The APU Question

[nabbl]

The core concept is two-fold. On the aesthetic side, the idea is to make the APU the literal opposite of the PPU. The PPU heals and strengthens a target, the APU damages and weakens. On the balance side, it's to make APU a distinct playstyle, rather than having two classes (tank and apu) who do nothing but look at the target while holding down the mouse button, and at the same time make APUs useful contributors to a team, without ever being the only thing you need in a team.

I really like that idea! But it should be a very smooth style of play. the apu should be also able to compete in 1on1s versus unbuffed players. The OP-Fight role, as you describe above is something I really would like to see happen.

[Ivan Eres]

Well yes, obviously one of the problems with this is it takes APUs away from where they used to be, gives different reasons to enjoy and dislike playing them. On the other hand however, APUs can never go back to what they once were, as it was vastly unfair.



The idea is that using the debuffs will be necessary to play as an APU. In terms of pure damage/time they wouldn't be able to compete with a tank, or probably a PE or Spy either. However, by using their debuff abilities, they'd be able to turn it into a fair fight.
This would also hopefully mean that having an APU or two in a team would always be useful - it would enable you to weaken or neutralize the star-members of the opposition team. However, it would never make sense to bring nothing but APUs, as once a target has been debuffed, a tank will do more damage than an APU would to the debuffed target. APUs would be expected to focus more heavily on the debuff role and less on hitting stuff in big team operations than they would during solo play, where they'd use some debuff abilities, but mostly focus on attacking.



The core concept is two-fold. On the aesthetic side, the idea is to make the APU the literal opposite of the PPU. The PPU heals and strengthens a target, the APU damages and weakens. On the balance side, it's to make APU a distinct playstyle, rather than having two classes (tank and apu) who do nothing but look at the target while holding down the mouse button, and at the same time make APUs useful contributors to a team, without ever being the only thing you need in a team.

This is what should had been done for 2.2 to defuse Monko'cron.

[CMaster]

@Nabbl - to clarify, a lot of the abilities (and the general focus of the ideas) are "debuffs" not "antibuffs" - that is they weaken a player from their base state, rather than removing a boost. Damage boost is one example that is in game at the moment.ie

However that does raise one issue with regards to balancing that is of some concern:
In one-on-one fights, some classes rely more on shields than others (PE > Spy >> Tank/APU). So there's a risk that APUs will either be too strong vs PEs, or too weak vs tanks. Of course, maybe the answer to that is that the antibuff skills need to be balanced so that they are only worth doing vs Holy buffs, and a waste of time against PE-level shields (which is likely the case anyhow)

[scientit/Bamboo]

Check this out:

http://forum.neocron-game.com/showth...PU-PPU-changes

[Ademos Rakh]

I'd really enjoy a role change as proposed by Cmaster. I'd really like to see and especially play that ingame.
Thumbs up for that!

[Cannings]

The whole APU situation is something i've been trying to give a lot of thought recently.

Having a lot of experience playing both sides of this class back in NC1 some fundamentals are core, ppu's should not be debuffing as previously stated not only does this mean you get ppu's for healing and ppu's for debuffing with ppu's on ppu's on ppu's on and so on. Back in NC1 just before the death we got to a place where we used to do (on pluto at least) a 5 v 5 v 5 v 5 v 5 op fight where all clans would gather their team of 5, within restrictions (1 ppu) and duel it out and the last standing would win the op.

This usually ended in a ppu and tank left standing at the end, apu's would be drilled, spys didn't stand much of a chance and pe's died off not long after. Tactically taking out classes would be a necessity but you would always want a spread of classes, bringing PE's and Spy's allowed them to be more self sufficient and allow the ppu to focus on the apu/tank and blah blah, I digress but the point i'm trying to make was there was a point of semi stability back then where apu's were strong, but they could not take a tank on 1v1 toe to toe (even with insta lock full dmg aiming) then you add the ppu x factor and tank + ppu vs apu vs ppu, this is what I would call a skill matchup and could go either way depending on the skill of each player.

