[Merged] Cooldown Thread

[metiman]

Josh has decided to cleverly sidestep me or he has missed my post.

 

I think the reason there is a failure to convince him that Cooldowns are not good for tactical gameplay is coming from the need to so in one post or with one example or with a few lines of text.

I must have missed your post. A large number of the people in this thread are talking about a type of spell cooldown I've never suggested for PE (cast a Fireball, unable to cast Fireball again for 30 seconds).

 

You also never ruled it out and made a point of not doing so. I don't think it is unfair for some of us to assume that was for a good reason. I admit that that is precisely the mechanism that concerned me. A reassurance that that was not what you had in mind would have entirely renewed my enthusiasm for the game. As for the cooldown-as-rest mechanism it is a very interesting conundrum. I am tempted to believe that there is a certain amount of pain that must be endured as the price of the enjoyment aspect, but I would really have to actually try a specific example of such a system to be sure. If there isn't one available that is considered appropriate I would have to wonder why. Surely it's not for a lack of trying to streamline cRPG systems. That seems like all the mega-developers ever do.

[Jaesun]

I think our main concern is will the new combat system remain as tactical as it was like the IE games? Having to conserve spells. Knowing when to use spells and where. As well as using specific spells on some enemies. etc...

 

I think you have pretty much alleviated the fears of the horrible WOW type of cool-down system, will not be in PE.

 

Are there room for improvements/complete changes with how the old IE combat system works? Hell yes.

 

We can only hope you will work on something that is tactical and challenging to the player, and is somewhat reminiscent of the IE games. Not a carefully designed player friendly no thinking required walk-through of the game.

[Captain Shrek]

The obvious question should be: why even a cool down? Make the regeneration instantaneous!

Locking out access to an entire level of spells once you have exhausted the castings you have available to you at a given level (as a 3E sorcerer would) means that you have to use spells from your other spell levels. This creates a tactical challenge during combat, especially for spells at levels where you do not have many castings available (i.e. typically your highest). Allowing them to regenerate literally instantly means that there is not a tactical consideration; you should just use the most powerful spell for the situation over and over again for the duration of combat.

 

There is a very popular example of this model named Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare 2. They make it even less tedious! The health (sadly only meaningful resource in that game unlike RPGs) regenerates instantly. Why not do that with project eternity as well? I mean that is the least amount of tedium right?

The feeling of challenge is a balance between enjoyment and frustration. It is not the same for every player, but it is almost always at some midpoint between those two emotions. My goal is to use a variety of mechanics to find balance points that appeal to this specific audience, varied as it is. I think that instant health regeneration errs to much on the side of ease for this audience.

 

Not really Josh. You are probably too busy to get this question correctly. Sorry to intrude on your busy schedule like this. But your reply has little do with what I said.

 

I haven't yet said a single word about the difficulty or tactics WITHIN the combat. All I am asking is why this artificial Cooldown time? Why not instantaneous regeneration POST combat?

Edited October 2, 2012 by Captain Shrek

[Shevek]

They could just do levelled action points. So, you prepare X amount of spells at each level, you get a set number of castings per spell level, they regenerate at different rates (much slower the higher you go) during combat. Once combat is done, all spells action points regen instantly. This gives you similar spell variety of a wizard, casting mechanics of a sorceror and the lack of a need to rest.

 

I would still make it so you had to rest (and thus end all buffs and summons) when you try to swap spells.

 

Edit: not advocating this, just fishing around for where they are heading.

Edited October 2, 2012 by Shevek

[metiman]

The obvious question should be: why even a cool down? Make the regeneration instantaneous!

Locking out access to an entire level of spells once you have exhausted the castings you have available to you at a given level (as a 3E sorcerer would) means that you have to use spells from your other spell levels. This creates a tactical challenge during combat, especially for spells at levels where you do not have many castings available (i.e. typically your highest). Allowing them to regenerate literally instantly means that there is not a tactical consideration; you should just use the most powerful spell for the situation over and over again for the duration of combat.

 

There is a very popular example of this model named Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare 2. They make it even less tedious! The health (sadly only meaningful resource in that game unlike RPGs) regenerates instantly. Why not do that with project eternity as well? I mean that is the least amount of tedium right?

The feeling of challenge is a balance between enjoyment and frustration. It is not the same for every player, but it is almost always at some midpoint between those two emotions. My goal is to use a variety of mechanics to find balance points that appeal to this specific audience, varied as it is. I think that instant health regeneration errs to much on the side of ease for this audience.

