elements and hybrid dps

it would be cool if using a specific element wasnt JUST good for enemy weaknesses
here is what i suggest
Fire techs burn the enemy for x amount over x seconds
Ice techs increase crit damage done to enemy for x seconds
lightning techs slightly count towards physical down

ik what you are going to say "techs are cool stop being a bully"
it is just personal preferance
maybe i want to use those duable augments or whatever they are called to say
use fire techs with my double saber

will try to think of something for other tech types
obviously these wont apply to the combotech PAs in the game

If they were going to do anything like this it would just be the status effects they had before. While I think separating damage types on augments again was a bad move, I don't think something like this would actually solve that problem. While I do miss having the option to use ice techs on high priority targets, or fire/dark techs on high hp enemies, it's not like we don't use off-element techs anyway. Everyone mobs with zonde, and while I think they're mostly overlooked because they came later, Megid, Zan, and Gi-grants are all good for mobbing too. I have no problem with using elemental weakness on bosses or though enemies for downs though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kondibon

Megid, Zan, and Gi-grants are all good for mobbing too. I have no problem with using elemental weakness on bosses or though enemies for downs though.

---

tell me whats so good about megid and gi grants mobbing? Megid feels like it consumes way too much PP for its outputs and Gi Grants while even in its special state lacks in dmg. Meanwhile Zonde is just strong and Zan is super good in clusters of mobs. not arguing with you, i genuinely want to know because i think Megid and Gi Grants are completely ass to mob with

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ArcaneTechs

tell me whats so good about megid and gi grants mobbing? Megid feels like it consumes way too much PP for its outputs and Gi Grants while even in its special state lacks in dmg. Meanwhile Zonde is just strong and Zan is super good in clusters of mobs. not arguing with you, i genuinely want to know because i think Megid and Gi Grants are completely ass to mob with

---

I can answer that question as one who loves Gigrants. Say you have a PSE burst and the enemies are in a compact area of sorts or lined up rather than spread out. That's where charged Gigrants shines (no pun intended). Yea Zonde is good but only hits 6 enemies while charged Gigrants can hit more, thus can help you charge Compound Tech faster in those moments. I also found out recently that you can use charged Gigrants faster as Fo if you use Photon Flare, which means more damage and even faster charging of Compound Tech. Also back when I would farm event points in Lab Ruins at the low ranks, charged Gigrants is superior to Zonde. I also recall that charged Gigrants with the halo can knock some enemies down, like those Garongos. The downside though is when those Goron enemies (belly DOLLS) face you, where they shrug off your attacks, or if the enemies are spread out. As for the Lower area of Retem, I'm more likely to use Zan for the elemental weakness.

Megid's case is... I suppose if the enemies are also in a compact line, but more spread out, where 3-4 megid spheres will hit the targets, though similar weakness as charged Gigrants except you have to set up with 1-2 uncharged ones first to get the spheres.

By all means give it a try, at least the charged Gigrants thing, when the enemies in a PSE are tightly packed sometimes. If you're with others, I'm sure they can take care of those more durable enemies while Gigrants can potentially sweep the others away.


As for the OP's topic, I always wonder why we could inflict ailments back in base game but none in NGS with the exception of downing certain enemies (mostly bosses) with the respective elemental weakness. Hopefully something will happen in the future for elements besides just what they are now, though. Fire element also needs its special perk sometime, too, kinda like how Barta Clot exists for ice.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ArcaneTechs

tell me whats so good about megid and gi grants mobbing? Megid feels like it consumes way too much PP for its outputs and Gi Grants while even in its special state lacks in dmg. Meanwhile Zonde is just strong and Zan is super good in clusters of mobs. not arguing with you, i genuinely want to know because i think Megid and Gi Grants are completely ass to mob with

---

Zan kinda relies on the second charged cast, which means you need to alternate between doing that and the low dps uncharged version. Gigrants just kinda does its damage upfront once you have the halo (which is really easy to upkeep anyway). If you only compare the DPS of only charged zan then it wins out but that doesn't take into account the alternating or how slow the charged projectile is. Before gigrants got its AoE buffed and the glitter effect changed to a knockdown instead of throwing enemies all over the place, I would have agreed that it's pretty bad, but as it is right now, it's very consistent.

Megid is probably pushing it because the charged version has a tendency to get caught on terrain, but it's mostly that it has a REALLY wide AoE at max spheres.

Honestly though I want better single target lightning and ice techs more than other AoE options at this ponit. There's no ice tech that simply tracks and hits your target, and there's no dedicated single target lightning tech. Zonde is more like a general purpose tech that happens to be ok for single target.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AdmiralPit

As for the OP's topic, I always wonder why we could inflict ailments back in base game but none in NGS with the exception of downing certain enemies (mostly bosses) with the respective elemental weakness. Hopefully something will happen in the future for elements besides just what they are now, though. Fire element also needs its special perk sometime, too, kinda like how Barta Clot exists for ice.

