentionally lead to be played by remaining more engaged in combat rather than using the additional tools that were provided like Ninjitsu had.
This is why they changed Assassins Stike to build a charge for a fast cast and why they adjusted the inherent twice.
But that’s enough of looking backwards, looking forward we have a set design which can be simulated by some Support Sets. And that’s a problem.
We aren’t designing the Prot. manip. around stealth striking. Hence when we do design the sets thatnhave protections and untiliies we need to provide a cohesive mechanic that lends itself to a unique play style.
[hr]I don't use a nerf bat, I have a magic crowbar!
- Combat Mechanic -
[color=#ff0000]Tech Team. [/color]
We can’t usenthebterm defense to describe Protections sets because defense is a type of mechanic and we need to avoid confusion.
Neither of the two names lends themselves toward all thebplay styles possibly presented within then secondaries, some of which may have some of those names presented within the set name itself.
[hr]I don't use a nerf bat, I have a magic crowbar!
- Combat Mechanic -
[color=#ff0000]Tech Team. [/color]
"Tactical defense, strategic offense" is a phrase I've read in various military-themed speculative fiction, including Sir Paarfi of Roundwood as translated by Steven Brust (in considerably less concise wording.) In our history, I think it goes back to [url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helmuth_von_Moltke_the_Elder]Moltke[/url], if not further. This is my problem with Notears' suggestion of calling offensive sets "tactics". ^_^
Foradain, Mage of Phoenix Rising.
[url=https://cityoftitans.com/forum/foradains-character-conclave]Foradain's Character Conclave[/url]
.
Avatar courtesy of [s]Satellite9[/s] [url=https://www.instagram.com/irezoomie/]Irezoomie[/url]
I believe we will most likely have Offensive Manipulation just be called Manipulation (no legal issues to worry about with that).
As of now, we are way off from worrying about power art name categories for those set types anyway.
[hr]I don't use a nerf bat, I have a magic crowbar!
- Combat Mechanic -
[color=#ff0000]Tech Team. [/color]
whoa Whoa WHOA, a Steven Brust reference! I thoroughly enjoyed all of his Vlad Taltos novels, and I even recall seeing the name Morrolan e'Drien as someone's name in Secret World Legends. Good shtuff!
Tactical and Strategic, in a military context, is mostly about scale. Tactics is smaller scale whereas strategic is larger scale. Squads use tactics, battalions use strategy. You execute tactics right-the-hell-now, and you plan strategies weeks and months out. So "Tactical Defense, Strategic Offense" just means to consider defense on a smaller, more agile, individual-level scale, and consider offense on a broader, larger, longer-term scale.
~ DariusWolfe
Errant, TNT, Vibrant and Fluxion on Liberty
I love it when someone articulates a feeling I've always had about words :p
Like how presumptions are based on less into than assumption
[hr]
[color=red]PR, Forum Moderator[/color]
[url=http://cityoftitans.com/forum/desvipers-creative-impulsivity]My Non-Canon Backstories[/url]
Avatar by MikeNovember
So, 'Strategic Offense' would be 'Pets', or maybe Traps? And 'Tactical Defense' would then be some sort of active Dodge mechanic? This discussion has gone in odd directions.
Be Well!
Fireheart
hello guys new here and yes the potention in each and everyone of you is the key to succsess we will update you with an anouncment once we get rolling cheers with love and thanks for your paitent,
ArcNati
unless you're a dev, who's "we" :p
[hr]
[color=red]PR, Forum Moderator[/color]
[url=http://cityoftitans.com/forum/desvipers-creative-impulsivity]My Non-Canon Backstories[/url]
Avatar by MikeNovember
I'm not saying it's Aliens, but it may be aliens.
AND the data on this thread goes back to the Beginning of everything. It's useful, but not definitive.
If it is aliens, I say lock up your potention and your paitent before they abduct them!
Spurn all ye kindle.
Huh? Who? W. . . .?
I'm sorry, but Doctor VonMadman says he needs the patient back for his next round of experimentation.
Native of Triumph - Victory - Protector - Gladden - Dwarrowdelf - Tribble
Broad spectrum geek and Shadowy Advisor
Yes, my [u][url=https://www.deviantart.com/revanantmorituri]art gallery[/url][/u] is almost entirely screen captures. Tough.
He went that way! He's pretty fast though so I'd pick up the pace a bit. (points to the far end of the hall)
ARC Nati is an insurance company in Chapel Hill, NC.
http://www.buzzfile.com/business/ARC-Nati-919-942-4862
And ArcNati uploaded SWTOR game videos to YouTube.
https://www.youtube.com/user/ArcNati/videos
It’s a mystery!!!
