j12601 wrote: So something along the lines of... 1 - restores 3RUG, 2 PB - costs 14 2 - costs 1 less (13) 3 - costs 1 less (12) 4 - costs 2 less (10) 5 - costs 2 less (8) That could be interesting. Generates 13 AP for 8 AP at 5 covers. Probably too good at that point, would still need adjustments. Hood generates 18 for 15 at 5 covers, but also can take out problem tiles at the same time. So maybe the ultimate price would have to be a bit higher.
DayvBang wrote: j12601 wrote: So something along the lines of... 1 - restores 3RUG, 2 PB - costs 14 2 - costs 1 less (13) 3 - costs 1 less (12) 4 - costs 2 less (10) 5 - costs 2 less (8) That could be interesting. Generates 13 AP for 8 AP at 5 covers. Probably too good at that point, would still need adjustments. Hood generates 18 for 15 at 5 covers, but also can take out problem tiles at the same time. So maybe the ultimate price would have to be a bit higher. Actually, that would generate 39AP for 8AP, if you manage to protect all three countdowns.
simonsez wrote: If a skill is more desirable with fewer covers, the problem is that they've set up the skills poorly, not that there's no option to remove covers. I'd rather have them fix this by addressing the former.
Thugpatrol wrote: As others have alluded to, this is really a power design problem and not a user interface problem. If every power was universally, undeniably better at 3 covers than it was at 1 or 2 covers, then there would never be any benefit to removing covers. Therefor if the current powers that don't meet that criteria are fixed and no more are created, this problem goes away.
mischiefmaker wrote: Thugpatrol wrote: As others have alluded to, this is really a power design problem and not a user interface problem. If every power was universally, undeniably better at 3 covers than it was at 1 or 2 covers, then there would never be any benefit to removing covers. Therefor if the current powers that don't meet that criteria are fixed and no more are created, this problem goes away. The problem is that making a power "universally, undeniably better" is pretty hard. It assumes that the designers can predict all possible future situations and combinations, which in the best case severely limits design space, and in the worst case is unrealistic. Take Sacrifice as an example. Reducing the damage done to self has to be "universally, undeniably better", right? Well...what if they wanted to make a future ability that's like CStorm's Tempest, but with a lower %? Then maybe you want the higher self damage to trigger it. Also, consider that if you allow people to remove covers, that opens up design space to have interesting character builds at fewer than max covers.
mischiefmaker wrote: You're right in that you can always just have levels 1-3 be numerical escalation so that it's safe to assume every power should always be at level 3, but that's what I was saying about restricting design space -- it's pretty boring.
Deviator1 wrote: If all the characters had vanilla upgrades till 4 it would be a little boring till you got there. I agree having a big change at 5 is a must but that's another part of design that they either do or dont do. Look at sentry he just loses a little less health with more damage same as the rest of the upgrades. Then look at cstorm, her green may not be an amazing ability but at 5 it doubles how many tiles get destroyed. GSBW hits every enemy, it looks like recent characters dont have that fun big difference.Lazy cap and lazy thor just do bigger numbers with the same abilities on red to cap and green for thor. Newer players will have basically no power till 4 of any ability.