---

To be fair, actual status effects on trash mobs were basically a non-mechanic in classic until Ultra Hard, and even then they were pretty niche. I think with the way enemies are balanced to be a bit tougher it would work better in NGS, but it's mostly that more medium/large enemies should have downs, since that's all that really matters. Most of the status effects in classic were some sort of cc, and the two that weren't, burning and poison, were always either completely irrelevant, or so valuable that I would get mad at people using light techs on gran gwanadah and overwriting the burn.
If fire gets some sort of perk I want it to be something simple like the light one where it's just a little bit of extra damage instead of something that requires using uncharged and charged techs together. I like the way fire and light techs have the gimmick of their charged and uncharged versions serving different functions.

I believe that PSO2, both vanilla and NGS, could have more "specialization" in PAs and Techs. What I mean is that each PA/Tech/Ability should have a certain case where it is more effective than average. We already have PAs/Techs that are best for single-target at range, single-target for target at melee, multi-target etc. even if they are off-element, but I think Sega should explore the following as well:

- Combos: Using an ability empowers a different ability, so that going 1-2-1-2-1-2 or 1-2-3-1-2-3 is better

- Opposite element combo: Hitting an enemy afflicted by element down with the opposite element of what it has been downed by deals bonus damage.

- Create 2 types of Physical Down: Melee down, Range down. Similar to above, if an enemy is melee-downed, then using ranged PAs deal bonus damage and vice versa. Rod and Wand physical attacks would count as melee, Talis as ranged.

- PAs/Techs that deal more damage to breakable parts. So that you use those until a part breaks, then revert to your usual abilities

- PAs/Techs that specialize on a target being right on the ground or above some certain height.

- PAs/Techs that are more powerful the farthest/closest you are to 100% HP or PP.

- Abilities that charge as you perform different actions (similar to how Spread Shot charges only when using Rifle attacks). For example, taking a lot of damage could charge an ability that when used makes you reflect a portion of incoming damage. Narrowly dodging damage could charge an ability that when used makes you immune to damage for a short period of time (so that you can turret). Counter-attacking could charge an ability that when used makes all your attacks be critical hits for a short time.

- Abilities that require multiple players to set off. For example hitting an enemy with <AbilityA> gives the enemy an inert debuff that activates when hit by <AbilityB> from another player.

- I'd like to see Burn and Poison return, but not in their vanilla implementation. I think it's better design, and easier to balance, if the amount of damage was dependent only on the user's Power and not on the enemy's max HP. At the same time I don't understand why they didn't allow multiple debuffs to be applied to an enemy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dark Mits

I believe that PSO2, both vanilla and NGS, could have more "specialization" in PAs and Techs. What I mean is that each PA/Tech/Ability should have a certain case where it is more effective than average. We already have PAs/Techs that are best for single-target at range, single-target for target at melee, multi-target etc. even if they are off-element, but I think Sega should explore the following as well:

- Combos: Using an ability empowers a different ability, so that going 1-2-1-2-1-2 or 1-2-3-1-2-3 is better

- Opposite element combo: Hitting an enemy afflicted by element down with the opposite element of what it has been downed by deals bonus damage.

- Create 2 types of Physical Down: Melee down, Range down. Similar to above, if an enemy is melee-downed, then using ranged PAs deal bonus damage and vice versa. Rod and Wand physical attacks would count as melee, Talis as ranged.

- PAs/Techs that deal more damage to breakable parts. So that you use those until a part breaks, then revert to your usual abilities

- PAs/Techs that specialize on a target being right on the ground or above some certain height.

- PAs/Techs that are more powerful the farthest/closest you are to 100% HP or PP.

- Abilities that charge as you perform different actions (similar to how Spread Shot charges only when using Rifle attacks). For example, taking a lot of damage could charge an ability that when used makes you reflect a portion of incoming damage. Narrowly dodging damage could charge an ability that when used makes you immune to damage for a short period of time (so that you can turret). Counter-attacking could charge an ability that when used makes all your attacks be critical hits for a short time.

- Abilities that require multiple players to set off. For example hitting an enemy with <AbilityA> gives the enemy an inert debuff that activates when hit by <AbilityB> from another player.

- I'd like to see Burn and Poison return, but not in their vanilla implementation. I think it's better design, and easier to balance, if the amount of damage was dependent only on the user's Power and not on the enemy's max HP. At the same time I don't understand why they didn't allow multiple debuffs to be applied to an enemy.

---

That all sounds needlessly complicated.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kondibon

That all sounds needlessly complicated.

---

More complicated? Yes. Generally complicated? No. Needlessly? Debatable.

