Yes indeed, but as I said in a previous post trade-offs that goes beyond the opportunity cost of not getting another feat will by principle be a lot more impactful and opens up a huge design space. To give up on that because it's a "fool trap" or because things are not well defined in descriptions makes very little sense in DDO where you already can mess up a character far worse and already relies on knowing things you need to look up.
The issue of whether or not feats with drawbacks are good game design is kind of a red herring.
Maybe the question we should be asking about the patience feat is do the types of builds best supported by it need this additional leg up over other types of melee builds like sneak attack and imbue heavy melee builds?
It's not clear to me that they do. Specifically one issue sneak attack heavy melee builds face is the huge damage increases afforded to first number heavy builds through debuffs are only partly realised. Those boosts to damage from debuffs don't apply to sneak attack damage.
I would have liked to see choices available for melee builds that are not built solely around maximising first number damage via crit profile and using active attacks. This is one of a number of reasons I'm dissatisfied with what is being offered.
Wow people are really underestimating this one. Even for just auto-attacking it's a strong DPS feat for many builds. But the real point is that for adrenaline and active attacks (like SDK chains) attack speed doesn't really matter and this feat will be a massive increase to burst DPS.
Yes. But they also have cooldowns so you will get just about the same number of chain attacks in regardless of your attack speed, thus increasing the damage at the cost of attack speed is beneficial.
Maybe that is exactly why I think they are not a good idea. Too big of an impact. Maybe it could work as a class feature or tier5.
Anyway, *why* I think feats with impactful tradeoffs are not a good idea in DDO is complicated, it's not easily reduced to a few line in a forum post. It's more based upon my experience after having played many and developed multiple games (that is not an argument for my point of view, that is just an argument why I can't back up my opinion more meticulous.
There are games that have used this design pattern to great effect, but I've also seen it fail (like 'perks' with a positive and negative side... where it was always possible to choose one where the negative side was utterly irrelevant, for instance. pathfinder suffered from this.). I've also seen games that use it extensively and do it well, but when I look at the end result and I compare those character building systems to the one in DDO, I just like the one in DDO (without this design pattern) slight better.
But preference aside about whether a game with or without this design pattern would be better, I think IF a game would to be embrace this, it should do so at an early stage and not slap it on halfway through development.
My main issue is that the design space that is already there is not used. As I wrote, for destiny feats there is an interesting choice, or casters in epics there is an interesting choice, the first thing you need to do is create interesting choice between epic feats for martial builds. That one *IS* a general rule of thumb in game design: to not open up new design space when the space you already have (in this case: the tradeoff between feats) is not utilized.
The issue of whether or not feats with drawbacks are good game design is kind of a red herring.
Maybe the question we should be asking about the patience feat is do the types of builds best supported by it need this additional leg up over other types of melee builds like sneak attack and imbue heavy melee builds?
Nah, I think the question about which direction this would take the game is a far more important one. I'm sure the devs can run make an excel sheet or run a simulation to work out the numbers, or at least they should be able to do so. But how I *feel* about the feat is player feedback they might be interested in.
Nah, I think the question about which direction this would take the game is a far more important one. I'm sure the devs can run make an excel sheet or run a simulation to work out the numbers, or at least they should be able to do so. But how I *feel* about the feat is player feedback they might be interested in.
Sure, but the thing is no great new design space is really being opened up by this one feat.
You might plausibly argue it was if other options for other build types were being offered.
But right now there is just one new feat that works significantly better for some melee builds than others.
That just seems lazy to me and reinforcing of certain meta builds that don't need any more help.
And as to how it feels, that is quite subjective. For people who can't evaluate how good it would be for their preferred build or who can and recognise it as a a subpar offering for them, it doesn't feel great.
Maybe that is exactly why I think they are not a good idea. Too big of an impact. Maybe it could work as a class feature or tier5.
Anyway, *why* I think feats with impactful tradeoffs are not a good idea in DDO is complicated, it's not easily reduced to a few line in a forum post. It's more based upon my experience after having played many and developed multiple games (that is not an argument for my point of view, that is just an argument why I can't back up my opinion more meticulous.
There are games that have used this design pattern to great effect, but I've also seen it fail (like 'perks' with a positive and negative side... where it was always possible to choose one where the negative side was utterly irrelevant, for instance. pathfinder suffered from this.). I've also seen games that use it extensively and do it well, but when I look at the end result and I compare those character building systems to the one in DDO, I just like the one in DDO (without this design pattern) slight better.
