#UniteThePVPPlayers: Movement - Immunity and Farming

Agreed,legends should keep immunity
But please dont accept something like RPS,the only advantages roles should ever have over others are the basic ones
The match shouldnt be dictated by the fact that u are a role,counters should do that.
And if u think about it the counter buff/debuff can pass any 5v5 4v4 2v2 1v1 balance with no problems.
RPS falls apart from 2v2, becouse there are 3 roles.
The counter buff/debuff will make the better player overcome a role that overpowers hes role by skill alone,not just by simply being a role and debuffing.

This is DCUO, what if you were a total Batman fan but your legend was impossible to play at beginner levels?

What kind of audience do you think this game brings?

Having a general learning curve will guarantee the game wont be boring and reward practice, but making it set to skill of new and old, and making the gap huge.. Not a good design.

There's an easy way to know if you're not confusing me with someone else.. what was my toons name? o:
(Also yeah I had that style for years ^^)

As little as you do?
I know for a fact that the Hold was never cancelled with Block, It was a Super Power clip.

And I wasn't trying to be anything but humorous.

I didn't mean to disrespect you when I said it was horrible, I just meant it was my opinion and provided reasoning to it.

If you don't see the complexity of it, it might be because you're capable of grasping it - while a lot of others cant.

Stop taking it as an insult and maybe use that to ego boost yourself, you might just feel like passing on doing it yourself in the future.
(That Jab at you was just stronger than me, I'm human too, Couldn't help it)

This is getting far too off topic, if you really want me to discuss why all of the reasoning you just posted is wrong then feel free to PM me and I will.

But for now, I'll just end with this:

Don't worry, the money I earnt from this game and merchandise from sponsorships already did that for me

I honestly don't believe any Legend is engineered to have lower health or higher "punishment" based on the assumption that they'll get immunity, especially considering everyone has access to immunity.

Also, like I said before, if you feel like you need a guaranteed followup after a counter to do good damage it just means the counter itself is too weak. Frankly, counters now are at one of their weakest points ever in terms of relative damage. There are many other ways to do as much or more damage than a counter.

If the counter itself did more damage, you wouldn't need immunity or long knockdowns for that guaranteed followup we currently utilize.

Yes, immunity was originally introduced because damage was getting out of control in arenas. Why was damage getting out of control? Because T3 raids had just come out and people were using their DPS weapons, DPS trinkets, CC trinkets, and more in arena.

But instead of restricting the use of PvE in arenas (which they eventually did anyway), they introduced immunity. This is the exact problem Sir Ivy, Soul and ChillCat have mentioned already. Layering an entirely new system on top of an old one without fixing the core issue.. ugh, it just creates chaos.

That said, it's obvious that people like getting extra rewards for counters. They're used to it because of immunity. So rather than eliminating that gameplay style, I would be open to providing a different kind of reward.. just not immunity. Stat buffs as you suggested, or heals, or power, or CC resistance, or debuffs, or whatever.

I guess one answer is the game isn't built around 1v1. I don't like that answer though so here are some others:

(1) Restrict 1v1 queues to DPS role only; or

(2) Stat cap 1v1 queues the same way we are stat capped now in arenas. Current arenas are designed so that every role is equal; or

(3) Offer free/cheap debuff grenades as consumables. It's easier to balance consumable use than movement mode debuff use because of the longer cooldowns; or

(4) Give counters the ability to role debuff.

Okay. But this isn't clipping a hold with a block. It's cancelling a castbar hold with a power, which you can still do right now:

www.youtube.com/watch?v=71U2nGDOf-I

I think its too late for that now. Even Injustice - Gods Among us, which has way better graphics and combo system than DCUO is already declining. The esports market is already becoming too saturated anyways, for DCUO to enter the esports market with such limited resources would be impossible imo.

While it may be too late for DCUO to majorly profit from a tournament E-Sports scene, it's never too late to implement. There is one major thing that esport games offer.. balance. Balance patches for those games come hard and fast, and are backed with complicated statistical analyses.

However, embracing e-sport traits does not mean embracing immunity. Almost all esport game have simple mechanics.. the complexity comes from the execution of those mechanics.

Yeah, thats the sad part about DCUO ... balancing happens too rarely.

