Champions Online

... is that, as I understand it, "anybody can have any power" was already tried in the CoX beta, and it led to massive imbalances, so they switched to the AT system.

Either: it'll be deja vu all over again, and the same sort of thing will happen, and we'll end up with CoX II (not necessarily a bad thing ) or there was some reason why free power choice wasn't properly implemented in CoX, and Cryptic know what they're doing this time.

Discuss?

Originally posted by gurugeorge

... is that, as I understand it, "anybody can have any power" was already tried in the CoX beta, and it led to massive imbalances, so they switched to the AT system.

Either: it'll be deja vu all over again, and the same sort of thing will happen, and we'll end up with CoX II (not necessarily a bad thing ) or there was some reason why free power choice wasn't properly implemented in CoX, and Cryptic know what they're doing this time.

Discuss?

If it is like pre CU/NGE SWG where you only had a limited amount of skill points to use, then it is fine. But if you can train all like in EVE over time it is a bad thing..

I like really dynamic skill systems.

But for COH I did like the archetypes to a large extent. I liked some were Defenders and others scrappers and others again were Brutes.. but this is really the exception, as I normally like more free skill systems..

The way that CoX handled it was with Power Pools and that was the issue. Since most of the builds then went to a single attack and a single defence that people had decided was the Optimum

Configuration. If Champions Online uses the same basic idea that the Pen and Paper game uses then it will be based on Points thus ultimately every choice will mean that you have to give up something else. While it can be far more complicated, it will result in for the most part balanced playing field.

I wouldn't let it concern you, keep you up at night ( ' ;

Part of the reason for the move to CoX archtypes was to ensure that players didn't gimp themselves nor all resolve to an optimized build.  At least in Pre-CU SWG, they could go with this approach because you earned a living and xp from more than just combat, thus a nice variety of classes could be born (until the holo-grind, that is).  Still, people cried about balance issues there too.

Can Cryptic implement it this time around?  They've got the experience to do it.  Perhaps if they're clever, they might let players choose any skill they want but also provide a recommended "skill tree" for those who who aren't the calculating, min-max, reasearch type just so they could avoid the gimpin factor. Or, just allow for full blown respecs.

As per Cryptic's responce to this matter, I believe that when choosing a power "outside" of your recommended "archetype", the power would be significantly powerless, compared to someone who's archetype recommends that power.

For example, a class like "Brute" will primarily choose tanking powers, like defense enhancement powers, resiliance, etc.

They'd get a 20% defense bonus, whilst a "blaster" like class choosing the same power will only get a 3% (or whatever.. 3% seems quite low) defense bonus.

I do believe this will result in some conflict of balanace, but it will surely make people think twice about where to spend those power slots..

"Should I get a power that does 500 damage since I'm a blaster, or get the defense power that gives me 3% defense so that I can survive that itty-bit longer".. =P

Originally posted by gurugeorge

... is that, as I understand it, "anybody can have any power" was already tried in the CoX beta, and it led to massive imbalances, so they switched to the AT system.

Either: it'll be deja vu all over again, and the same sort of thing will happen, and we'll end up with CoX II (not necessarily a bad thing ) or there was some reason why free power choice wasn't properly implemented in CoX, and Cryptic know what they're doing this time.

Discuss?

First of all, a system that allows all players to have access to the same abilities and restrictions is superior to one that forces class-based restrictions. This is because the remainder of the game's lifespan will be spent addressing "How a scrapper is imbalanced vs. a Stalker" and so on. That is unless, of course, they do not care about Archetypical imbalance.

Second, once an equal player field is established as the foundation, patches and updates focus on the powers and not the classes or the archetypes. Therefore, a change to a power or ability affects everyone, not just the class or archetype. And therefore, if a power is truly "uber" or literally some form of game abuse, the FIX removes the ability for anyone to become "uber or abuse it.

In other words, it's easier to fix a system where all people have access to the same resources. One patch, affects all.

Having played City of Heroes/City of Villians (Ironically, there is an update/patch occurring as I write), I have noticed that they are constantly re-addressing animation times for different Archetypes, fixes to different power descriptions, and so on. Each Archetype is addressed seperately, and therefore, after each patch, we are wondering....

....which Archetype has the advantage now?

And because of this, City of Heroes often gives out free "respecifications"...the ability to rechoose your powers...because they feel people would have chosen their powers completely different en lieu of their patch.

An equal playing field is therefore optimal, because ultimately, the end product is one that addresses the options for every player and not just a select group.

And finally, in respects to how City of Heroes handled their "massive imbalances" during their beta season. If City of Heroes had stuck with an equal optioned system, right now they would probably be in much better shape.

Note: Most of equal-playing field system arguments ultimately deal with PvP because the developers can tweak NPC/mobs/etc as they see fit.

Originally posted by titan1970

The way that CoX handled it was with Power Pools and that was the issue. Since most of the builds then went to a single attack and a single defence that people had decided was the Optimum

Configuration. If Champions Online uses the same basic idea that the Pen and Paper game uses then it will be based on Points thus ultimately every choice will mean that you have to give up something else. While it can be far more complicated, it will result in for the most part balanced playing field.

I think the key to making an open and equal system is to more narrowly define the powers. If you buy a "cold shield"...do not also make it resistance to toxic, fire, negative energy, etc.

City of Heroes/City of Villians basically gives their ATs all the resistances or none of them...or very little.

Champions online should change the name of the title, if they don't go by the point system. The rpg is unique cas' of that system. And a skilled based system can have same balance as a class based one. The skilled based just gives you control over your weakness and imbalances (as well as you strength and advantages), instead of being given your imbalances cas' of class. I rather have control of my character. It's time an mmo lets youn learn to make your own decisions instead of them holding our hand. Players will play spend more time online creating different characters to perfect their game and tweaking powers, which will make the company more money. Earn your points spend your points. If your a fire blaster and you attack somene that has high resistance to fire, oh well, your not not taking him out. And vice versa. As far as, the whole everyone is the same, I don't see that happening when you allow enough powers. Players will still become tankers, blasters, controllers, etc., but will have more of a hybrid feel.

Originally posted by gurugeorge

... is that, as I understand it, "anybody can have any power" was already tried in the CoX beta, and it led to massive imbalance