Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
March 28, 2024, 10:57:57 PM

Login with username, password and session length

Search:     Advanced search
we're back, baby
*
Home Help Search Login Register
f13.net  |  f13.net General Forums  |  The Gaming Graveyard  |  Game Design/Development  |  Topic: Let's talk about buffing/debuffing 0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Pages: [1] 2 Go Down Print
Author Topic: Let's talk about buffing/debuffing  (Read 18962 times)
Arnold
Terracotta Army
Posts: 813


on: April 07, 2004, 02:27:20 PM

I've been reading the forums on the Turbine web page, because I was considering a return to AC Darktide and I wanted to check out the current state of the game.  I saw the devs talk about buffing and some solutions they had for reducing the amount of time it took.

And then I remembered the buffing.  Asheron's Call is all about buffing.  A buffed up character is godly, but in an unbuffed state they can be killed in 1 shot.  I remembered spending 10 minutes buffing my character up, just so I could play for another 10 or 15 minutes before having to repeat the whole cycle.

I don't think the original developers intended players to cast every possible buff on their characters and keep those buffs up at all times.  I don't think the developers foresaw players having every single spell available to them.

Originally, you had to learn all your spells.  Characters with the Arcane Lore skill could learn spells from scrolls found off monsters, and those spell forumals would give them clues to other formulas, but most spells had to be learned through casting and it included a lot of expensive guesswork.  We didn't even know every spell that existed.

Eventually a player created a 3rd party program that would decipher ALL of the spell formulas by plugging in the lower ones that you already knew.  Suddenly everyone could cast every spell.  And they did.

Content was designed around the fact that everyone would be buffed to the hilt all the time.  People complained about the cost and time they had to spend on buffing, yet they continued to do so.  People complained about the sheer weight of the spell components they had to carry, which would last through a few buffing cycles of all four schools of magic.

While Turbine addressed some of these problems, there is still the basic assumption that characters will be buffed.

I understand it's similar in EQ.  While I doubt the EQ buffs are as powerful as the AC buffs, I've heard casters complain about other players who cry when a buff begins to drop.  I've heard casters complain about burning all their mana on healing and buffing other players, then sitting down and meditating it back while the others fight.

If a player can cast a buff, he WILL cast a buff.  Eventually all of the players and developers will expect everyone to be buffed with every buff possible and the vicious cycle will continue.  Someone is either going to be the bored buffer, or they will use buffbots.

I think long lasting buffs are the wrong approach to take.  It's really just another grind for the caster.  I believe buffs and debuffs should be short term affairs which are cast on the fly, and used for tactical reasons.  This approach completely removes the requirement of spending a large percentage of playtime making your character(s) as powerful as the developers expect them to be.

Another idea I was tinkering with to prevent this buff madness is to reduce the caster's mana pool by the buff cost for its duration.  The caster could buff/debuff everything in sight, but he won't have any mana left to do anything else.
HaemishM
Staff Emeritus
Posts: 42628

the Confederate flag underneath the stone in my class ring


WWW
Reply #1 on: April 07, 2004, 02:47:50 PM

I think DAoC already does the "reduce the mana pool" thing, but it's not the mana pool, it's the concentration pool. It only matters on certain buffs, i.e. the ones that use concentration. The buffs are always on, but the caster only has a certain amount of concentration points to use. I could be wrong, since I don't play a buffer or a caster, but I think the unlimited range of some of these was the start of the buffbot problem.

You are correct, if players CAN be buffed all the time, they will be. I think this has led to lots of stupid mudflation issues. ALL of EQ's end-game content (and a lot of regular static content from Kunark-time onward) is based on the assumption that the party will use the best buffs AND items they can get.

I think buffs should really only be done by either one-use potion type of deals, or cause some serious consternation for the buffer. I think most buffs come out of the D&D Bless spell school of thought. For my type of game, take buffs and make them require some actual work to do, including burning reagents, praying, etc. Give them a chance of failure. And for fuck's sake, do not make any class/profession/template rely on buffing as their primary use in a group or in the game. It should be a side venture, not an entire spec line for casters. Buffing people is BORING, worse even than healing. No one will willfully play a boring class.

Fargull
Contributor
Posts: 931


Reply #2 on: April 07, 2004, 02:51:55 PM

I am of a vote for no buffing, but de-buffing.  Would require activity by the player and have an aggro feature depending on the buff strength.

I do not like the Buff mentality.

"I have come to believe that a great teacher is a great artist and that there are as few as there are any other great artists. Teaching might even be the greatest of the arts since the medium is the human mind and spirit." John Steinbeck
Arnold
Terracotta Army
Posts: 813


Reply #3 on: April 07, 2004, 02:57:47 PM

Quote from: HaemishM
I think buffs should really only be done by either one-use potion type of deals, or cause some serious consternation for the buffer. I think most buffs come out of the D&D Bless spell school of thought. For my type of game, take buffs and make them require some actual work to do, including burning reagents, praying, etc. Give them a chance of failure. And for fuck's sake, do not make any class/profession/template rely on buffing as their primary use in a group or in the game. It should be a side venture, not an entire spec line for casters. Buffing people is BORING, worse even than healing. No one will willfully play a boring class.


