Feedback:User/Silverdawn/Energy & Gear Choice

This suggestion is outdated. A more current suggestion can be found here: Feedback:User/Silverdawn/Taking energy one step further

I am not a fan of artificial restrictions -- in this case, I'm referring to weapon and armor choices for classes. I have an alternative system that ties into energy that will provide much more playstyle diversity and role-playing freedom without taking away class uniqueness or skill balance.

The Basic Energy System
Every class has the same base energy level and energy regeneration, much like in Guild Wars. However, there is a second, "hidden" energy bar called fatigue or exhaustion that acts as a cap for the energy bar that you see, much like death penalty did for energy in Guild Wars. A character who drops below a certain milestone of energy (<50%, for example) slowly begins to accumulate fatigue; a character at maximum energy slowly loses it. There would be a maximum fatigue cap, much like death penalty was capped. Energy would be a short-term resource, fatigue would be a long-term resource.

Reaching 0 energy would not prevent someone from using skills, instead allowing them to go into energy "debt" and pay for it by incurring a condition every X seconds that lasts for X seconds and has the potency (not duration) of its effect stacked depending on how deeply indebted the character is. The condition would reduce attack/skill activation speed, movement speed and it would also add an after-skill delay. This would make the character vulnerable without rendering him unable to do anything (which was very frustrating in City of Heroes, a game with a consumables-dependent long-term energy system and no auto attack).

Potions might be permissible as a quick way to get rid of fatigue, but making energy management dependent on consumables is a bad idea that only leads to annoyance and frustration.

Armor Balanced as a Skill
Armor heavier than the basic scholar armor should reduce energy regeneration, essentially making it a defensive skill that costs energy over time. It should be the most efficient defensive "skill" in the game while the character is actually taking damage, but while the character is not taking damage all that extra energy regeneration the character could have had if he wore lighter armor is wasted.

A character who trades in for lighter armor is betting he can use defensive energy more efficiently in short bursts as needed through the use of dodging and active defense skills than the "always-on" defensive benefit of armor. Although he has more energy, he doesn't have the energy to defend against persistent attack using active defense. He is hoping to avoid attention while he unloads offensive skills and use his defensive skills to thwart enemies long enough to escape if they should notice him.

A character who trades in for heavier armor is betting that more aggressive positioning and a quick burst of heavy offense will be more effective than prolonged, measured offense from a more conservative position. He hopes his enemies will ignore him in favor of softer, more active targets, allowing him to select a vulnerable target and position himself to unload all his energy for a kill.

A scholar in soldier armor should have enough energy to just barely kill someone in adventurer armor if no countermeasures are taken; adventurers should be able to do it a little more efficiently. A soldier in scholar armor should have enough energy regeneration to experience only minor energy drain while spamming all five attack skills at a normal attack speed; an adventurer should also get this benefit but to a lesser extent.

Skill Cost Optimized for Profession Armor
Each profession should be able to maintain energy at a constant level while using the five attack skills at a leisurely pace (3-5 seconds in between activations) while wearing profession-appropriate armor. Energy should decrease slowly while constantly spamming the basic attack, much faster if the player doesn't pace himself with attack and control skills, and absolutely plummet if he chains together two or three defensive skills.

This can provide a possible innate balance for ranged and Area of Effect skills by optimizing energy costs for adventurer or even scholar armor. This balance would be much more modular, organic and fun to play than attributes, which currently offer a disincentive to bring a melee and a ranged weapon. The choice posed to (for example) warriors becomes much more interesting with this sort of a system. The question becomes: "should I equip heavy armor and use more energy with my ranged attacks, then be tired but well protected when my enemy engages me in melee or should I take more of a risk and equip lighter armor to put out more offense?" rather than "should I be good at one thing or mediocre at two things?" Personally, I love the idea of a tough, adaptable warrior who can fight equally well with a bow or a sword and shield, but being mediocre isn't my idea of having a good time. I would much rather pay the energy piper to be good for shorter spurts.

Generic Weapon Attacks
All weapons should have three classless attacks that are available to all professions that aren't trained in their use. These generic attacks should be physical and optimized for heavy armor. They should be viable in combat, but only almost as effective and not nearly as flashy as a profession weapon. Offhand item that the character is not trained in should not offer additional skills, but both weapons and offhands should confer their item bonuses.

Pros:

 * o Greater role-playing freedom.
 * o An energy system with a long-term component that rewards a player for using energy efficiently.
 * o An energy system with a short-term component that keeps combat fast-paced.
 * o An energy system that penalizes but doesn't frustrate players who reach 0 energy and have no consumables.
 * o Energy denial becomes a viable strategy once again.
 * o Energy potions are unnecessary, eliminating a mechanic that is controversial and not fun to play.
 * o Armor choices add a new dimension to each class.
 * o Professions will still feel very different, even wearing the same armor.

Cons:

 * o Might be difficult to balance in a system that scales by level.
 * o Might overbalance for melee/ranged hybrid characters when combined with attribute dilution.
 * o Makes it impossible to distinguish between classes if no skills are being used.
 * o Players have disincentives to use the additional weapon choices.

Counter-Cons:

 * o Level-less systems provide even more benefits - check it out.
 * o There are better mechanics than attributes - check it out.

Credit where Credit's Due
These two posts contributed to the energy idea, but they've both signed their intellectual rights away to ANet, too, so everything's kosher.

Evian2389's Fatigue

Tmakinen's Negative Energy Suggestion

--Silverdawn 09:05, 11 February 2011 (UTC)