Please Fix Broken Champion Points --Sincerely, Magicka Users

Starshadw · September 2015

The Champion Point system is a mess, full stop. It's certainly one of the primary reasons for a lot of the troubles we're seeing - and it's only going to get worse. The entire system needs to be revamped, and sooner rather than later. Passives need to be grouped together more logically, they need to possibly add in diminishing returns or increasing costs. I was frankly surprised to find that I wasn't forced to choose one of the three constellations to focus on while being unable to put points in the other two of the same group.

As it stands, you can put your points wherever you want, however many you want - up to the max. This gave us people who spend 8-10 hours grinding CP. It gave us things like unending shields - which resulted in shield nerfs. Roll-dodge monkeys - which resulted in the nerf to roll-dodge.

More nerfs will come, if something isn't done to improve and better balance the CP system.

I can think of a number of possibilities:

1. Some sort of dynamic CP gaining suppression system, which would keep the player base on a roughly even basis: so perhaps there is a range: the low end would have players with 150ish CP while the upper end and the cap would be 300. So long as a player was below the minimum and hadn't reached the maximum, they would continue to gain CP. As the average number of CP earned rises, so would rise the overall cap. If you hit the cap, you can't earn more until the rest of the active population reaches the equivalent minimum. This would prevent the CP grinding that puts some players light years ahead of the average.

2. Increased cost: the more points you put into a particular passive, the more expensive it becomes, This would force players to make more strategic decisions. So maybe the first 25 points in a passive are 1 for 1, 26-50 is 2 for 1, 51-75 is 3 for 1, and 76 - 100 is 4 for 1. If you really want 100 points in Bastion - you're going to have to give up something in exchange.

3. As stated above, some sort of lockout for certain constellations. It might not be as restrictive as forcing a player to only choose one of the three constellations, it might be something more along the lines of "If you put 120 points into one of the constellations, then you are locked out of the two upper tier passives in the other two constellations of the same group." Again, that's just one idea.

Basically, we shouldn't be able to have our cake and eat it, too. We should have to make choices - higher damage, lower survivability? Higher regen, lower damage? That sort of thing.

Sallington · September 2015

Starshadw wrote: »

The Champion Point system is a mess, full stop. It's certainly one of the primary reasons for a lot of the troubles we're seeing - and it's only going to get worse. The entire system needs to be revamped, and sooner rather than later. Passives need to be grouped together more logically, they need to possibly add in diminishing returns or increasing costs. I was frankly surprised to find that I wasn't forced to choose one of the three constellations to focus on while being unable to put points in the other two of the same group.

As it stands, you can put your points wherever you want, however many you want - up to the max. This gave us people who spend 8-10 hours grinding CP. It gave us things like unending shields - which resulted in shield nerfs. Roll-dodge monkeys - which resulted in the nerf to roll-dodge.

More nerfs will come, if something isn't done to improve and better balance the CP system.

I can think of a number of possibilities:

1. Some sort of dynamic CP gaining suppression system, which would keep the player base on a roughly even basis: so perhaps there is a range: the low end would have players with 150ish CP while the upper end and the cap would be 300. So long as a player was below the minimum and hadn't reached the maximum, they would continue to gain CP. As the average number of CP earned rises, so would rise the overall cap. If you hit the cap, you can't earn more until the rest of the active population reaches the equivalent minimum. This would prevent the CP grinding that puts some players light years ahead of the average.

2. Increased cost: the more points you put into a particular passive, the more expensive it becomes, This would force players to make more strategic decisions. So maybe the first 25 points in a passive are 1 for 1, 26-50 is 2 for 1, 51-75 is 3 for 1, and 76 - 100 is 4 for 1. If you really want 100 points in Bastion - you're going to have to give up something in exchange.

3. As stated above, some sort of lockout for certain constellations. It might not be as restrictive as forcing a player to only choose one of the three constellations, it might be something more along the lines of "If you put 120 points into one of the constellations, then you are locked out of the two upper tier passives in the other two constellations of the same group." Again, that's just one idea.