The big difference being that D&D clerics got a limited number of spells per day and they had to choose between buffs/healing/divination/offense/defense.  MMOPRG clerics get a mana pool that regenerates, which encourages the whole max buffing mentality.  The reduced mana pool idea is aimed at bringing that decision making back to the game.
Mr_PeaCH
Terracotta Army
Posts: 382


Reply #4 on: April 07, 2004, 03:01:27 PM

Or put em on relatively short timers with long downtimes; make a buff on a fighter last for 5 or 10 minutes then he cannot be affected by that buff effect (by any buffer) for 30 minutes more.  Make them more strategic or situational.

Related (and I love debuffs), after your buff has worn off and while you're under the re-use timer, make debuffs 200% effective on this player.

***************

COME ON YOU SPURS!
eldaec
Terracotta Army
Posts: 11839


Reply #5 on: April 07, 2004, 03:11:08 PM

Quote from: HaemishM
ALL of EQ's end-game content (and a lot of regular static content from Kunark-time onward) is based on the assumption that the party will use the best buffs AND items they can get.


DAoC have similarly admitted the same from SI onward.

Imo, buffing is ok so long as it is an active skill.

Possible ways to do this...

- Buffs that last 10-20 seconds but have a dramatic effect.
- Buffs that have a downside as well as upside (maybe the 'do 20% extra spell damage' buff also blocks 50% of healing) so that you have to turn them on and off during combat.
- Buffs that disappear if the buffer strays more than a few feet from the buffee, or maybe buff timers that run down much quicker at longer ranges.
- Reactive buffs such as 'give group 20% resistance to the last damage type that hit me'.
- Short duration Buffs cast as part of combat feat or spell chains.
- PBAoE chant buffs - of the sort paladins usally get.

DAoC style buff-bots, and EQ style timer buffs, however, clearly need to go.

Quote

Another idea I was tinkering with to prevent this buff madness is to reduce the caster's mana pool by the buff cost for its duration. The caster could buff/debuff everything in sight, but he won't have any mana left to do anything else.


I dislike this idea - it encourages buff bots.

Losing mana is exactly like losing conc if you are a daoc buffbot.

However, if you are not a buff bot it prevents you doing anything else.

"People will not assume that what they read on the internet is trustworthy or that it carries any particular ­assurance or accuracy" - Lord Leveson
"Hyperbole is a cancer" - Lakov Sanite
nach0king
Terracotta Army
Posts: 22


Reply #6 on: April 07, 2004, 04:40:49 PM

More buffs should be like the Group Leadership abilities in EQ (or in a cruder sense, Bardsong.)

The problem with EQ buffing has evolved. Or, some may say, it's meandered, as some would argue that it hasn't become better.

It used to be that buffs were mana-intensive, wore off very quickly, and were impractical for big-game hunting. For those that remember the initial Vox and Nagafen raids, you'll recall time was of the essence: you buffed for the fight, and you attacked imminently, lest they wear off. For pickup raids, or less-organised forces, "Buff queues" were formed whereby groups buffed one at a time, then actually camped out to the EQ Chat server to wait for the call to come back in. That's how long buffing took for those outwith the top tier of play, and that's how quickly they wore off. In EXP groups, keeping buffs up on an entire group could be problematic and caused downtime.

Kunark's introduction of group buffs helped a lot; high duration buffs began to appear with Aegolism in Velious and reached a peak with Mass Group Buff in Luclin. It was a false peak, however; a higher echelon was discovered with the 3 hour plus spells available with Planes of Power, not to mention Extended Enhancement IV (i.e. works on spells up to level 65, the maximum) items available somewhat readily from mid-tier bosses, or crafted by Potters from tier 2 plane drops. A Velious tradeskill quest also resulted in this effect.

This is the situation we have today. Buff-bots? Sort of - a lot of groups may plant an ENC or a SHM nearby to buff (and possibly slow). Buff-o-matics are more common. Log onto your favourite EQ server and go into Plane of Knowledge. You'll see SO much spam relating to SELLING buffs. Shamans will sell STA, AGI, Focus, whatever. Clerics will sell Temperance (baby Virtue) or Virtue, or group Virtue. And, most of all, Enchanters. They'll sell KEI, C5, and other spells.Haste too. And this makes buffs "necessary" (in that most people are used to them) but the grouping unnecessary. This has Enchanters up in arms, but that's worn down a bit recently, as Enchanters still more than hold their own in most six-man groups. Anyway, that's not entirely relevant.

The one thing EQ buffing indisputably got right with buff stacking. No such AC problem exists: you simply must pick the best spells for each "slot" and live with them. It's cookie cutter, yes, it relies on some classes more than others, yes, but it's MUCH better than allowing any spell willy-nilly.