Well that depends on the games, FPS and fighting games have rather simple mechanics and it comes down to execution like you said. ARTS/MOBA and RTS have very complicated mechanics that take way longer to master. The most popular games atm are team based games, I think the biggest factor in their complexity comes from the team aspect of the game. I've been playing DotA since it first came out on WarCraft III and I've learned that no matter how good or bad you are you cant win or loose a game by yourself, you are not playing alone, the key thing you needs to master is to learn to sync with your teammates.

Agreed about the teamwork thing. I guess what I really meant was I think DC's actual combat mechanics are complex enough to support an esports game already. We don't need to continually layer on new gameplay mechanics. There are certainly popular games out there already with far less complex combat systems.

Except if you buff counter damage as a whole, every legend benefits from this. Every legend that doesn't rely on counter punishment gets buffed greatly where as those that do are effectively nerfed.

If the devs decided to adjust the counter damage values for every single legend based on the counter punishment they can do now, then we'd still have the problem that certain abilities that are used solely with immunity become practically useless. Robin's 2, Supergirl's 5, GA's 5 and 6, catwoman's 2 and to a lesser extent 3, all stealth attacks become weaker (as it becomes entirely possible to get knocked out of it without immunity, especially if you have dots applied), every single might based finisher becomes useless...

I think you underestimate just how heavily counter punishment is integrated into legends if you believe that simply changing counter damage is a sufficient change.

I'd argue that the mechanics in fighting games are not exactly simple. You have things like combos & damage that scales down the longer a combo is, meter which further increases combo damage/can be used for breakers in certain games/enables special attacks to be utilised, you have various options for combos (animation cancelling or via linkers), crossups, invulnerability frames, safety frames, daze meter in certain games, counter breakers in KI etc.

The mechanics are far simpler in DC

Well I see it this way; the legends who currently "need" to fit a ton of damage into a knockdown wouldn't need to anymore. Their actual counters would do great damage. A buff to everyone is just that; a buff to everyone.

That's a problem with the abilities themselves. If an ability is impractical because of overly long vulnerability windows then the vulnerability should be adjusted. You don't need to layer on an entirely new mechanic like immunity to justify abilities that are just plain useless to begin with.

And there's a ton of things you have to worry about in DC that you don't need to worry about at all in fighting games. Fighting games are just 1v1 encounters at their core while DC is not. I like that DC is action oriented and the combos are reminiscent of a fighting game.. but it would be a mistake to think they're the same.

He brought up those finishers.
how would you adjust finishers? They're meant to be high risk, high reward... so those low health hits and those vulnerability windows gotta be in line with each other.

What you are missing is that that the supposed buff to everyone only sleeps those characters at relatively the same strength while those more defensively built or without counter punishment would get massively buffed. It is like giving a Donna Troy Catwoman's counter punishment.

The second problem is that you are also asking for the design of legends to be restricted to never have a certain amount of risk. Restricting the design of legends powers frankly sounds boring to me.

Also I don't see anywhere that Clutch is saying fighting games and DCUO are the same. He only brought support as to how DCUO is simpler than fighting games. Also not all fighting games are 1v1. I recently won a tiny Smash Bros tournament in the 2v2s. It certainly isn't every where, but it does exist.

And why exactly does Catwoman need the ability to fit a massive amount of damage into one knockdown? She's already one of the best legends.

Any character can be balanced without the need for immunity. It's already what the devs do when they create new Legends. Every time an ability is added that does something "new" they reduce the health of that Legend and call it a day.

I did nothing of the sort. Clutch thinks those abilities he listed are useless without immunity. I'm just pointing out the core reason why he thinks that.

He said DC mechanics are far simpler than fighting game mechanics. I'm saying it's not a fair comparison. Smash Brothers is a good example. It's not as mechanically complicated as 1v1 fighting games because it doesn't need to be; it has 2 extra players.

Except a buff to counters wouldn't exactly be a buff to everyone, would it? Counter punishment based legends will never be buffed as greatly with the replacement of punishment with high counter damage as legends with lower counter punishment. For example this would be an even greater buff for shazam and BA because their counter punishment is kind of average in comparison to someone like supergirl.

It's a horrible idea

Why is it a bad thing if immunity gives these abilities use though? Isn't it technically sound design if a mechanic in the game makes certain abilities useful? You also completely ignored stealth...this would also become a useless ability. Your logic is that these abilities don't "need" immunity, but they still need changing. There's an awful lot of abilities and legends that would need adjusting to make them viable, and not all of them are such an easy fix as "adjusting vulnerability windows". It adds further work to the devs plate, and inevitably even more problems will arise from more complicated tasks.