I think when talking powers you got to look at simply "what makes it strong" and "what makes it weak"
Lets use a simple rating scale - I am going to pull out my old school PNP hat and STRONGLY advise looking at HERO Games Champions Roleplaying system
1. Activation
No Activation - Always on +20 pts
No Activation - Triggered +10 pts
Activation - No Cooldown +5 pts
Activation - Short CD +0 pts
Activation - Moderate CD (once per average fight) -5 pts
Activation - Long CD (once per long fight) -10 pts
2. Effect (tool) - Generally talking about effects that do not have a mathematical scale - rather then pts shown below (some stuns may last longer) the idea is that your Duration works as a multiplier...so a 1 second stun is 10 pts - a 5 second is 50 pts.
High power (ex. A Stun) +10 pts
Moderate power (ex. A Root) +5 pts
Low (ex. a Slow) +0 pts
3. Effect - Math - Again likely you would need to cross calculate this estimate with what it is...a high Damage power that has no cooldown would be a crazy high score - a 1 per 5 minute power would be far less powerful
Big Numbers (say 70% of health of a defenseless equal tier target) +10 pts
High numbers (50%) +5 pts
Moderate Numbers (20%) +0 pts
Low numbers (10%) -5 pts
Mild numbers (5%) -10 pts
4. Effect Scale/Range
AOE +15 pts
Long Range +10 pts
PBAOE +5 Pts
Moderate Range 0 pts
Short Range -5 pts
Melee -10 pts
The idea is every power has a "value" and is added up - this gives you a final score - that score is used to determine your difficulty. You use this to take into account the level of effort and skill to make it work.
If you have to press a dodge button and run into melee every fight and are constantly lightly hitting a foe over a long period of time - that would generally be considered a harder play-style then a guy who constantly incinerates anyone who comes near him and is immune to any form of harm. This is not a game balance calculation - this is just a gameplay difficulty calculation - AOE is typically easier to use; same goes for long range attacks.
You could use that to come up with a rough estimate of how hard your build will be to play.
Kung-Fool will be a hard character to play as he dodges and whittles down his opponents - he can avoid all damage if he times those dodges right and his attacks are fast but light so he needs to constantly keep in range to keep his short CD attack going.
Fire-truck however is a easy guy to play; his invulernability just reduces all damage he takes to minimal amounts and he just waltzs into combat and everyone around him constantly takes fire damage (tip of hat to fire tankers)
Both guys are actually not hitting hard and are technically able to take 0 or almost zero damage...one has to work a LOT harder though.
Cisco Certified - Long time PnP HERO - MSCE - Long time MMOer - Dripping Nerdom, nuff said
Our initial concept for our power design system first used Mutants & Masterminds as a rough guide.
Later, we moved on to our own point based system.
This then morphed into the current system we employ which takes an input value, then every aspect of a power a dev places has its own multiplier to that base input my. The more effects a power has, the more you have to split up that initial input. Each power tier has its own multiplier as well. Making sure higher tiered powers are more effective.
The final valise is an output. That output is then filters throughout conversion formula for the effect of the output giving you the in game value.
These conversion formulas handle diminishing returns of stacking outputs of like-effects as well as improvements to those effects.
We design entire power sets based between sustain, damage, and utility. A protection set with high sustain will have less damage potential and less utility. A protection set that has more damage potential in it will have less utility and sustain. These are broad stroke examples.
We don’t worry about twitch-related mechanics as it is t in our design scope.
[hr]I don't use a nerf bat, I have a magic crowbar!
- Combat Mechanic -
[color=#ff0000]Tech Team. [/color]
Interesting Choice using M&M - Its funny you mention a points based system (guessing it was born from M&M research).
I found that M&M fell sort of flat when it came to some effects not being particularly quantified - especially when you looked at FEATS which were super cheap for sometimes incredible output; so I can totally get ditching it.
It sounds like your using more of a trifecta model - the more points (more powerful the power is) the larger the shape is within the triangle - which then you skew toward your 3 anchors accordingly. I admit I am glad twitch based mechs are not really a factor - I feel the shift to action mmo gameplay has been derivative to say the least as many of us do not have the reflexes we used to and I think the idea of the "twitch" skill to sometimes be heavily overvalued - a good example of this is a solid genji in overwatch being rewarded with a high level of power if your capable of dancing allover the screen and tracking what is going on.
Cisco Certified - Long time PnP HERO - MSCE - Long time MMOer - Dripping Nerdom, nuff said
It's always good to hear that hasn't changed!
Spurn all ye kindle.
Pages