 

Not really Josh. You are probably too busy to get this question correctly. Sorry to intrude on your busy schedule like this. But your reply has little do with what I said.

 

I haven't yet said a single word about the difficulty or tactics WITHIN the combat. All I am asking is why this artificial Cooldown time? Why not instantaneous regeneration POST combat?

 

I assume this was a form of logical reductio ad absurdum and not what you would actually like to see in the game?

[ogrezilla]

They could just do levelled action points. So, you prepare X amount of spells at each level, you get a set number of castings per spell level, they regenerate at different rates (much slower the higher you go) during combat. Once combat is done, all spells action points regen instantly. This gives you similar spell variety of a wizard, casting mechanics of a sorceror and the lack of a need to rest.

 

I would still make it so you had to rest (and thus end all buffs and summons) when you try to swap spells.

 

Edit: not advocating this, just fishing around for where they are heading.

the only way that works is if every fight is hard enough to be a significant threat.

[Shevek]

I agree. Attrition style dungeon design (which I love) does not work well if everything regens after every fight.

[Sargallath Abraxium]

Why not instantaneous regeneration POST combat?

 

 

...why not jus' play a superhero, in that case...or a God...

 

 

...WHO LUVS YA, BABY!!...

[GordonHalfman]

If we want the game to have varied and interesting and powerful spells, then there has to be a way to limit them, between encounters as well as within them. We can't have the player summoning a demon and stopping time in every fight.

 

I have an open mind on there being better ways to limit spell casting than D&D, it definitely has it's problems. (The main one in my view being that the player is ridiculously powerful when fully stocked.)

 

But there is a logical problem here. If casting a spell in one fight means the player doesn't get to cast it in subsequent fights (for whatever reason), then the decision to cast the spell has to be based on a prediction about what future fights will be like, which he is often unable to know without meta-gaming. This is something Josh seems to find unacceptable.

 

So... what now?

[metiman]

So is there a consensus as to his basic question? Might there be any value to streamlining the traditional leave-dungeon-to-rest-mechanic? I'm thinking that it may be too risky to find out. We know that the old system is highly enjoyable for the target audience. Otherwise we wouldn't be here. Can it be improved? Maybe, but how to be sure? Beta testing? Maybe, but it may not be comprehensive enough. If it's that important to consider then why not make the choice an optional one? Is that not an easy solution?

[evdk]

Why not instantaneous regeneration POST combat?

 

 

...why not jus' play a superhero, in that case...or a God...

 

 

...WHO LUVS YA, BABY!!...

You do understand he does not actually advocate that, right? He's just professing his dislike for the countdowns by reducing them to their most stupid incarnation and using that as an argument against their inclusion in the game. The CoD reference is a dead giveaway.

[J.E. Sawyer]

Not really Josh. You are probably too busy to get this question correctly. Sorry to intrude on your busy schedule like this.

I don't believe you are sincere.

 

All I am asking is why this artificial Cooldown time? Why not instantaneous regeneration POST combat?

The amount of time that a spell level lockout should last isn't something for which I have a solid answer. It could work in a manner similar to 4E where the end of an "encounter" resets the lockout on the majority of abilities, but "combat" states in engines is something that, in my experience, is often triggered on/off in weird ways. If a lockout lasts for something like 30 seconds or 45 seconds, that lockout will likely last longer than the remainder of the combat, but not so long that the player would have a compelling incentive to "spam stand", which I agree is bad. Whether the answer is a timed lockout or a combat state-released lockout, I'm not sure.

 

I think health and hit points can be handled differently because the player always has a high incentive to avoid as much damage as possible for all of their characters. I.e. conserving health is (almost) always in the player's best interest, but conserving spells may not be.

[Captain Shrek]

Not really Josh. You are probably too busy to get this question correctly. Sorry to intrude on your busy schedule like this.

I don't believe you are sincere.

 

I am most sincere Josh. Honest!

 

All I am asking is why this artificial Cooldown time? Why not instantaneous regeneration POST combat?

The amount of time that a spell level lockout should last isn't something for which I have a solid answer. It could work in a manner similar to 4E where the end of an "encounter" resets the lockout on the majority of abilities, but "combat" states in engines is something that, in my experience, is often triggered on/off in weird ways. If a lockout lasts for something like 30 seconds or 45 seconds, that lockout will likely last longer than the remainder of the combat, but not so long that the player would have a compelling incentive to "spam stand", which I agree is bad. Whether the answer is a timed lockout or a combat state-released lockout, I'm not sure.