What do I think about all this? Well, I come back again to Bardsong and leadership abilities. Bard songs affect your group (or raid) with an 18 second duration and must be constantly refreshed. No arguments about mana; no arguments about duration relative to cost; no arguments about botting or selling buffs ensue. Giving a variety of bard-esque abilities to a variety of classes removes all of these variables while still giving buffs a meaningful role in the game.

I'll post on debuffing some other time, as it's entirely different. I don't even like the term debuffing very much as it equates the two too easily.

-nk
Still on EQ
Arnold
Terracotta Army
Posts: 813


Reply #7 on: April 07, 2004, 05:19:18 PM

Quote from: nach0king

The one thing EQ buffing indisputably got right with buff stacking. No such AC problem exists: you simply must pick the best spells for each "slot" and live with them. It's cookie cutter, yes, it relies on some classes more than others, yes, but it's MUCH better than allowing any spell willy-nilly.


The only "buff stacking" I can think of in AC is the ability to impen/bane armor AND underclothes.  The problem with AC is that every skill and every stat can be buffed.

For those of you who have never played AC before, a buff cycle goes something like this for my gimpy mage, the last time I played him:

Creature Enchantment Mastery 5 (so I can cast level 6 creature spells easier)
Creature Enchantment Mastery 6
Mana Conversion Mastery 6
Focus Self 6
Willpower Self 6
Item Magic Mastery 6
Impenetrability 6 (Amuli Top)
Impenetrability 6 (Amuli Pants)
Impentrability 6 (shirt)
Impenetrabiltiy 6 (pants)
Impenetrability 6 (gloves)
Bludgeon Bane 6 (Amuli Top)
Bludgeon Bane 6 (Amulit Pants)
Bludgeon Bane 6 (shirt)
Bludgeon Bane 6 (pants)
Bludgeon Bane 6 (gloves)
Armor Self 6
Bludgeon Protection 6
War Magic Mastery 6
Focus Self 6 (stat buffs were short, have to cast again at end of buff cycle)
Willpower self 6
Endurance Self 6

And that's a SHORT buff cycle for fighting tuskers.  I might have even left some stuff out.  I did leave out helm and shoe buffs because tuskers don't hit those locastions.  Also notice that I only buffed for ONE damage type.  AC has fire, lightning, cold, acid, piercing, slashing, and bludgeoning damage.  When going to PvP or in a real dangerous area, you have to buff for ALL of those.  Imagine casting a bane for each damage type for each piece of armor.  

There are also the other life protect spells to cast.  Then you'd also buff your heal skill, run, all stats (strength, coordination, quickness, endurace, focus and willpower).  You'd cast your weapon skill mastery, you'd buff your weapon for damage, speed and accuracy.  You'd buff your shield up for everything in case you went melee.

I didn't even mention the fact that your character will have nowhere near enough mana to cast all this crap.  You have to use the transfer spells to accomplish this.  You'd either cast health to mana and heal yourself with a kit, or if you had high enough mana conversion, you'd cast stamina to mana and then revitalize to get your mana back.

During this process you'd burn through TONS of spell components, which cost lots of money, and more importantly make your character overuncumbered on a full pack of them.
Alkiera
Terracotta Army
Posts: 1556

The best part of SWG was the easy account cancellation process.


Reply #8 on: April 07, 2004, 11:30:17 PM

Quote from: Arnold
Quote from: nach0king

The one thing EQ buffing indisputably got right with buff stacking. No such AC problem exists: you simply must pick the best spells for each "slot" and live with them. It's cookie cutter, yes, it relies on some classes more than others, yes, but it's MUCH better than allowing any spell willy-nilly.


The only "buff stacking" I can think of in AC is the ability to impen/bane armor AND underclothes.  The problem with AC is that every skill and every stat can be buffed.

For those of you who have never played AC before, a buff cycle goes something like this for my gimpy mage, the last time I played him:

(dumbest buff nonsense EVAR)

During this process you'd burn through TONS of spell components, which cost lots of money, and more importantly make your character overuncumbered on a full pack of them.


Every now and then I think AC might have been a good game, and then I remember this.

Did doing all that result in more exp/time than spending that time just killing stuff?  If you spend 5 mins buffing, and 10 mins killing before you have to buff again, for example, why not screw all the buffs, and just kill for 15 minutes?  If doing all that makes a notable difference in exp/time, then something is borken.

--
Alkiera

"[I could] become the world's preeminent MMO class action attorney.  I could be the lawyer EVEN AMBULANCE CHASERS LAUGH AT. " --Triforcer

Welcome to the internet. You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say can and will be used as evidence against you in a character assassination on Slashdot.
SirBruce
Terracotta Army
Posts: 2551


WWW
Reply #9 on: April 08, 2004, 12:36:48 AM

I'm not a big fan of buff spells in a game design.  Why?

1. Firstly, I believe in strong solo play.  Having buff spells either makes it nearly impossible for the soloer, or requires all soloers to be in hybrid classes that can buff themselves.

2. It adds to a problem most MMOGs have of stat and damage inflation where the gap between the high-end content and the starting content becomes fairly mind-boggling.

