A possible matrix for Breed balance

[McKnuckleSamwich]

consider:

4 breeds, 3 perks per breed line, 2 breed lines per breed.

4*3*2=24 perks.

Two distinct lines: Alpha, Beta

Alpha= Offensive
Beta= Defensive

For a reasonable sense of balance, a perk in one line, with the same investment, SHOULD provide an *equal* benefit, in an either offensive or defensive manner.

I can see, so far that there has been some effort to adjust the perks as I have described. However, there is one glaring inconsistency.

Consider the proposed perkline of Atrox primary:

The perk benefit is heavily weighted to the top end, but, in most other perklines there is a moderate amount of balance between perk 1, 5 and 10.

My recommendation would be to try to provide equal, or increasing benefit for subsequent perks in the lines (already done), but also, provide some equal (or pseudo equal) effoct of one perk over another.

For example: a damage perk vs. a small one time heal, or,
A 20 second damage to nano effect vs. a large AAO buff
or, a huge AAO buff vs. a strong HOT

The point of these comparisons is to note that one benefit should be appropriate to deal with the other:
- a small heal can offset dmg caused by a small dmg perk
- A 20 second dmg to nano will enable someone dealign with an alpha where the perks land to offset much of the damage to nano.
- A strong hot popped before an alpha should be enough to heal your through a large hard alpha.

etc. I'd like to see some of this type of reasoning when observing the proposed changes to breed lines.

[Kopecz]

most=yours?

QFT. who says my beta line has to be defensive?

[Iamkama]

I really like your idea of balancing. Where things cancel each other out, but you may not always have the perks open for use because youve used them already.

I like it I like itttttt

[McKnuckleSamwich]

QFT. who says my beta line has to be defensive?

err I think the "definition" of beta is that it's like secondary.. where alpha is primary, sooo, yea, if alpha is offensive, then beta would be defensive... not to pick at a point here, but this is the way it is already designed, so, unless you want to take it up with the designer of the greek/latin whatever *ALPHA*BET*(a), or FC themself, I think you'll have a hard time selling this idea...

maybe we should change the alphabet to betalph? hmmz

[Parranoid1]

err I think the "definition" of beta is that it's like secondary.. where alpha is primary, sooo, yea, if alpha is offensive, then beta would be defensive... not to pick at a point here, but this is the way it is already designed, so, unless you want to take it up with the designer of the greek/latin whatever *ALPHA*BET*(a), or FC themself, I think you'll have a hard time selling this idea...

maybe we should change the alphabet to betalph? hmmz

yeah.... beta is secondary....but who said that primary had to be offensive and secondary had to be defensive.

i know lots of people that have set out toons in the ways of defence/survivability first, killing second.

or who is to say that the "secondary" line cant be a secordary offensive or secondary defensive line... if ur primary attack fails you have a secondary to back up, if u catch my drift.

But yeah i can see where your going and having a line that counteracts another line isnt a bad idea but you have to keep in mind that people probably wont use these lines just to counteract another line, for example the large HOT line idea you had. This could be used at any time they chose and i would assume it would be alot more powerful in a situation where it wasnt just used to directly counteract another line used

[McKnuckleSamwich]

I completely agree, paranoid. It's just potential method for balancing, as opposed to just flinging out ideas willy nilly.

I'm not saying that beta must be defensive, or alpha must be offensive, I'm more trying to look objectively at what FC has proposed, and trying to see how well one perk stacks up against another.

Does MR stack up against the opi blocker? yea, it's not bad.
Does MR stack up against the NM DtN? yea, because it *should* provide enough of a damage sink to survive the alpha.
Does MR stack up against survival? not really (could be a 10s hot at 500/s to really be a "survival" perk.
Does MR stack up against the atrox secondary final perk? not really.

Does mongo fury stack up against any other 2nd perk? no.
Does tacky hack stack up... etc. The point is to see how balanced a perk is based on it's "peer" group, perks of similar investment.

[Kopecz]

err I think the "definition" of beta is that it's like secondary.. where alpha is primary, sooo, yea, if alpha is offensive, then beta would be defensive... not to pick at a point here, but this is the way it is already designed, so, unless you want to take it up with the designer of the greek/latin whatever *ALPHA*BET*(a), or FC themself, I think you'll have a hard time selling this idea...

maybe we should change the alphabet to betalph? hmmz

Err no. Alpha/Primary line buffs skills you're already good at, Beta/Secondary line buffs stuff that you need more of. Where in the real world does that mean that Beta has to be defensive? For example -- Opi Secondary specials are Blinded by Delights and Dizzying Heights both of which are, according to their descriptions, offensively oriented. Another example -- Soli Alpha perk action Tacky Hack is totally defensively related.

At your other point of comparing perk actions: c'mon really? If you had your way everything would be carebear because NOTHING would be better than anything else and everything that you did would always have some amazing counter from someone else. Well yeah, but where's the fun in that? Suddenly every time a Trox and an Opifex meet BAM breed perks become null and void in your world. You might as well give everyone the exact same special actions because that's really what your calling for here.

So no you can't tell me "well that's how FC designed it already" because that's simply not true. Bad idea. Next please.

[Iamkama]

Err no. Alpha/Primary line buffs skills you're already good at, Beta/Secondary line buffs stuff that you need more of. Where in the real world does that mean that Beta has to be defensive? For example -- Opi Secondary specials are Blinded by Delights and Dizzying Heights both of which are, according to their descriptions, offensively oriented. Another example -- Soli Alpha perk action Tacky Hack is totally defensively related.