But preference aside about whether a game with or without this design pattern would be better, I think IF a game would to be embrace this, it should do so at an early stage and not slap it on halfway through development.
My main issue is that the design space that is already there is not used. As I wrote, for destiny feats there is an interesting choice, or casters in epics there is an interesting choice, the first thing you need to do is create interesting choice between epic feats for martial builds. That one *IS* a general rule of thumb in game design: to not open up new design space when the space you already have (in this case: the tradeoff between feats) is not utilized.
Alright, another "it is bad for inexplicable reasons". Oh well.
What I can say is that a feat like impatience is a lot more exciting than "+1W" or "+2 imbue dice" and it offers a much more meaningful and impactful choice that affects every part of the build down to playstyle.
Actually I've changed my mind. Not for you, hence why I didn't reply to you, but in case a Developer ends up reading this so I'll try to keep it as short and simple as possible while still getting the basics across. I'll be using Borderlands 1 as examples. Why Borderlands? Because it did trade-offs spectacularly well.
There are 4 primary pillars that need to be taken into consideration from a mechanics standpoint on when a trade-off is a good idea.
1st is availability of the resource. The more rare a resource is the more net positive the result should be.
2nd is skill expression. The larger the skill requirement is the larger the positive benefit can be and the larger the penalty can be.
3rd is limitations. The more strictly limited to a playstyle the larger the trade-off can be.
4th is permanence. The harder it is to change the larger the net positive result should be.
Now for examples from Borderlands 1. These will be in spoilers to decrease the wall of text. First, if you are not familiar with Borderlands it's a looter-shooter that has trade-offs with weaponry, shields, skills, and class mods.
Weapons are first because they do not have the 3rd category, limitations. They can be used by everyone so we will go through all remaining points.
Weapons are everywhere and you can change them mid-fight. This makes their permanence near zero and availability near infinite. This allows you to have trade-offs that don't always have to be positive. However even in this regard weapon affixes are a near universal buff and those that aren't are generally trade-offs with skill expression. Such as trading damage for recoil that can be overcome with skill, or trading accuracy for damage that can be overcome with skill.
Weapon parts provide wide swings in combat abilities but that trade-off is ok because of availability allowing you to find another with better capabilities easily.
The rarer the weapon is the more net-positive the effects become adding a disproportionate increase in capabilities for every trade-off if a trade-off even exists.
Shields are the same as weapons with their ubiquity but lack the same level of skill expression with them. As a result what you'll see is variations with shields will be universally buffs with the only 3 exceptions being trading HP for shield strength, trading shield strength for recharge rate, and depleting fully charged shield for a damage boost. These three variations are good trade-offs because of skill expression, namely resource management and not getting hit.
Shield parts, like weapon parts, have a wide swing in abilities but the trade-off is ok because of availability.
The rarer the shield the more net-positive the effects become if there is even a trade-off to begin with.
Not much to say on these as they are all universal buffs just different flavors of the same thing
Skill tress are a resource that is rare, is limited by the class, limited by playstyle, and is the most permanent. As a result you'll find that there are almost no trade-offs that occur here. As such there is only 1 skill one 1 class that has a trade-off and that trade-off is a skill expression, trading accuracy for sway. It is also strictly limited to a class whose playstyle is already heavily influenced by skill expression.
Two classes have class mods with trade-offs all others are buffs only. These classes are the ones with the largest ranges for skill expression. This checks off the boxes of limitations and skill expression. These items are more limited than weapons and shields but less limited than skill points. These items are less permanent than skills but more permanent than weapons. The mods that do have trade-offs are the mods with the biggest buffs making them net positive but pushing for a higher risk, higher reward playstyle that comes with superior skill expression.
In Evaluating patience against these four pillars this is why it's a bad feat.
1. Availability of resource. Feats are the most rare resource in DDO. The rarity would be an expectation of a higher net positive return than any other resource.
2. Skill expression. Changing attack speed for crit chance has no skill expression.
3. Limitations. There are no limitations to the feat. It is universally available so positives should be minimized and negatives eliminated.
4. Permanence. Feats in DDO are effectively permanent in a build. Feat respec is an ultra limited resource. The reason a feat like Improved Precise Shot and Power Attack are somewhat OK is because they are toggle-able (although many, if not most, builds no longer use either of these feats in favor of precision which has no downside other than rage limitation).