3. Such spells become, effectively, a time sink that adds little to fun.  All encounters must be geared with the idea that the characters may have all the buffs appropriate to their level.  This forces them to buff just to access said content.  On the other hand, if you don't account for that, then a bunch of people may whine that your content is too easy.

AC2 somewhat solved these problems by allowing all classes to buff themselves in unique ways, and those buffs were frequently long-lasting.  However, given the power of some buffs that some classes had, it made soloing easier for some than for others.

If you're going to make a game for soloers, I'd be tempted to design so that:

1. Buffs can't be cast on others, so each class has to use their own buffs
2. Buffs should be small in effect and not required to defeat content
3. Buffs should be long-lasting

If you're going to make a game that requires large group raids, then your best bet is creating tiers of combination spells that can buff entire groups so you don't have to sit around for 20 minutes just buffing everyone up in your guild.

Bruce
eldaec
Terracotta Army
Posts: 11839


Reply #10 on: April 08, 2004, 02:42:22 AM

Quote from: SirBruce
If you're going to make a game that requires large group raids, then your best bet is creating tiers of combination spells that can buff entire groups so you don't have to sit around for 20 minutes just buffing everyone up in your guild.


I tend to think this assumption that the design must cater for everyone on a raid being fully buffed all the time is the core of buff problems.

A buff character as currently constituted in EQ...

1) Ramps up their effectiveness indefinitely in larger raid partys.
2) Remains stuck in a 'bot' role.

If you set up with long lasting buffs that can be cast on an unlimited number of people, you restrict how powerful they can be in small group encounters, to the point where the buff character is not providing the same advantage as, for example, another tank.

So I think you have to limit total buff output, and you have to do so in a way that allows one buffer to give a similar total contribution either in single group or zerg encounters.

This together with the need for the buffer to active in encounters still leads me back to short duration, relatively large effect, cast-in-combat designed buffs. More examples...

- Buff that makes the next swing proc a DD (or a snare, or a dot, or a debuff, or another buff), only lasts a few seconds if not used.
- Buffs that can only be landed on an character under attack, and which falls when that character loses aggro.
- Buff that makes a character gain double or half aggro for a short period.
- Buffs that can only be cast on characters that have built up enough 'rage'. Or when the buffer has built up enough 'rage'.

Most of these would have to have very short or instant cast times.

And wherever possible you're looking for effects that are, at least in part, tactical condition modifiers - not just generic stat boosts.

"People will not assume that what they read on the internet is trustworthy or that it carries any particular ­assurance or accuracy" - Lord Leveson
"Hyperbole is a cancer" - Lakov Sanite
tar
Terracotta Army
Posts: 257


Reply #11 on: April 08, 2004, 03:03:18 AM

Quote from: Alkiera
If you spend 5 mins buffing, and 10 mins killing before you have to buff again, for example, why not screw all the buffs, and just kill for 15 minutes?


Last time I played AC1, the buff durations were quite a bit longer than 10mins, I think it was 30mins for the lowest, 45 for mids and 60 for highest. So it was more like buff for 5, fight for 55.


AC2 has come up with a way of doing things that'll mean buffs from other players aren't usable for soloing, so solo content won't end up being balanced for people using every buff. Also, the tedium generated by group buffing will be cut out by most buffs being automatically fellowship-progagated and not needing recasting.

If you want to read the full system, it's here.
Tebonas
Terracotta Army
Posts: 6365


Reply #12 on: April 08, 2004, 03:15:10 AM

While I would agree with buff characters falling easily into the bot trap, Buffers/Debuffers not so. Too much mob interaction to bot this efficiently.

Never in my 65 levels as an EQ Shaman I was reduced to buffing alone. Mainly because I used my other abilites which Shaman have plenty to help out their group.

Longer lasting buffs (in higher levels) actually enabled me to do more of those other things my character was able to do. Of course, a badly played Shaman is easily replaced by a bot. And I guess thats true for every buff class.

So I think the way to go would be short buff durations for classes that work mainly with buffs (so that thery are not bored or botted), and long buff durations for classes that bring other things to the group. Actually there are people who take pride in the fact that they can juggle buffs effectively and keep everybody buffed up. That should be a viable character template for them.
Xilren's Twin
Moderator
Posts: 1648


Reply #13 on: April 08, 2004, 07:02:08 AM

How's about this for a twist on the old D&D logic.  Instaed of spell casters having every spell available at any time, they have to choose a limited number of known spells at each given spell level.  And while that number may increase over time you will always know less than half the total spells available for a given level.

This wouldn't neccessarily eliminate buff bots per se as a two box players may well decide to make a spell caster that focus on learning those spells, or a dedicated guild might have a person go that route, but for a typical active player, they can at least have a choice if they want to bother learning buffs at all.  Admittedly it's not a great solution but if we were talking about a change to existing magic systems in games like DAoC, AC and EQ, would this help?