By convention, the more factors you have to consider before making a decision/action, the more complicated something is. In my opinion, gameplay so far is quite barebones and can be aggregated as following: (1) Avoid stuff (2) Hit stuff. As long as you do those two, no obstacle will be unsurmountable (except jump puzzles but that's not the discussion here)

That's where dps checks come into play. By having timed trials, Gigantix enemies etc., the developers ask that simply avoiding enemy attacks and hitting them with any of our own should not be enough; we also have to make strategic use of our arsenal to achieve victory within the allocated time frame. This is why we have metas emerge, and why we can't simply run solo with a 1-star Sword holding just left-click down and expect to beat a Gigantix.

Giving abilities that specialize in specific scenarios can bring out new metas, which also mean that the gameplay will not go stale as quickly. This helps in game longevity. At the same time, new metas do not mean that non-minmaxers will be unable to complete harder content; as long as someone desires it, they can still just autoattack with a sword and defeat enemies and earn loot and progress their character. Or they can switch to another weapon or PA and spam that instead, whatever they enjoy. The only thing that changes is how much time a player may spend for a specific obstacle.

TL:DR: New abilities and mechanics should allow to tackle content differently than before, without making it harder for existing gameplays to achieve their results.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dark Mits

More complicated? Yes. Generally complicated? No. Needlessly? Debatable.

By convention, the more factors you have to consider before making a decision/action, the more complicated something is. In my opinion, gameplay so far is quite barebones and can be aggregated as following: (1) Avoid stuff (2) Hit stuff. As long as you do those two, no obstacle will be unsurmountable (except jump puzzles but that's not the discussion here)

That's where dps checks come into play. By having timed trials, Gigantix enemies etc., the developers ask that simply avoiding enemy attacks and hitting them with any of our own should not be enough; we also have to make strategic use of our arsenal to achieve victory within the allocated time frame. This is why we have metas emerge, and why we can't simply run solo with a 1-star Sword holding just left-click down and expect to beat a Gigantix.

Giving abilities that specialize in specific scenarios can bring out new metas, which also mean that the gameplay will not go stale as quickly. This helps in game longevity. At the same time, new metas do not mean that non-minmaxers will be unable to complete harder content; as long as someone desires it, they can still just autoattack with a sword and defeat enemies and earn loot and progress their character. Or they can switch to another weapon or PA and spam that instead, whatever they enjoy. The only thing that changes is how much time a player may spend for a specific obstacle.

TL:DR: New abilities and mechanics should allow to tackle content differently than before, without making it harder for existing gameplays to achieve their results.

---

People have a hard enough time wrapping their head around the idea that an accurate ranged PA that gives you mobility is going to be less raw DPS than the one that requires you and your target to be a specific range from each other and stand still for two full seconds.
Also, interesting meta discussions come from using things in ways they might not have been intended to be used, not making a bunch of super niche things that are automatically optimal in their respective situations. You aren't "Tackling things differently" if you use the PA that does more damage to breakable parts on breakable parts.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kondibon

People have a hard enough time wrapping their head around the idea that an accurate ranged PA that gives you mobility is going to be less raw DPS than the one that requires you and your target to be a specific range from each other and stand still for two full seconds.
Also, interesting meta discussions come from using things in ways they might not have been intended to be used, not making a bunch of super niche things that are automatically optimal in their respective situations. You aren't "Tackling things differently" if you use the PA that does more damage to breakable parts on breakable parts.

---

Yeah, the first part is a player issue. Either the player learns and eventually becomes more efficient, or they don't and keep playing as they do.

But regarding the second paragraph I disagree. While meta is always about finding ways to increase efficiency (after all that's what the acronym 'meta' means: Most Effective Tactic Available), the emergence of metas that are counter-intuitive are usually an indication of bad balance or bad design from the developer. As a specific example with Zonde, the fact that a Lightning-based AoE tech is more effective at mobbing than any other element AoE tech regardless of the weak element of the enemies, that fact is proof that balancing is off or that the design of Zonde arcing to so many targets without damage drop-off needs to be looked at.

In my previous post regarding the various ideas, as emergence of metas I would consider the following:
- If I take hits hits (and knockdowns) so that I can then reflect damage back to the enemy later on, will that be more overall damage done than avoiding attacks? How will that affect my gearing and affixes? When will be the best time to take hits and when to avoid them? Do I have enough Resta signs for that tactic? If I can I rely on other players (for example in premade groups) to also use their Resta signs for me will it be better for the entire group?
- Is it better to break all breakable parts of an enemy or should I just expose only one weak point and then focus everything on it? If I also consider the amount and frequency of "downs/staggers" the enemy will suffer due to breakable parts being destroyed, how will that affect what is best?
- Is it better to focus my damage on the upper body of the enemy or on the lower body?
- How will my ability rotation/priority list change considering the presence of another player with whom I can coordinate?