So how do we fix the current situation, while I like the idea of the debuff bot I don't think making monks a pure support class through heals or debuffs and weakenings is the way to go. People are saying you can't make apu's glass cannons because what if they get caught alone, or how do they farm, well that is a hinderence of the class, if you want to be able to farm warbots then make a spy/pe, firemobs, make a tank, heal make a ppu you cannot balance by maknig a class globally viable for everything, this is why we have 4 slots on the accounts.

People have mentioned all the different spells monks have, but at a higher level interms of rares it is a lot smaller pool. I say we fix frequency for apu's, if you want to nerf the frequency of spells don't do it through the actual freq but through the cost of mana, this goes for anti buff, and any other spell that you don't want religiously spammed, this could also be fixed through the handling, making it so the spell can't be fully run cast will mean apu's having to pick their targets, and pause a brief second to unload this large amount of dmg, creating a window for them to be caught by tanks or enemys of any class.

These are just a few of the potential idea's I have on the subject, obviously a large amount of testing is needed to be done to find the right medium for dmg, freq, handing, mana cost and everything on this subject but getting back to this place is essential for the game to evolve from how many tanks and ppu's can you bring to a fight?

In an additional note, but down the same theme someone earlier in the thread mentioned parashock, the P word omg, and don't get me wrong I have had my days of fun chasing down dmg boosted spy's with my holy para laughing as I chip them down at 20 health a hit! But in my honest opinion a level of this needs to be re-implemented, again with testing and potential changes as with the apu's to mana cost, for example would you consider 1 parashock on someone if it reduced their movement speed by 50% but took all your mana and 3 seconds to cast? possibly situation dependent ofc but without a para it means movement speed is king end of. With talks of the changes coming, caps to movement speed and other things I think this is also a subject that needs to be addressed.

Also once debuff is back with apu's give it the massive lines coming out of it again!

[Dracain]

I quite agree with Cannings point of view. I just don't think APU should be support via debuffs. It doesn't really fit the core ideology of the class.

[elGringo]

I just don't think APU should be support via debuffs. It doesn't really fit the core ideology of the class.

This is a statement I would like to see explained.
To me, APU should not be considered a class, but a specific skill setup for a class: namely the Psi Monk.

It is no doubt easier to balance PPU and APU as two separate and single purpose classes, so KK chose to split the Monk class. Speaking of "the core" of the class, I think this narrow and unflexible separation destroyed much of what made it special.

The glasscannon problem of monks is only a problem when you stick with the harsh separation of APU/PPU skillsets. There is no question that the combination of both allowed for too powerful setups in the past, but I think the class lost a huge deal of its 'core trait' when the freedom was removed to gradually position your char on the scale of robustness and damage output... but that is a topic in itself.

Regarding the debuff:
Monks used to have a subskill called "Exotic Psi" which would nicely cover manipulative modules such as debuffs. Also, I don't see why this could not be reintroduced to allow any type of monk to give up some specialization (APU/PPU) to use a variety of "Exotic Psi" modules. Why must everything be strictly APU or strictly PPU? Complexity and flexibility in char setups are more difficult to balance, but it is also inherently more fun.

[Cannings]

IIRC exotic PSI was a skill that never ever ever worked, so i'm not sure why you're floating that as a solution when its never even been implemented.

Also I have no clue what the hell you're waffling on about when you say APU and PPU should not be seperated, thats like saying melee and hc tanks should not be because they are both tanks, pistol and rifle spies should not be your points are terrible and you make no sense. Yes they are all skill variations, but that is the whole point of the spells, skills and such. To put it into an easier to understand visual for you, it effectively 2 different routes down a talent tree, both of which need to be balanced and both need to be considered as an individual class.

Hybrids were removed and for good reason imo, they were impossible to balance at the same time as trying to balance apu and ppu individually. The problems that have led for things to get into the way they are is by lots of whining and lots of bending to the general consensus. What needs to be done is a clear plan by the powers that be as to what needs to be where and when and how and to get that right and then stick to it. No one is ever going to be 100% happy with their class, or with other peoples classes against them, which is why the decision needs to be made and stuck to, input is a great thing but it is almost always biased.

[elGringo]

IIRC exotic PSI was a skill that never ever ever worked, so i'm not sure why you're floating that as a solution when its never even been implemented.