Basically, we shouldn't be able to have our cake and eat it, too. We should have to make choices - higher damage, lower survivability? Higher regen, lower damage? That sort of thing.

So spot on, especially points 2 and 3. I think the biggest problem with the whole CP is the lack of needing to make a choice. I like your idea of increased CP cost past a certain threshold. I also like the idea of limiting CPs to somewhere around 400-600 total. You shouldn't be able to fill the entire tree of every constellation. There's no weaknesses in that. Like any worthwhile RPG, you should need to make a choice on where to put your points. If you put them in offense, then you won't have enough to buff your defense as high, and vice versa.

frozywozy · September 2015

Starshadw wrote: »

The Champion Point system is a mess, full stop. It's certainly one of the primary reasons for a lot of the troubles we're seeing - and it's only going to get worse. The entire system needs to be revamped, and sooner rather than later. Passives need to be grouped together more logically, they need to possibly add in diminishing returns or increasing costs. I was frankly surprised to find that I wasn't forced to choose one of the three constellations to focus on while being unable to put points in the other two of the same group.

As it stands, you can put your points wherever you want, however many you want - up to the max. This gave us people who spend 8-10 hours grinding CP. It gave us things like unending shields - which resulted in shield nerfs. Roll-dodge monkeys - which resulted in the nerf to roll-dodge.

More nerfs will come, if something isn't done to improve and better balance the CP system.

I can think of a number of possibilities:

1. Some sort of dynamic CP gaining suppression system, which would keep the player base on a roughly even basis: so perhaps there is a range: the low end would have players with 150ish CP while the upper end and the cap would be 300. So long as a player was below the minimum and hadn't reached the maximum, they would continue to gain CP. As the average number of CP earned rises, so would rise the overall cap. If you hit the cap, you can't earn more until the rest of the active population reaches the equivalent minimum. This would prevent the CP grinding that puts some players light years ahead of the average.

2. Increased cost: the more points you put into a particular passive, the more expensive it becomes, This would force players to make more strategic decisions. So maybe the first 25 points in a passive are 1 for 1, 26-50 is 2 for 1, 51-75 is 3 for 1, and 76 - 100 is 4 for 1. If you really want 100 points in Bastion - you're going to have to give up something in exchange.

3. As stated above, some sort of lockout for certain constellations. It might not be as restrictive as forcing a player to only choose one of the three constellations, it might be something more along the lines of "If you put 120 points into one of the constellations, then you are locked out of the two upper tier passives in the other two constellations of the same group." Again, that's just one idea.

Basically, we shouldn't be able to have our cake and eat it, too. We should have to make choices - higher damage, lower survivability? Higher regen, lower damage? That sort of thing.

I think the champion system should be revamped so you would have to spend X points and then you're done. At least for PVE. For PVP, they could make it so you earn champion points the same way it is right now but it would reset back to 0 at the end of every campaign.

Or make it so they gain some kind of power (gear, cps or anything) with a cap easily reachable for hardcore players every campaign so that way, you give time to slower players to catch up a lil bit at the end of every campaign.

One thing is sure, adding a softcap after the first 300points won't do much when some players are already 1500+ and can 3shot people with emp and alot of points in thaumaturgy (even with the 50% damage reduction of 2.1).

Starshadw · September 2015

frozywozy wrote: »

One thing is sure, adding a softcap after the first 300points won't do much when some players are already 1500+ and can 3shot people with emp and alot of points in thaumaturgy (even with the 50% damage reduction of 2.1).

They'd have to fully reset the system and essentially start over from scratch - which is sure to cause wailing and lamentations. Thus the reason I said they need to get the system fixed sooner rather than later. The longer they wait, the worse it's going to get.

In terms of the cap - that cap would move, as the majority of the active population caught up, at which time the cap would move in response to the new average/range.

olsborg · September 2015

The entire champion system needs a revamp, completely. If u ask me. And ffs introduce the cap already.