Second-Turn Compensation?

Second-Turn Compensation? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Artix Entertainment Games] >> [EpicDuel] >> EpicDuel General Discussion

Message

Joe10112 -> Second-Turn Compensation? (2/6/2012 21:24:39)
Not sure if this should really go in Balance, but: We all know-going second is a disadvantage, your opponent gets first strike, and you have to wait a turn. How could we "compensate" or make second-turn compensation?

Chosen 0ne -> RE: Second-Turn Compensation? (2/6/2012 21:26:09)
No idea.

ReconnaisX -> RE: Second-Turn Compensation? (2/6/2012 21:27:06)
I don't really know. But from my experience in 2vs2, the lowest level usually goes first.

rej -> RE: Second-Turn Compensation? (2/6/2012 21:29:08)
The person going second could be given a one round boost of +5% block chance and +5% deflect chance.

Angels Holocaust -> RE: Second-Turn Compensation? (2/6/2012 21:37:09)
I'm glad that someone is actually acknowledging this problem. The player who goes first has a grossly overpowered start. Going first allows you to set up your field with a debuff forcing your opponent to play conservatively throughout the match. This is a problem that not even I could solve, like we know that there is a problem but how do we fix it?

nico0las -> RE: Second-Turn Compensation? (2/6/2012 22:12:26)
A great way to compensate is to make your first attack (for the person going second) deal higher damage than usual. So instead of dealing, say 10, you deal 15-20, depending on the level range. However, you are aware that the person going second is usually higher level than you (or has higher support), so chances are they can probably deal heavier damage than you can? Just something obvious that I'd like to make clear. @Below a defense bonus would turn the tables in 34 battles. As Angels said above me, one is forced to play conservatively, but for a level 34 battle, it's more a question of "deal the most damage as fast as possible" (for the most part). Adding a defense bonus would cause a problem very difficult to overcome for whoever went first. I still think a slight damage buff for the first... three turns would be good.

Joe10112 -> RE: Second-Turn Compensation? (2/6/2012 22:23:08)
@^: That is true. But many times, too often I go first against a level 28, or vice versa. A level 34 takes a first turn on me many times, even though I'm 3 levels lower. Maybe have a defense bonus for the whole battle, or maybe have your own first strike do 50% more damage or something? It would be nice to see Cindy or a mod make a comment on this :P

Remorse -> RE: Second-Turn Compensation? (2/7/2012 0:14:59)
Perhaps a "compensation" is not what should be focused on here. Rather a Limitation on the player who starts, such as a stopping certian skills being used the first turn if you get the VERY first turn (note. Not giving it a warm up just not letting you do i the very first turn.) Skills in this catagory in my opinion should be: Malf, Smoke( both force the player to play defencive) Plasma bolt,Fireball (deal too much dmagae for the very first shot making the player recover at too early stages) Maul,Overload,stungrande,plasma grenade (Often too game infulecing to start and stun the first shot especially at lower levels when fights can be won in 2-3 turns.) Perhaps a small rage compensation could be given to the player who is second eg. the starter player only gets half the rage of the attack, and the other half goes to the other player(second player). So if you dont force players to play defensive or to recover early by not attacking the first turn for example the other player gets no rage stolen from you turn. People who say there should be a damage bonus to the second person obvilsy dont realise that the current balance issues and this starting problem are cuased by people with too much power hence it is definately not the answer to give them more even if they are second. Hope you like my ideas Remorse Less.

ND Mallet -> RE: Second-Turn Compensation? (2/7/2012 0:19:23)
@remorse What about lower level players? My mage greatly benefits from going first against BHs and TLMs since Malf lowers Smokescreen dex reduction. And when you have no varium gear against full varium players 5 levels ahead of you, every advantage counts.

goldslayer1 -> RE: Second-Turn Compensation? (2/7/2012 0:19:40)
@remorse then ur technically giving the first turn to the other guy.