Of course it worked, just like any other skill.
What did not work were a lot of exotic psi modules/effects.

Also I have no clue what the hell you're waffling on about when you say APU and PPU should not be seperated

You speak about debuff modules being untrue to the core of the class. I say that what constitutes the core of the class is to be debated, because for me it is not the same as it is for you and historically it has been very different from the status quo. I see no reason why a monk that leans towards offensiv skills should not use a debuff module. They did in the past, even when there was a separation in two separate skilltrees (which clearly, I am no big fan of).

Hybrids were removed and for good reason imo, they were impossible to balance at the same time as trying to balance apu and ppu individually.

They failed to balance hybrids, yes. That does not mean it is impossible. There have been many suggestions as to how it could be done better. Either way - I did not mean to switch this thread into a hybrid discussion - sorry for that

I am however still waiting for your explanation of why debuff modules are "not true" to the core of the APU? Is it not an aggressive spell?

[Cannings]

I don't remember ever saying the words "true to the core" in any of my posts, my point of not making APU's into a debuff, dmg boost bot is that it would remove a CORE aspect of the game itself. Are we really going to devolve the entire game into a guns, cannons and pistols only for dmg types? Neocron always has been lightning from the sky, plasma blobs from the massive hulks running at you and people sniping you from afar, to make it weapon only would be to cut off a leg.

I personally am not a massive fan of debuffing in general, sure it used to be a necessity when ppu's could shelter, defl and holy heal and their subject would survive armageddon and the meteor that killed the dinosaurs, but that's not the case anymore, there are more dmg type's, higher incoming dmg, and less str on shields, heals and the like. Now with 3 shields to recast, and a heal that doesn't make you survive anything, its an antibuff and insta death, this will not lead to epic op fights but to short engagements that don't last long at all.

While I realise i'm not getting way off topic, but the aim should never have been to increase the ways to kill buffed people but to remove the reliance on the amount of ppu's, the nerfs to spells did this but then they gave ppu's antibuff, it completely defies logic.

My personal pref would be bring apu's back in their glass cannon form, decrease heals and shields even more, give anti buff back to apu's although its use will be massively diminished, increase health pools and resists to a point where fights take longer, not because there are 5 ppu's with 10 shields but because the amount of dmg dealt is reduced. PPU's will be needed for rezzes/primary buffs but beyond that the number of them won't influence the fight.

[onero S]

I have to say, I'm not in love with the idea (though this is entirely subjective), but on a somewhat more objective note, I also reject one of the main premises behind it. The claim that an APU being high dmg but lower surviveability (but not the the insta gib level you described as one of your options) would create monk o cron doesn't have to be true. Old monk o cron was largely due to two interconnected factors.

1) PPUs are AMAZING at boosting surviability by a fairly flat factor. That is to say, you have two players and one of them has "double" the serviceability of the other (say resists wise), after they are both buffed by the PPU, this relationship will no longer hold. That is to say the two players will be fairly close defense wise. Note that there is no similar effect for dmg. This obviously massively biases the game towards PPUs+ the highest dmg dealing class.... APUs. This doesn't have to be the case, if PPUs scaled a players innate survivability more properly, this effect wouldn't be there.

2) APUs had antibuff, I know this point has been pretty beaten to death, but when PPU buffs are so amazingly tide turning, the only ability in the game which removes them will obviously be amazingly valuable. It was pretty much a no brainier that whatever sole dmg dealing class has antibuff will be king. The obvious solution here is to allow every class some (different) way of at least partially bipassing buffs on a single target. The flipside should be that a PPU devoting all his energy to a target can negate these efforts (though he may not be able to do this for a target and himself if they are both having these abilities used on them). This would lower the PPU>All effect seen in pvp (somewhat), and also make every class viable (and hopefully unique).


I will say this, tanks should be the most well rounded combat character. They should be good solo, good in teams, scale well with PPU support, be super tanky, and do great dmg. That doesn't mean they should be the best combat char in every specific role. It's not a problem if in some situations anther class is better (combat wise). If PEs are super versatile in a solo fashion, thanks should fill that role in a team, they are always helpful and good to have. That doesn't mean they need to do the most dmg and take the most dmg in every fight.