Of course, this is all premised on their not being one best spell per level or indespensible buffs (i.e. mana regen accelerators) and having magic mean more than just it's affects on combat, but thats another thread entirely.  It pushes individual spells to be more like skills.  Personally, I love to see spells be generically available to all players who want to invest skill points in learning them (again back to a system with lot and lots of skills to choose from)

Xilren

"..but I'm by no means normal." - Schild
Grelf
Guest


Email
Reply #14 on: April 08, 2004, 07:26:06 AM

Buff durations have vastly improved, at the high end, (lvl 7 spells) duration is an hour. So you buff for 3-6 minutes, and then hunt for the remaining 54-57 minutes.

Shortest amount of time I believe is 30 minutes, but don't quote me, since it's been forever since I casted anything but 7's.
eldaec
Terracotta Army
Posts: 11839


Reply #15 on: April 08, 2004, 08:39:57 AM

Quote from: Grelf
. So you buff for 3-6 minutes, and then hunt for the remaining 54-57 minutes.


Again, you talk like this is a good thing.

If a buffing role in a MMOG doesn't involve continuous decision making during an actual battle (to the same extent that healing, tanking, nuking, all require decision making), then I don't see how it adds anything to the game.

Rip it out if you can't do better. Personally I believe you can.

"People will not assume that what they read on the internet is trustworthy or that it carries any particular ­assurance or accuracy" - Lord Leveson
"Hyperbole is a cancer" - Lakov Sanite
WayAbvPar
Moderator
Posts: 19268


Reply #16 on: April 08, 2004, 09:30:04 AM

Quote from: SirBruce
I'm not a big fan of buff spells in a game design.  Why?

1. Firstly, I believe in strong solo play.  Having buff spells either makes it nearly impossible for the soloer, or requires all soloers to be in hybrid classes that can buff themselves.

2. It adds to a problem most MMOGs have of stat and damage inflation where the gap between the high-end content and the starting content becomes fairly mind-boggling.

3. Such spells become, effectively, a time sink that adds little to fun.  All encounters must be geared with the idea that the characters may have all the buffs appropriate to their level.  This forces them to buff just to access said content.  On the other hand, if you don't account for that, then a bunch of people may whine that your content is too easy.

AC2 somewhat solved these problems by allowing all classes to buff themselves in unique ways, and those buffs were frequently long-lasting.  However, given the power of some buffs that some classes had, it made soloing easier for some than for others.

If you're going to make a game for soloers, I'd be tempted to design so that:

1. Buffs can't be cast on others, so each class has to use their own buffs
2. Buffs should be small in effect and not required to defeat content
3. Buffs should be long-lasting

If you're going to make a game that requires large group raids, then your best bet is creating tiers of combination spells that can buff entire groups so you don't have to sit around for 20 minutes just buffing everyone up in your guild.

Bruce


What he said ^^^^^

When speaking of the MMOG industry, the glass may be half full, but it's full of urine. HaemishM

Always wear clean underwear because you never know when a Tory Government is going to fuck you.- Ironwood

Libertarians make fun of everyone because they can't see beyond the event horizons of their own assholes Surlyboi
Arnold
Terracotta Army
Posts: 813


Reply #17 on: April 08, 2004, 01:00:07 PM

Quote from: Alkiera

Did doing all that result in more exp/time than spending that time just killing stuff?  If you spend 5 mins buffing, and 10 mins killing before you have to buff again, for example, why not screw all the buffs, and just kill for 15 minutes?  If doing all that makes a notable difference in exp/time, then something is borken.

--
Alkiera


A single tusker can kill an unbuffed mage with 1 hit.  When attacking one, a mage will be swarmed by 6-8 of them, all hitting constantly.  I'm sure they aren't the "thing" to kill anymore, but back in the day they were high level and therefore high XP value.  They were easy to kill because they just had lots of health and a big attack that could be defended against.
Arnold
Terracotta Army
Posts: 813


Reply #18 on: April 08, 2004, 01:04:23 PM

Quote from: Grelf
Buff durations have vastly improved, at the high end, (lvl 7 spells) duration is an hour. So you buff for 3-6 minutes, and then hunt for the remaining 54-57 minutes.

Shortest amount of time I believe is 30 minutes, but don't quote me, since it's been forever since I casted anything but 7's.


I never got level 7 spells, but I was around for a short time when they extended the durations.  But 3-6 minutes seems really fast for a full set of buffs.

The buff duration change brought in problems of its own.  Some people didn't buff for EVERYTHING all the time before because it was expensive and time consuming.  Once the durations were extended, everyone was buffed for everything all the time.

Also, I felt screwed because I had Arcane Lore.  Now Creature mages could just cast their stat buffs and have them last forever instead of relying on jewelry.
Alluvian
Terracotta Army
Posts: 1205


WWW
Reply #19 on: April 08, 2004, 01:05:50 PM

I like the way the 'inspirations' work in CoH.  I like that WITHOUT any buffing class at all.  CoH has other types of buffs as well that are actually cast by buffing type powers, but I really like the inspirations.