Lord Nub -> RE: Second-Turn Compensation? (2/7/2012 0:21:53)
1v1 - Highest Support should go first every time. 2v2 - Lowest level should go first every time. Forget increased chance, this game surrounds luck wayyy tooooo much. Bring in the 0%'s and sure things. Allow the players decisions to affect the outcome of the match.

happysmurf44 -> RE: Second-Turn Compensation? (2/7/2012 0:23:13)
if you ask me a great way to make this more even is to give all skills a one round warm up for the first turn. so he gets first strike but he can only gun or aux or strike so they are only up one hit and not a large skill hit. as a blood mage i tend to use firebolt on my first strike and taking that away would slow me down some alowing for the enermy to better set up. that is my only suggestion

Remorse -> RE: Second-Turn Compensation? (2/7/2012 0:25:09)
@ NDI see your reasoning, You say that malf the start turn is a good bonus yes, but you have to take the downsides with the good, I would rather not debuffing their smoke if they never got the chance to smoke ther very first turn. Wouldn't you? @Gold, your not giving them the first turn, you can still use most attacks that attack or turn would conteract watever bonus the second player gets from smoking/malfing their first turn hopefully making almost no advantage at all for starting. Above that is a bit to harsh because it would be more of an advantage to those who have powerful normal attacks. I just think a certain few skills should be blocked the first turn.

ND Mallet -> RE: Second-Turn Compensation? (2/7/2012 0:30:55)
@remorse When the difference is 5 levels they seldom ever get to go first anyways. It usually has me go first to nerf their smokescreen. Why should I want the system changed to benefit a very rare occurence where they go before I do so they can't use skills? I'd rather nerf their smoke 98% of the time rather than get the full smoke 98% of the time when I go first and then they can smoke. Like gold said, it's just like giving the other guy first turn instead of you. The only difference is that you got to hit them. If you can't use skills then you get stuck with nothing but attacks and may end up doing 10s if you fight a tank and can't nerf them right off. @lord nub So if someone had exactly 1 more point of support than you, you would be okay with him going first every time? Or what if he has the same as you? Will the game just freeze since no one has the higher support? And what if everyone in 2vs2 is also the same level? RNG is there for a reason sometimes.

Sipping Cider -> RE: Second-Turn Compensation? (2/7/2012 0:36:11)
No need for Second Turn Compensation since whoever went first already had to invest more points in support or they are a lower level so the higher level should not get a buff for going second. I could see making it less luck based and putting in the 0% and 100%.

Joe10112 -> RE: Second-Turn Compensation? (2/7/2012 0:40:15)
@^: And that's precisely what would help. Except now STR abusers = Failure, always go second. So that means that we can't have higher SUP always going first. Which leads to circular logic...

Sipping Cider -> RE: Second-Turn Compensation? (2/7/2012 0:49:07)
@^ I do not think streangth builds would fail. They have less wasted points in support so they do more damage.

XxKirachanXx -> RE: Second-Turn Compensation? (2/7/2012 0:52:53)
I wonder.... I've noticed that nearly without fail, players four to five levels below you will always go first...okay But being closer in level, but not quite, does it make a difference at all? I have a level 32 varium BH, and for a good part, I excelled in 1v1 until I got to where I would consistently be faced against cap levels.... And so, due to a slight strategic error I made with a purchase, I am forced to have at least 67 support, which is often twice what cap level players have, yet they nearly always seem to go first? Perhaps it is sheer bad luck, but with that much more support, and being two levels lower...wouldn't I have a significantly greater chance at going first?

Lord Nub -> RE: Second-Turn Compensation? (2/7/2012 0:59:23)
@ND, Yup, luck can factor in when two players have the same support but other than that the one with the highest goes first. There needs to be a deciding factor other than luck.