 

I think health and hit points can be handled differently because the player always has a high incentive to avoid as much damage as possible for all of their characters. I.e. conserving health is (almost) always in the player's best interest, but conserving spells may not be.

 

That automatically begs the question Josh, that does the party have a heal spell, no? Because as I see it resetting all your spells post combat => heal heal heal.

 

EDIT: And that's just the first of many I can think of to be honest.

Edited October 2, 2012 by Captain Shrek

[Shevek]

If a player doesn't have to conserve spells, doesn't that give them instant heals and thereby trivialize the conserving of health?

[metiman]

I think he probably is sincere actually. You have to remember that you are the lead developer on this project. We would never normally expect to be talking to you at all. It should go without saying that we are honored and all that. And yes I'm being sincere.

[Hypevosa]

The issue then becomes though, if I finish an encounter, and literally walk into another encounter, how did my caster regain that spell so quickly outside combat? Why not just spam all my encounter spells from the getgo? This is why I don't like encounter based spells at all - the limitation seems very, very arbitrary, and not really much of a balance.

[Blablachar]

Still- I find cooldowns a nice feature.

 

About the potions- one of the few games I wasn't reluctant to use potions and I sometimes simply run out of them, was Witcher. These were often a must on the hard difficulty and I realy liked it. So yeah- let potions be quite expensive and rare, also have a certain knockback (toxicity type of thing, lowering the parameters) when used.

[Althernai]

So is there a consensus as to his basic question? Might there be any value to streamlining the traditional leave-dungeon-to-rest-mechanic? I'm thinking that it may be too risky to find out. We know that the old system is highly enjoyable for the target audience.

Do we? You may like it, but for me, the rest system was definitely one of the weaker parts of the IE games. The problem is I that I cannot think of anything better -- but if Obsidian can, then they should by all means try it. The one thing I believe there is more or less a consensus on in this thread is that there should not be cooldowns in the sense of not being to cast the same spell twice in a row without waiting a long time (as in Dragon Age: Origins).

 

If it's that important to consider then why not make the choice an optional one? Is that not an easy solution?

"Make it an option" is a solution to everything controversial, but it doubles the work the developer must do. In this case, an option would mean two different systems each of which must work throughout the game. I highly doubt they have that kind of resources to spare.

[metiman]

The issue then becomes though, if I finish an encounter, and literally walk into another encounter, how did my caster regain that spell so quickly outside combat? Why not just spam all my encounter spells from the getgo? This is why I don't like encounter based spells at all - the limitation seems very, very arbitrary, and not really much of a balance.

 

I guess you'd have to reduce the number of spells so that it is around the same amount you would normally have. As I have said before I use my mage's spells as I need them, but I don't immediately go running back to rest when he has no spells left. I nearly always wait until the health is fairly low on at least half my party before doing that. In that sense encounter based seems a bit overpowered.

Edited October 2, 2012 by metiman

[J.E. Sawyer]

That automatically begs the question Josh, that does the party have a heal spell, no?

Not in the way you're thinking of it.

[BobbinThreadbare]

That automatically begs the question Josh, that does the party have a heal spell, no? Because as I see it resetting all your spells post combat => heal heal heal.

 

EDIT: And that's just the first of many I can think of to be honest.

If a player doesn't have to conserve spells, doesn't that give them instant heals and thereby trivialize the conserving of health?

 

This is a good point.

[Osvir]

This thread is moving real fast, and just for the sake of it I wish to hear opinions on it myself. How would a "send off my companion to camp" system work, would it be appreciated or disliked? This way (in case of a 6 man party), the remaining 5 party members can go about scouting some previously unexplored areas whilst you send your Mage back to camp to restock on spells.

 

Heck there could even be macro management a la "Send Mage with Thief and drop Items in Camp for later town/city skirmishes) or even send of the Thief to grab some items that you will feel more comfortable having in your inventory (a couple of extra potions).

 

This way you smash 2 flies with 1 stone.

 

1, you get an equivalent "rest" function when you are in "Dungeons" and you also get a disadvantage for it (1 less party member~).

2, you get to continue to interact with the dungeon, without leaving it. Don't worry, your Mage will catch up.

[Merin]

Here is something I would like to hear opinions on. Take the following circumstance, which is not uncommon in the IE games and would be somewhat similar to the KotC "campsite" system in circumstances were you are not locked off from backtracking to a campsite.

 

* You are in a location where resting is either prohibited or extraordinarily likely to result in an encounter. You do not know the location of the next campsite/safe resting area.