For those that don't know, they work like potions.  You get limited space for these that is based on level.  They drop rapidly, about every few mobs has one.  They are very short duration, about 20-30 seconds or so.  They are single use and then gone.  They stack infinately with themselves.  They can be traded.  They can be purchased at vendors.  What this does is relieves anyone of having to worry about any other persons buffs but there own.  If you are in a real challenging area you can benefit by trading them.  Give the endurance (mana) ones to the blasters and controllers.  Give the healing ones to the tanks and brawlers, the accuracy ones to the blaster, etc...

You can stockpile a LITTLE when starting out.  Basically pick up some rarer ones and reserve space for others that drop on the way.  They are a very entertaining way to get out of a sticky situation.  Getting your butt kicked because 5 more creatures ran around the corner you didn't see?  Fire off 3-5 damage buffs pretty much instantly, throw on a health buff and start dropping area effect powers like crazy that are now doing huge damage.  The effect wears off quickly and you take it easy for abit while collecting and filling up on more.

You use them because you can't store them very well.  They stack because it is not imbalancing due to the fact that you can't stockpile very well and they don't last that long.

It allows people to control their own destiny to a large degree instead of relying on the buffer for everything.  Everyone can use all the different inspirations, and a surplus of any of them is useful but requires a different tactic to get out of trouble.
kuro
Guest


Email
Reply #20 on: April 08, 2004, 02:19:21 PM

Here is the buff system that I would use with the goal of eliminating classes that only buff,  downtime from buffing, balance issues between pure melee classes and hybrids, dependency on a single class, and buff bots.

Buffs in general
- don't require mana
- don't requre expensive reagents
- any buffer can only cast 2 Passive Group Buffs  plus 1 Active Group Buff  on any single target
- all classes have access to a number of Passive Group Buffs (including pure melee)
- there is overlap between classes, to prevent dependence on a single class

Types of Buffs:

1. Passive Self Only Buffs:
- are self only
- have a casting time
- last until canceled, dispelled, or death, but not link dead
- no recast timer

2. Active Self Only Buffs:
- are self only
- instant cast
- last for short duration
- have recast timer

3. Passive Group Buffs:
- have both single target and group versions
- have a casting time
- stack with self only buffs, but not with identical passive group buffs
- grey out when player is out of a certain range or out of group with the caster and don't function
- last until greyed out to long, canceled, dispelled or death (of caster or target), but not link death
- note: caster can cancel the buff on other players at any time.


4. Active Group Buffs (i.e. chants, songs)
- instant cast
- recast timer equal to length of the pulse (i.e. can't be twisted)
- stack with self only buffs, passive group buffs, but not identical active group buffs
- effect group members within a given range
- drops when out of group, out of range, canceled (by caster), or death (of player or caster)
SirBruce
Terracotta Army
Posts: 2551


WWW
Reply #21 on: April 08, 2004, 02:42:10 PM

Quote from: eldaec
Quote from: Grelf
. So you buff for 3-6 minutes, and then hunt for the remaining 54-57 minutes.


Again, you talk like this is a good thing.

If a buffing role in a MMOG doesn't involve continuous decision making during an actual battle (to the same extent that healing, tanking, nuking, all require decision making), then I don't see how it adds anything to the game.

Rip it out if you can't do better. Personally I believe you can.


Well, I think one should rip it out, not because you can't do better, but because, for reasons I stated, buffing is a generally sucky idea.  But a lot of people like it, so if you're going to have it, making the long-lasting at least makes buffing tolerable to the rest of us.

If you want continuous decision making during an actual battle, then leave it to healing, tanking, nuking, and other spells and not buffing/debuffing.

Bruce
kuro
Guest


Email
Reply #22 on: April 08, 2004, 02:59:53 PM

Buffs are nice in that they allow a character to contribute something  concrete to the group as soon as they join.  Socially, it's kind of like bringing a bottle of wine to a dinner you've been invited to.  

The problem with buffs comes with downtime from the buff, dependence on a single class for a given buff, balancing pure melee vs. hybrids, buff bots,  having a single character able to buff an entire raid.

So the solution seems to be to spread buffing duties out among all the classes so that buffing can be performed more quickly and to overlap spells among classes so that there isn't dependence on a single classes. Limit the number of buffs a character can cast on another player and require that they remain in group and within a given range to get benefits.  If possible make buffs fire and forget about them.   For more powerful buffs or situational buffs implementing them as an active ability on a timer or a DAoC style chant  seems simple enough.
Djamonja
Guest


Email
Reply #23 on: April 08, 2004, 03:58:31 PM

I'm partial to short, effective, tactical type buffs which require an active player at the keyboard to make decisions on what they should cast just like a nuker, a tank, or a healer would make similar tactical decisions during combat. I don't much care for standing around buffing for an extended length of time, and I don't think it makes for particularly good gameplay to have buffs "required" to be effective as an individual or a group.
Alluvian
Terracotta Army
Posts: 1205


WWW
Reply #24 on: April 09, 2004, 07:37:49 AM

Quote
and I don't think it makes for particularly good gameplay to have buffs "required" to be effective as an individual or a group.