At your other point of comparing perk actions: c'mon really? If you had your way everything would be carebear because NOTHING would be better than anything else and everything that you did would always have some amazing counter from someone else. Well yeah, but where's the fun in that? Suddenly every time a Trox and an Opifex meet BAM breed perks become null and void in your world. You might as well give everyone the exact same special actions because that's really what your calling for here.

So no you can't tell me "well that's how FC designed it already" because that's simply not true. Bad idea. Next please.

Ok, so you'd rather have 1 or 2 breeds be superior than the rest and have 2 breeds make up the entire population of AO rather than have the breed perks balance out each other so that theres variety in what people play?

good idea...

[McKnuckleSamwich]

Suddenly every time a Trox and an Opifex meet BAM breed perks become null and void in your world. You might as well give everyone the exact same special actions because that's really what your calling for here.

you clearly haven't read the thread.

I'll paraphrase for you, skipping the adjectives: Balance for # of perks invested
alpha/beta "could" be seen as off/def, but don't need to be; but, considering the general design, they are "generally" off/def in nature; so, in keeping with the theme, there *could* be a relative strength counter action in the alternately named perkline.

There is nothing "carebear" about it. Your version of "carebear" is the same as everyone seeing the relative strength of ranged advy, and everyone goes to roll one. There is no benefit to diversity without balance.

Without balance, dear friend, you get whats known as cookie cutter. That means, that XX perk is SOO Much stronger than any combination of WW, XY, XQ, and YY perk, that everyone /rolls opi advy, or everyone /rolls atrox enf, because the perk combination is so brutally OP'd.

now, if you don't like balance, no problem, theres a ranged advy out there with your name written all over it, or, if you like it the other way, go roll a 175 shade and come to towers. But, the rest of us, AND FC are trying to BALANCE THE GAME.

Balance means there are suitable counters for actions; relatively consistent checks on actions; and the strength of a perk has some bearing on the investment of perks.

[Kopecz]

Ok, so you'd rather have 1 or 2 breeds be superior than the rest and have 2 breeds make up the entire population of AO rather than have the breed perks balance out each other so that theres variety in what people play?
good idea...

No. But this is clearly a thinly disguised "Nerf MR and proposed Nanomage perks" thread, which Means said weren't gonna make it to test anyway.

you clearly haven't read the thread.

There is nothing "carebear" about it. Your version of "carebear" is the same as everyone seeing the relative strength of ranged advy, and everyone goes to roll one. There is no benefit to diversity without balance.

Balance means there are suitable counters for actions; relatively consistent checks on actions; and the strength of a perk has some bearing on the investment of perks.

Uhhh newsflash: I read the thread and it's still a bad idea. "Balance" doesn't necessarily mean that everything has a 50/50 chance, that's just not how it should work ... EVER. Is Mongo Rage OPed? Yes. Do I hate being hit w/ BBD just like everyone else? Yes. Do I think that every time my Nanomage enforcer sees a trox shade pop Mongo Fury/Mongo Rage that I should have some magical button to counteract that? No.

So in summary I totally disagree with your view of balance because I think that breeds should have strengths and weaknesses and not 50/50 chances where Secondary Perk X counteracts or nullifies Primary Perk Y. Everyone might as roll a solper in that world.

[Yama]

Breed perks should consider also breed abilities. As a trox i have great disadvantage in sense/int/psy....so i want from my breed perks give me some advantage because of this.

You can think about 50/50 when also basic abilities will be same which is not.
So each breed should have something different poiting on basic abilities.

[McKnuckleSamwich]

@kopecz

How did you still miss the bolded part?

it's all about perk strength vs number of perk's invested.

If youre still having a problem with this, I'll use an example.

Option #1 If you buy 1 case of beer it costs you 40 bucks, you can get yourself pissed and try really hard to get laid; but,

Option #2 If you spend 50 bucks, you can get a bottle of vodka, and two mixes and get three chicks wasted and without any effort get laid.

Which do you choose?

Obviously, if youre trying to get laid you do option #2. If youre lazy, you do option #2, if you're a broke down dumbass you do option #1. If you're chillin with some bro's you do #1.

BUT, THE BEST BANG FOR YOUR BUCK IS OPTION 2.

Now, convert that into perks, if I spend 5 perks as atrox, and some soli date spends 5 perks, I want MY 5 perks to give me at about as good action as hers.

ok?

[Kopecz]

@kopecz

How did you still miss the bolded part?

it's all about perk strength vs number of perk's invested.

I'll just quote myself for emphasis here:

This is clearly a thinly disguised "Nerf MR and proposed Nanomage perks" thread, which Means said weren't gonna make it to test anyway.

[McKnuckleSamwich]

nothing is disguised.

The reality is is that anyone who pays for something, expects to get market value.

If my breed perks gives me a handful of crackers and kick in the ass, and yours give you beer and a pack of chips, I'm switching breeds.

And everyone else will too. Furthermore, if I only want half a beer and half a pack of chips, and it comes on breed perk 5, I certainly wouldn't settle for for two stale cookie crumbs like it is on mongo primary.

The general make up of the perks is as follows:

Perk 1: action scaling with # of perks in line (not very strong)
Perk 5: action scaling with # of perks in line (stronger)
perk 10: action (strongest)

However, on atrox primary, it looks like this:
Perk 1: wtf useless
Perk 5: prelude to greatness, but wtf stupid on it's own
perk 10: unbelievably OP'd.

So, my point isn't to nerf MR! It's to balance the damn line.