Considering most of these abilities are well balanced currently, you're effectively going to break something to have to fix it again which in turn is more than likely going to break other aspects.

Not to mention that the removal of immunity will make dodge an incredibly broken mechanic in legends....far more than breakouts are currently (and yes, it used to be insanely powerful previously as well). But then the subsequent nerf of this will make characters that rely on it currently to be balanced (harley and NW for example) will become either underpowered in NW's case or severely underpowered in Harley's.

The amount of people you're fighting is no where near enough of a factor to make DC approach street fighter in complexity. Farming counters is still practically the same when multiple people are involved, you simply have to know what attacks are AoE for screen blocking and learn to track more than one target. This really isn't that difficult nor complicated.

You're saying there is a "ton" of things to worry about in dc which you don't in fighting games...again that doesn't nececssarily mean it's complex. You have to worry about healing, power, multiple targets as three examples (although there are more) but all of these things are incredibly easy to understand and to learn in comparison to many facets of fighting games. Learning the exact invulnerability frames for every move for a fighter and what is punishable with the specific character you're using is far more complex than all three of the things I mentioned put together, and takes a hell of a lot more learning to understand and even more practice in order to punish off of memory. Infact I'd be willing to wager a single aspect of SF's mechanics are probably far more complex than 5 of DCUOs.

Out of all the games I have played competitively, DCUO has some of the simplest mechanics and easiest to learn out of them all. It isn't even the most complicated MMO I've played, it's simply that the counter mechanics increase the skill floor and ceiling quite a lot.

Yes, it would be a buff to everyone. Logically speaking, immunity was a buff to everyone too when it was first introduced.. so in your view it must have created all kinds of problems as well, right?

And honestly, there's no such thing as a "counter punishment based legend." That's just something you yourself made up. There is no legend that has a different counter damage formula from any other. If Shazam innately had 50% stronger counters, and he had 50% less health as a result, then you could call that a counter punishment based legend by design. We don't have that though.

In the devs' mind, every Legend is balanced according to how much damage or survivability their abilities give them; as those go up, their health goes down. That's all.

So in all likelihood, no Legend was engineered with an especially low health or high followup damage with the assumption that they'd need immunity. The fact that you've come up with rather ingenious ways to fit in the maximum damage possible into a knockdown is an unintended consequence.

I get it. We've built an entire meta around fitting as much damage as possible into a knockdown.. so it's hard to admit that our meta may just be an unintended consequence of the devs tinkering with knockdown times. However, it is painfully obvious that the devs do not give breakout powers the same weight we do. They don't care about giving Legends breakout powers.. they give it out like candy now. The only reason breakout powers even exist is for PvE and not PvP.

Tunso could decide tomorrow that he's applying the PvE version of immunity globally and this meta would go completely down the drain. He's already done it twice and his reaction was not one of measured caution.. it was one of mild amusement at how big a deal we were making out of a 2 second knockdown. Even if they made it a 1 second knockdown it would still turn your whole world upside down.

Pshhh. Nah, it's not man. No matter what you think, they would have to increase counter damage at some point. They increased weapon combo damage, they increased Legend ability damage, they increased Legend health.. the only thing left is counter damage.

Most of these abilities existed before immunity you know. I'm fairly certain the devs did not envisage stealth to be used as a tool for guaranteed damage.. they intended it to have risks if used in the middle of combat.

Whoa. Why are you even comparing DC to Street Fighter? Totally different games, genres, audiences, popularity, expectations.. just totally different and not even worth the comparison.

If he doesn't admit this to be the truth, I don't think there's a point continuing this debate.

Whether Immunity is needed or not, those words are the simple truth.

I'm also delighted to see none of this reasoning was applied to Arenas in this discussion, Oh boy, I'de love seeing that.

I don't understand how you aren't understanding this. Let me make it simple:

With counter punishment:

Legend a can do 3000 counter punishment, has low survivability.

Legend b can do 1500 counter punishment, has high survivability.

Let's say counter damage is increased to 2000 to compensate and immunity removed:

Legend a does 2000 damage on a counter, has low survivability

Legend b does 2000 damage on a counter, has high survivability.

Legend A is comparatively nerfed while B is comparatively buffed.

What if you buff the counter damage to exceed 3000, so legend A technically does more damage on a counter than with punishment?

Simple, B gets buffed just as hard but retains its survivability. Once again, A is comparatively nerfed because it no longer has a damage advantage but retains it's survivability disadvantage.