* You have cast many of your spells and the ones that remain are not entirely appropriate for the encounters you are now facing.

* Because you came from an area where you could rest and are not locked in the location, you have a cleared (by you) path back to the area where you can safely rest.

* It will take you three minutes of real time to walk back to the camp, maybe thirty seconds to reconfigure spells, five seconds to rest, and another three minutes of real time to walk back to where you had left off.

* Because you killed everything between you and the campsite, there are no threats between you and the campsite.

 

In this circumstance, what is good about the experience of walking back to the campsite?

 

Masochists get their jollies?

[Captain Shrek]

That automatically begs the question Josh, that does the party have a heal spell, no?

Not in the way you're thinking of it.

 

Alright. So let us assume for the present that heal is not the issue. What about Summoned creatures, one shot kill spells (Wail of the Banshee?) something even worse like Shadow simulacrum which you can spam per battle? I am hoping such things are completely absent then, other wise I foresee a clear trail of munchkin crumbs in my merry adventurous path along the game .

 

Since I am sure that the combat will have challenge, I must be wrong! But still I would assume that combat is no more so difficult as I can always use all my powerful abilities repeatedly through-out the dungeons! That makes me joyous!

[D3xter]

Here is something I would like to hear opinions on. Take the following circumstance, which is not uncommon in the IE games and would be somewhat similar to the KotC "campsite" system in circumstances were you are not locked off from backtracking to a campsite.

 

* You are in a location where resting is either prohibited or extraordinarily likely to result in an encounter. You do not know the location of the next campsite/safe resting area.

* You have cast many of your spells and the ones that remain are not entirely appropriate for the encounters you are now facing.

* Because you came from an area where you could rest and are not locked in the location, you have a cleared (by you) path back to the area where you can safely rest.

* It will take you three minutes of real time to walk back to the camp, maybe thirty seconds to reconfigure spells, five seconds to rest, and another three minutes of real time to walk back to where you had left off.

* Because you killed everything between you and the campsite, there are no threats between you and the campsite.

 

In this circumstance, what is good about the experience of walking back to the campsite?

I don't think most people want the Infinity Engine-based system back as it was 1:1, entirely with rest-scumming and having to walk back to town, traversing 2-3 maps to do so and come back again. I just believe that it could be more easily fixed to be made into something fun and tactical than ANY cooldown-based system.

 

A recent game with a Vancian magic AND hp system checkpoint-based "campsites", a lot of people loved because of it, got critical acclaim and I believe you said you played and liked as well was Dark Souls. And it worked rather well there (despite the respawning enemies). The idea behind the system is the planning through choice, challenge and limited usability of abilities and spells that comes with it, and not because of a single detail in regards to the mechanic like having to get back to town.

 

In the ideal case, the player would only have to resort to that if he hit an impossibly challenging wall (a boss he can't beat or enemies one/two-hitting the entire party) and wants to get back to a Hub and do a certain other quest series before he comes back (kind of like in Dark Souls when going back to Firelink and taking another way).

 

As I was talking about before, there could be limited usability "safe campsites" throughout the dungeon e.g. one per level or similar, around NPCs or by finding a campfire spot that "looks safe" or similar, like it was resolved in Dungeons & Dragons Online and one could balance the challenges around that limit and choices of spells and abilities till the next resting spot instead, Souls obviously solved it by respawning every non-special enemy and having the player perform to the best of his abilities till the next checkpoint, but I guess that would be too tedious, and let's not forget that there should always be different ways of resolving a certain battle e.g. in DS there are very many combinations of weapons and strategies to get past something.

 

The details on how it is solved (e.g. "according to D&D rules", "like videogame X" or in a totally new way) doesn't seem like the most important discussion point.

 

Maybe a few counter questions:

* If the cooldown on spells/abilities is low, and all it takes is spamming the same 3-4 optimal skills for an encounter over and over again every few seconds in a "skill-rotation", where is the fun and tactical challenge in that?

* If the cooldown is long and it takes minutes for a spell to regenerate and you are standing before an encounter where you know you will likely need it, how exactly is it better than the campsite approach e.g. "I'm getting my Ultimate in 10 minutes, then we can do the boss, AFK brb in 10" in MMORPGs

* Do you (or does anyone else) have a single example of a CRPG in which a cooldown system has worked better tactically and regarding challenging gameplay, than one where players have to prepare for encounters beforehand?

Edited October 3, 2012 by D3xter