Lectrix -> RE: Second-Turn Compensation? (2/7/2012 2:45:07)
This is a problem that all players have encountered at one point or another; to attempt to change it now would be to potentially change the way the entire game is played. Nevertheless, it is a problem that should eventually be addressed. We should keep in mind that any offensive bonus for the player who ends up with the second turn could be abused. Increased damage or an increased chance for a Critical Strike, just to name a few examples, will compel a player to use certain attacks that could overcompensate for having the second turn. On the flip side, second turn players preferring to use a defensive move will feel as if they are not taking advantage of the offensive bonus. A defensive bonus for the second turn player could also be problematic. If, for example, the second turn player received an increased chance to Block, the first turn player could bypass this by using an un-blockable attack or some sort of buff/defensive Skill. The third option (as of now, the ideas mentioned above all seem to fall into one of these three categories) would be to somehow weaken the first turn player on their first move. This is simple when it comes to offensive attacks, but becomes a problem if the first turn player decides to use a defensive move. It would seem unfair to weaken a defensive Skill -- say, for example, Energy Shield -- for the entire duration of three turns, and unnecessarily complicated to weaken it for a single turn. Of course, a certain Skill could be "locked" during the first turn; but what exactly determines which Skills are locked? For example, the Skills mentioned by Remorse earlier in this Thread could be locked for the first turn player; but this would give the second turn player a (possibly greater) advantage by allowing him or her to use said Skills first. And what happens when it comes to passive Skills like Deadly Aim? Should they be locked for a certain period of time as well? Finally, consider that players with Blood Lust are already losing out by using an offensive Skill with a full HP Bar; Blood Lust has no effect in this case. The simplest solution I've seen so far involves Rage: lessening the effect of the first turn on the first turn player's Rage Meter, and/or increasing the effect on the second turn player's Rage Meter. However, even this could be problematic when dealing with players who utilize high Support Builds. At any rate, they say that no idea is a bad idea. We could very likely find the solution to this problem right here on the forums. Keep posting!

Goony -> RE: Second-Turn Compensation? (2/7/2012 3:03:22)
^ Yeah, maybe buried somewhere I can't find now! If only the devs could... change the way rage works. Having someone with near full health rage against the person they have beaten to a pulp due to the fact that they went 1st and had an offensive strategy defies logic. The wrong person gets angry (rage) in most cases in this game now! The existing structure of rage was implemented on a very different game... I had detailed this extensively on the old forum and most of the balance team should remember the proposed changes of having rage work on a variable rate based on health differential. This would also offset the 1st strike advantage considerably... The idea of rage based on health differential was widely accepted back in the day before focus and agility were implemented. I never did get any feedback as to why it wasn't an option! Maybe that idea could be reviewed again. I would happily rewrite it if there was some interest in moving in that direction.

TurkishIncubus -> RE: Second-Turn Compensation? (2/7/2012 3:41:42)
Starting advantage is too high, Your skill warm ups end faster , you will probably rage faster. Technically starter forced to be the attacker and second be the defender in most battles. Thats why your build should have both attack and defense strategies. Like BM they only have attack strategy if they cant kill they will lose very fast. The best way to avoid from all luck-starting advantage etc. is healing strategy. Without heal you just let RNG decide the winner. A person did 3 block 2 crit then i healed, then he said you win just because you healed. YES!!! i win just because i healed if i didnt healed i would let everything to RNG than who go first, who crit-block more will win. Heal and boosters are the only skills that make a difference in battle.

Xendran -> RE: Second-Turn Compensation? (2/7/2012 4:35:33)
If defence and resistance weren't such obscenely broken stats in the way that they scale, you could just give the second turn player a full rage bar.

Thylek Shran -> RE: Second-Turn Compensation? (2/7/2012 8:45:56)
Bad idea. Just think for a maxed Plasma Bolt with rage on first turn.

Sageofpeace -> RE: Second-Turn Compensation? (2/7/2012 8:48:16)
^ or bunker buster

Page: [1] 2 3 next > >>

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition

0.140625