Therefore, it is not a "buff" to everyone when certain legends are losing the one advantage they had which was keeping them balanced.

Your point regarding counter punishment based legends "not existing"

Your whole argument regarding this seems to be based around because the devs didn't "intend" for counter punishment to be a thing, that there aren't "counter punishment based" legends. This makes absolutely no sense.

Did you realise that combos in street fighter were initially a bug and were not intended by developers? They decided to keep the system and then develop it more in the future.

According to your logic, the people who discovered combos "made it up" because the devs never intended for it to be possible. Therefore fighters who revolved around the utilisation of combos also didn't exist.

Kind of silly isn't it?

The devs don't have to intend for a legend to be counter punishment based for the legend to be counter punishment based.

What's the only thing balancing supergirl? The fact she has great counter punishment. What's the only decent thing about green arrow? Again his counter punishment. Sinestro? Again the damage he can deal while immune. I haven't "made this up", it's the way the legends are and it isn't an "opinion" that there are legends that sole strength revolves around counter punishment, it is a fact. Trying to argue this shows you have a flawed understanding of the concept or lacking knowledge of some of the roster.

Closing point

I fail to see how counter punishment being an "unintended consequence" makes it any less relevant as a balance mechanic.

It's removal having a grave effect on legends balance isn't an "opinion", it is a fact. Infact it isn't even difficult, you can see it for yourself by doing simple math (much like included in my counter punishment vs counter damage scenario).

Yes, they could have buffed counter damage. Infact I've been calling for it for a long time especially considering counter damage was not buffed with the health and weapon attack increases.

But that isn't what was a bad idea. What was the bad idea?

Thinking removing counter punishment and buffing counter damage would be practically the same thing. THAT is a horrible idea.

Most? That is incorrect. Combo abilities were not a part of of legends until counter punishment was already in the game, and combo abilities are one of the only things balancing certain characters due to them naturally synergising with counter punishment.

This means all of these characters:

GA
John
Kyle
Sinestro
Donna
Supergirl

Have abilities which give them a needed boost in counter punishment which didn't exist pre immunities. Other characters also benefit largely from counter punishment (WW, donna for example) but don't solely rely on it to be good/balanced.

Stealth does have a risk in combat, that's why you utilise it after a counter. A counter is never guaranteed, but landing one allows you to use the ability to its fullest extent. Remove immunity and a simple DoT renders it useless, it seems like you don't really care about having a large selection of abilities become far less useful or more gimmicky than practical.

I don't really want even more useless abilities in legends, having 1-2 on any loadout is bad enough let alone 3-4.

Because of these statements:

We're comparing the complexity of the games, not the target audience or the genres or the population of the game...

Most Esport games are far more complicated than DCUO, and I was using SF as an example. However multiple other games are also more complicated, it certainly isn't close to being "almost all" are simple. Quite the opposite in fact.

Except that I already mentioned that in arenas immunity can be removed more easily. We're also discussing counter punishment based legends, why would I start talking about arenas and de-rail the topic at hand? You're just trying to be snide as usual with no logic behind it

I recommend actually reading my posts before claiming things that are not true, you're threatening to de-rail the thread once again.

I read it (Like always, Sigh), It's more or less you trying to cover up and/or avoid facing the truth or atleast putting it in words - there's no such thing as a "Counter Punishment Based Legend".

It's a term you just coined, like right here in this thread.

There are Legends that benefit more from Immunity, and as you see things - require it to be on a competitive level.
You know what? I don't disagree!
I just think it's stupid supporting a different system to balance them out, instead of tending to them individually.

So hey, you have your opinion, we have ours.
God have mercy on our souls for that, I know.


I'm really starting to feel like a non functioning train station, all this de-railing..

Is there or is there not legends who have above average counter punishment that make them balanced?

Are there abilities in legends which are only useful because of immunity?

Yes there are, so yes there is "such a thing".

You're trying to argue a fact, not an opinion. End of discussion.

Fixed

Oh, so "Counter Punishment Based Legend" is a Fact?

I see, aside from those that Factually fall under that definition (Coined by no other than yourself), what other types do we have?
You're welcome to give them names since you've given this one group its name already.

I would love "Swoop Attack Based Legends" to be renamed to "Combat Kittens", if It's alright with you, Ofcourse.

Edit: Oh and Also, do the Devs know they have "Counter Punishment Based Legend"? I mean they must know.. they made them!