With casters you can see this clearly. You did a great job on that. They have to choose between intensify, burst of glacial wrath, embolden or legendary focus. With two feats locked for ruin, that give 6 different combinations of two feats to take. I'm enjoying that balance a lot.
Great job? Ruin being mandatory? So DI as well? Then there are like 3 feats that actually work. You are enjoying that? That is the biggest problem with the design of the game. Things that overperform so much that they become mandatory. So many dead feats, spells, enhancements etc. But nerfing the overperformers is also not allowed. People are soloing r10 and endgame raids already and you want more of those overperforming feats? You know what that leads to? What cr will enemies in the new quests have? 50? 60? This balance is going nowhere.
I expect new feats to either be worthless or mandatory. I am so glad there are no new mandatory feats here. Now i can take what i want in those extra feat slots. All new feats being bad just means more build diversity.
Its not like the game doesnt have enough feats that we dont have anything to take at 33 and 34.
Patience is definitely quirky. On the weapon and melee build with most to gain, a Falcion with +1/+1 from class, it's a +17-10=7% DPS increase, assuming 0% fort. The math is worse for other weapons and melee classes, except Ravager T5. However, special attacks with extended crit range like adrenaline may still make this quite good, it's very hard to say. It also opens up the possibility of skipping a melee tree T5 entirely for some more caster-focused melee-caster hybrid but these are very niche. On Ravager it's definitely a substantial DPS increase, but the slower attack speed is not great for Bloodstrength, which is kind of fair.
Actually I've changed my mind. Not for you, hence why I didn't reply to you, but in case a Developer ends up reading this so I'll try to keep it as short and simple as possible while still getting the basics across. I'll be using Borderlands 1 as examples. Why Borderlands? Because it did trade-offs spectacularly well.
There are 4 primary pillars that need to be taken into consideration from a mechanics standpoint on when a trade-off is a good idea.
1st is availability of the resource. The more rare a resource is the more net positive the result should be.
2nd is skill expression. The larger the skill requirement is the larger the positive benefit can be and the larger the penalty can be.
3rd is limitations. The more strictly limited to a playstyle the larger the trade-off can be.
4th is permanence. The harder it is to change the larger the net positive result should be.
Now for examples from Borderlands 1. These will be in spoilers to decrease the wall of text. First, if you are not familiar with Borderlands it's a looter-shooter that has trade-offs with weaponry, shields, skills, and class mods.
Weapons are first because they do not have the 3rd category, limitations. They can be used by everyone so we will go through all remaining points.
Weapons are everywhere and you can change them mid-fight. This makes their permanence near zero and availability near infinite. This allows you to have trade-offs that don't always have to be positive. However even in this regard weapon affixes are a near universal buff and those that aren't are generally trade-offs with skill expression. Such as trading damage for recoil that can be overcome with skill, or trading accuracy for damage that can be overcome with skill.
Weapon parts provide wide swings in combat abilities but that trade-off is ok because of availability allowing you to find another with better capabilities easily.
The rarer the weapon is the more net-positive the effects become adding a disproportionate increase in capabilities for every trade-off if a trade-off even exists.
Shields are the same as weapons with their ubiquity but lack the same level of skill expression with them. As a result what you'll see is variations with shields will be universally buffs with the only 3 exceptions being trading HP for shield strength, trading shield strength for recharge rate, and depleting fully charged shield for a damage boost. These three variations are good trade-offs because of skill expression, namely resource management and not getting hit.
Shield parts, like weapon parts, have a wide swing in abilities but the trade-off is ok because of availability.
The rarer the shield the more net-positive the effects become if there is even a trade-off to begin with.
Not much to say on these as they are all universal buffs just different flavors of the same thing
Skill tress are a resource that is rare, is limited by the class, limited by playstyle, and is the most permanent. As a result you'll find that there are almost no trade-offs that occur here. As such there is only 1 skill one 1 class that has a trade-off and that trade-off is a skill expression, trading accuracy for sway. It is also strictly limited to a class whose playstyle is already heavily influenced by skill expression.
Two classes have class mods with trade-offs all others are buffs only. These classes are the ones with the largest ranges for skill expression. This checks off the boxes of limitations and skill expression. These items are more limited than weapons and shields but less limited than skill points. These items are less permanent than skills but more permanent than weapons. The mods that do have trade-offs are the mods with the biggest buffs making them net positive but pushing for a higher risk, higher reward playstyle that comes with superior skill expression.