This is more perception and how you define 'effective' than anything else.  If a buffed group can kill x creatures a minute and an unbuffed group can only kill x-y creatures a minute then the unbuffed group will not feel as 'effective' and will believe that buffs are REQUIRED to be 'effective'.

It is circular logic and will exist as long as buffs exist.
Grelf
Guest


Email
Reply #25 on: April 09, 2004, 07:40:15 AM

I'm not for or against AC's buffing schema. Just pointing out what is. Personally, buffing gets very old, since you either have to be a mage, or a hybrid, or use a buff bot to do anything in AC now.

Since everyone buffs, (and they do buff everything) the mobs are made in relation to being buffed.

And with third party programs, you can buff rather fast. My mage has 80+ spells he has to cast for a hunting session. With a third party app, he can do that in 4.5 minutes.
SirBruce
Terracotta Army
Posts: 2551


WWW
Reply #26 on: April 09, 2004, 08:29:12 AM

Quote from: Alluvian
Quote
and I don't think it makes for particularly good gameplay to have buffs "required" to be effective as an individual or a group.


This is more perception and how you define 'effective' than anything else.  If a buffed group can kill x creatures a minute and an unbuffed group can only kill x-y creatures a minute then the unbuffed group will not feel as 'effective' and will believe that buffs are REQUIRED to be 'effective'.

It is circular logic and will exist as long as buffs exist.


There is a solution to this, and one which I have advocated before for other reasons: scaling experience rewards based upon the level of the challenge.  You can make it so soloers get an experience bonus for killing a mob alone, rather than the other way around as many MMOGs have it now.  You could also include logic to detect any buffing during battle and also give them an additional bonus for not being buffed.

Bruce
Alluvian
Terracotta Army
Posts: 1205


WWW
Reply #27 on: April 09, 2004, 08:40:18 AM

I don't think giving a soloer an exp bonus is a good idea.  I don't think people would group at all.  Grouping is slower than soloing pretty much by definition.  A group of 7 will have 7 times the bio/smoke/soda breaks as the solo person.  Groups also take time and effort up front to form.  They need a benefit just to break even in terms of sheer efficiency.  The solution to this is making grouping FUN so that people WANT to group.  Not becuase it looks better on the spreadsheet.

Exp bonus for not being buffed makes sense as long as there is no buffing class (a system where everyone has a few buffs).  It would suck if there was a buffing class, because they would spell NEGATIVE experience.  Sure you might kill faster and make up for it, but that is not what people will see.  They will see the drop in exp per mob.  Balancing these buffs vs the percentage of exp to strip off would be very very hard though.  Not all buffs are the same, and some will be better in some confrontations than others.
Arnold
Terracotta Army
Posts: 813


Reply #28 on: April 09, 2004, 12:02:22 PM

Quote from: Grelf

And with third party programs, you can buff rather fast. My mage has 80+ spells he has to cast for a hunting session. With a third party app, he can do that in 4.5 minutes.


Damn!  When I last played it seemed to take Nerfus Buffus a lot longer.  But that was probably because I was a low 50s non-spec mage who would fizzle a lot more on 6s than a spec mage.
SirBruce
Terracotta Army
Posts: 2551


WWW
Reply #29 on: April 09, 2004, 04:03:06 PM

Quote from: Alluvian
I don't think giving a soloer an exp bonus is a good idea.  I don't think people would group at all.  Grouping is slower than soloing pretty much by definition.  A group of 7 will have 7 times the bio/smoke/soda breaks as the solo person.  Groups also take time and effort up front to form.  They need a benefit just to break even in terms of sheer efficiency.  The solution to this is making grouping FUN so that people WANT to group.  Not becuase it looks better on the spreadsheet.


I'm including extra breaks in the calculation.  Figure the time however you like; the soloer should at least be able to earn the same xp/hr. as the group individual xp/hr.  In most MMOGs, they simply cannot, because groups get xp bonuses.  Moreover, groups are inherently less risky.  They'll also be accumulating better treasure... even if the xp/hr. is the same, the treasure is more likely to be useful by SOMEONE in the group as opposed to having only some of it useful and having to sell the rest and go to the market for more stuff appropriate for you.  Finally, groups are often the ONLY way to take on even tough mobs, which although might wind up earning less xp/hr. reward the groupers with treasure the soloer could not reach at the same level.

Any way you slice it, to be "fair" soloers should be getting the bonuses, not the other way around.  Greater risk, greater reward.  Yes, this means people might group less.  So what?  The whole point is to appeal to soloers.  If you WANT to group, you still can, and get all of its benefits, with correspondingly lesser rewards.

Quote

Exp bonus for not being buffed makes sense as long as there is no buffing class (a system where everyone has a few buffs).


Well, I wouldn't have a buffing class to begin with.