In Evaluating patience against these four pillars this is why it's a bad feat.
1. Availability of resource. Feats are the most rare resource in DDO. The rarity would be an expectation of a higher net positive return than any other resource.
2. Skill expression. Changing attack speed for crit chance has no skill expression.
3. Limitations. There are no limitations to the feat. It is universally available so positives should be minimized and negatives eliminated.
4. Permanence. Feats in DDO are effectively permanent in a build. Feat respec is an ultra limited resource. The reason a feat like Improved Precise Shot and Power Attack are somewhat OK is because they are toggle-able (although many, if not most, builds no longer use either of these feats in favor of precision which has no downside other than rage limitation).
A good example of trade-offs are keystones in path of exile. They are fairly similar to feats in many ways and generally checks the same boxes in your arbitrary list and are very well regarded designwise.
Overall: Action boost damage reduction seems good if not exciting, the Trick shot seems fun and good in epics at least, but the rest were a bit meh.
I feel casters should get a fun feat as well, and the channel thing seems too restrictive at 4s block. If you are in a group, normally most things is dead by that time. If you solo, you can't afford to stand still. Would have been more fun to put that on tumble like for ranged. As it is I only see this as fun for Pale Trappers with sneak. I also don't think +100 USP on action boosts is fun, it is also not that good but probably just good enough to make action boosts obligatory to squeeze the last % out of nuker builds now, which is just annoying.
Patience is definitely quirky. On the weapon and melee build with most to gain, a Falcion with +1/+1 from class, it's a +17-10=7% DPS increase, assuming 0% fort. The math is worse for other weapons and melee classes, except Ravager T5. However, special attacks with extended crit range like adrenaline may still make this quite good, it's very hard to say. It also opens up the possibility of skipping a melee tree T5 entirely for some more caster-focused melee-caster hybrid but these are very niche. On Ravager it's definitely a substantial DPS increase, but the slower attack speed is not great for Bloodstrength, which is kind of fair.
Even if the math was correct it only affects "front" numbers. On hit effects eg sneak attack,imbues and the crappy 9d6 weapon effects are not affected but they are affected by attack speed. It will also affect debuff uptime something that is impossible to model without making assumptions about party composition.
Great job? Ruin being mandatory? So DI as well? Then there are like 3 feats that actually work. You are enjoying that? That is the biggest problem with the design of the game. Things that overperform so much that they become mandatory. So many dead feats, spells, enhancements etc. But nerfing the overperformers is also not allowed. People are soloing r10 and endgame raids already and you want more of those overperforming feats? You know what that leads to? What cr will enemies in the new quests have? 50? 60? This balance is going nowhere.
I expect new feats to either be worthless or mandatory. I am so glad there are no new mandatory feats here. Now i can take what i want in those extra feat slots. All new feats being bad just means more build diversity.
Its not like the game doesnt have enough feats that we dont have anything to take at 33 and 34.
Heh, the bar is not that high in DDO, OK?
I wasn't thinking about ruin and the two feat lock, especially now that dragon breath is nerfed and it's the only epic toy left. But given that; having a couple of feats left that are comparable in power level (but quite different is pretty nice. As far as balance goes, I do like the choice at 24 and soon at 33.
I'm all for buffing useless feats and nerfing OP feats by the way, I'd try to bring all feats in line so that the choice of which 7 to take in heroics is actually meaningful, instead of the current 5 feats fixed, 20 feats useless and out of the remaining 3 (that still feel like the bottom of the barrel in comparison to the top 5) you can pick 2. Such a waste of potential. But one thing at a time; and that is epic feats right now.
How will tumble reduce lag when every tumble roll will force the servers to recalculate reflex and other saves? Dodge values? Ranged Power? AC? ETC?
And when the effect and animatio has happened agin servers has to recalculate everything again?
I dont see this new metrhod will solve anything lagwise.
But I see that gimping down builds will kill fun of the game and make players quit DDO.
How will tumble reduce lag when every tumble roll will force the servers to recalculate reflex and other saves? Dodge values? ETC?
And when the effect and animatio has happened agin servers has to recalculate everything again?
I dont see this new metrhod will solve anything lagwise.
But I see that gimping down build will kill fun of the game and make players quit DDO.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