Bruce
Qenan
Guest


Email
Reply #30 on: April 10, 2004, 08:46:03 AM

Quote from: eldaec
- Buffs that last 10-20 seconds but have a dramatic effect.
- Buffs that have a downside as well as upside (maybe the 'do 20% extra spell damage' buff also blocks 50% of healing) so that you have to turn them on and off during combat.
- Buffs that disappear if the buffer strays more than a few feet from the buffee, or maybe buff timers that run down much quicker at longer ranges.
- Reactive buffs such as 'give group 20% resistance to the last damage type that hit me'.
- Short duration Buffs cast as part of combat feat or spell chains.
- PBAoE chant buffs - of the sort paladins usally get.


I like these ideas but they would also need to be balanced to avoid griefing, e.g., I cast "do 20% extra spell damage but block 50% healing" on a tank and watch hilarity ensue. Limiting bufs to players in your party would be a start.

The other issue is that if buffs become less valuable, you have just reduced the pool of effective classes or templates; buffers will be less useful. I think we could live with this, but it is a consideration.
Djamonja
Guest


Email
Reply #31 on: April 10, 2004, 06:21:30 PM

Quote from: Alluvian
Quote
and I don't think it makes for particularly good gameplay to have buffs "required" to be effective as an individual or a group.


This is more perception and how you define 'effective' than anything else.  If a buffed group can kill x creatures a minute and an unbuffed group can only kill x-y creatures a minute then the unbuffed group will not feel as 'effective' and will believe that buffs are REQUIRED to be 'effective'.

It is circular logic and will exist as long as buffs exist.


By "required" I mean buffs that are so good that you basically can't do without them if you wish to compete. It is a matter of perception, but IMO a reasonable person is well able to make the distinction between buffs that make someone ~50% more effective at "killing", and buffs that only make someone ~10-20% more effective. Coupled with making the buffs more tactical in nature, I'd like the ~10-20% more effective type vs. the ~50% uber type.
SirBruce
Terracotta Army
Posts: 2551


WWW
Reply #32 on: April 11, 2004, 05:34:38 AM

I think even 10-20% might be too much.  It's enough to unlock a tougher mob that might normall be able to kill an unbuffed character before running out of health itself.

Alluvian's point was that simply not making buffs "required" to access content was not in and of itself sufficient.  Let's say both a buffed and unbuffed character of level X can defeat a troll.  Okay, great.  But if the buffed character can defeat a troll in 20% less time, then many unbuffed characters will feel like they "have" to buff, because if they don't, they'll level at only 80% of the rate.

There are not really many good solutions, here.

Bruce
eldaec
Terracotta Army
Posts: 11839


Reply #33 on: April 11, 2004, 10:09:03 AM

I don't think exp bonuses as such are really the point here.

The way I see it today, the typical passive buff class isn't taking their share of the xp.

This is partly why buffs are seen as important, they add to the number of group members helping to kill the mob, but they do not add another person to share xp with.

If we really must have passive buffs, then the buffee should share xp with the buffer as if in group. That way the addition of buffs is the same trade off as inviting another healer/caster/tank.  In an ideal world....

xp = monster effectivness / character group effectiveness

... and while we can debate the subjective questions of how to measure each part of that, it's really hard to argue that a buffbot should not add weight to the denominator.


Quote

 You can make it so soloers get an experience bonus for killing a mob alone, rather than the other way around as many MMOGs have it now.


I'd see this as a really bad idea in the context of any of the current MMORPGs.

Soloers already have a bonus, it's otherwise known as 'all the xp/loot gained in the time a group spends finding a cleric'.

And taking DAOC as an example, this bonus is what makes buffbotted soloers dominant in sub-level-45 pve.


EDIT:
I'd also add that xp management is another reason I'd like buffs to be designed to be an active cast-in-combat skill.  They encourage the buffer to be inside the group - or at the very least to be at the combat encounter, that way all the normal aggro and xp rules can balance the effects of the buffs themselves.

"People will not assume that what they read on the internet is trustworthy or that it carries any particular ­assurance or accuracy" - Lord Leveson
"Hyperbole is a cancer" - Lakov Sanite
SirBruce
Terracotta Army
Posts: 2551


WWW
Reply #34 on: April 11, 2004, 11:37:28 AM

Quote from: eldaec
I don't think exp bonuses as such are really the point here.

The way I see it today, the typical passive buff class isn't taking their share of the xp.


Well, to me this just means you shouldn't have buff classes.  It doesn't tell us anything particularly about the nature of appropriate buffs beyond that.

Quote from: eldaec

Quote

 You can make it so soloers get an experience bonus for killing a mob alone, rather than the other way around as many MMOGs have it now.


I'd see this as a really bad idea in the context of any of the current MMORPGs.

Soloers already have a bonus, it's otherwise known as 'all the xp/loot gained in the time a group spends finding a cleric'.


Nope, they don't.  If a cleric is required for a group to kill the same mobs, then it's going to be even more required for the soloer... or the soloer has all that downtime to compensate.

Bruce
Pages: [1] 2 Go Up Print 
f13.net  |  f13.net General Forums  |  The Gaming Graveyard  |  Game Design/Development  |  Topic: Let's talk about buffing/debuffing  
Jump to:  

Powered by SMF 1.1.10 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC