ENC, Y u so complicated (in General)


AdminTitan [The Sky Forge] July 6 2011 12:01 PM EDT

The point behind ENC is to limit the effect that USD has in this game. It's currently "kindof" doing it's job; however, it can't effectively be lowered, b/c of the way ENC currently behaves. If you have an enchanter that you want to put a huge corn on, you better make sure he has more than a few million levels. If you want a wall, it better have HP, and not just a PL backed minion, or that AC is worthless. So, then, what could solve both of these problems. Why not redo ENC so that it is team wide, and based on MPR instead of stats. It could be set to something reasonable, 70-100M per M MPR. So, a 5M MPR team could have like 400M ENC, to be spread throughout his/her team in whatever fashion he or she chooses. This way the problems with the current ENC and multi minion teams won't arise, yet ENC will be able to actually do the job it was created to do.

QBRanger July 6 2011 12:11 PM EDT

Why not redo ENC so that it is team wide, and based on MPR instead of stats.

+1

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] July 6 2011 12:14 PM EDT

I think the only problem here would be minion hiring.

You could build a massive Mage (or Familiar holder, or whatever), then towards the end of your bonus run, buy a base minion and strap on the largest weapon you could fit.

And have the 'weapon allowance' fed by the size of the original character.

It would seem like the best of both worlds.

Another thing it might, encourage, is that every team would have to utilise thier ENC to the maximum. As you have the same amount your neighbour has, and if you're not using it, you're losing out.

Which migh tbe easier to fill up totally with a linear weapon x cost, but be less able to fill if the only slot you have is going from a +15 to +16 corn which might take millions more than your ENC. (If that makes sense, capping you at a lesser ENC potential until your ENC grows large enough for that one point upgrade.)

Besides, Multi Minions have so many advantages over single minions that ENC is really (apart fomr SoD splash damage) the only thing going for them.

Remove that, and you might as well remove the choice of making less than 4 minions.

QBRanger July 6 2011 12:18 PM EDT

You could build a massive Mage (or Familiar holder, or whatever), then towards the end of your bonus run, buy a base minion and strap on the largest weapon you could fit.

Hey, if someone wants to spend upwards of 30M CB to hire a 2nd minion just to increase their ENC a small amount, have at it.

Remove that, and you might as well remove the choice of making less than 4 minions.

IDK. In the early days of CB2 there were plenty of 1-2 minion characters. The concentration of xp is very powerful in CB.

Another thing it might, encourage, is that every team would have to utilise thier ENC to the maximum. As you have the same amount your neighbour has, and if you're not using it, you're losing out.

Is that not the way things are now? Use all your ENC vs your neighbor?

Zenai July 6 2011 12:18 PM EDT

I think it is a decent idea I just don't agree with the overall mechanics since you have to take into account what GL so aptly pointed out. Maybe if this worked per Individual MPR levels rather than team wide this would be more appropriate.

QBRanger July 6 2011 12:21 PM EDT

Maybe if this worked per Individual MPR levels rather than team wide this would be more appropriate.

Is that not the current situation?

Or maybe I misunderstand what Individual MPR means.

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] July 6 2011 12:25 PM EDT

Ranger, your neighbour is the same MPR as you. you both have exactly equal ENC. You use it to the full, sneaking in 5,000 CBD increases by upping your Weapon X every time your ENC increases.

Your opponent is sitting at 7 Million under thier ENC, as all they have left to buff is thier Corn, and that would take 10 Million in total.

Does that help explain the problem as little better?

Having ENC MPR based means that no matter what strategy you run, you have the same ENC as the guy next to you.

Whether your strategy is designed aorund utlising NW, or not.

Currently, you get a higher ENC, if you're a strategy that *requires* NW.

If that makes sense. ;)

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] July 6 2011 12:26 PM EDT

Hey, if someone wants to spend upwards of 30M CB to hire a 2nd minion just to increase their ENC a small amount, have at it.

It would be more like running a Familiar Holder with just an AoJ. Then at the end of your bonus run, buying a cheap minion to strap on your legacy uber weapon, and getting the full effect form that weapon, as you're using all the built up ENC form your Familiar holder.

Not gaining a small amount of extra ENC from the purchase.

AdminTitan [The Sky Forge] July 6 2011 12:29 PM EDT

But, why should that be the case GL, shouldn't every team get the choice of where they want to put their money, even if it's wasting 100M just to up a corn by one more +.

As for single/double minion teams versus 4 minion teams, believe me, this won't be a problem. Nothing can compare to exp concentration.

AdminTitan [The Sky Forge] July 6 2011 12:30 PM EDT

Then at the end of your bonus run, buying a cheap minion to strap on your legacy uber weapon, and getting the full effect form that weapon, as you're using all the built up ENC form your Familiar holder.

You still wouldn't have the ST/DX/HP to use that weapon, it'd be no different than the current system. The only thing it would allow would be very high AC on a low HP wall, which I'm fine with, if they want to risk that.

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] July 6 2011 12:31 PM EDT

A question.

Is ENC really necessary for Armour? Or was it mainly put in place for Weapons?

If it's just Weapons, then woudln't scrapping ENC and using a MTL for Weapons be the better solution?

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] July 6 2011 12:32 PM EDT

You still wouldn't have the ST/DX/HP to use that weapon

:P Was waiitng for that! ;)

Drop your Familiar for a ToA? Or instead of a naked Familair holder, run a naked Mage.

QBRanger July 6 2011 12:32 PM EDT

It would be more like running a Familiar Holder with just an AoJ. Then at the end of your bonus run, buying a cheap minion to strap on your legacy uber weapon, and getting the full effect form that weapon, as you're using all the built up ENC form your Familiar holder.

Single minion NCB runs do that now. Look at Shade, did just that.

Buying a new minion just for more ENC is the least of the problem this game will have and 30+M for a bit more ENC is not much.

If someone wants to buy a new minion as a tattoo holder, so they can armor up their main minion, they will do it whether ENC is character or minionwide.

I really doubt an ENC change like Titan proposes will change the behavior of people hiring minions.

Zenai July 6 2011 12:33 PM EDT

Or maybe I misunderstand what Individual MPR means.

My thoughts would be this, upon hiring each minion brings MPR to the pool thus increasing the ENC levels of the team. Now I have always thought this to be wrong since this goes against the very idea of what ENC was created to do in the first place. Hiring another minion should be nothing more than that. Each. Minion should have their very own ENC to work with that could only be affected by one thing besides XP and that would be the RoE. (Unless I have gone crazy it should make sense.....lol)

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] July 6 2011 12:34 PM EDT

Yeah, you're right.

Instead of using the small minion for the weapon, currently you'd just switch them.

Hmmm.

I think my only dislike then would be the levelling out of ENC, so that it's a fixed amount for all teams, regardless of strategy.

But that's more of personal taste, and not a mechanical issue.

QBRanger July 6 2011 12:35 PM EDT

Each. Minion should have their very own ENC to work with that could only be affected by one thing besides XP and that would be the RoE. (Unless I have gone crazy it should make sense.....lol)

Is that not the way things are now? Each minion currently has its own pool of ENC that you have to be under or suffer penalties.

Or what am I not reading correctly?

AdminTitan [The Sky Forge] July 6 2011 12:37 PM EDT

Now I have always thought this to be wrong since this goes against the very idea of what ENC was created to do in the first place.

No it doesn't. The whole point of ENC is to stop USD from influncing the game a great deal, while still allowing strategy to flourish, and CBD to have value. How we choose to do this is up to us( devs really ). This solution allows a very large array of strategy, while still limiting the amount of USD you can use. If you did it, "per minion MPR" you'd still be allowed to spend the same USD, the number of strategies would just be narrowed, b/c you would have to spend the money on fewer minions. Does that make sense?

QBRanger July 6 2011 12:44 PM EDT

Titan,

Again I agree with you.

As 4 minion character do not get a bit more xp than single minions ones (as was the case in CB1), there should be little downside to characters wanting to maximize their potential.

Also

Your opponent is sitting at 7 Million under thier ENC, as all they have left to buff is thier Corn, and that would take 10 Million in total.

That is a great point.

However there is a benefit for staying under your ENC. Your PR will be lower and your rewards possibly better.

I would of course keep the PR addition from items minion specific. Which, in the land of NW=PR, was one of the best changes Jon/NS made. Making that +10 corn on a 1m xp minion not add as much as the same corn on a 100m xp minion.

Zenai July 6 2011 12:52 PM EDT

Ranger: Yes but not from the start, if you higher the MPR pool gets bigger and so does encumbrance for the whole team. (If I remember this correctly.)

Titan: That is only a part of the reason ENC was created, the other part was to keep Vets from throwing uber gear on a NCB and pwn the ranks.

AdminTitan [The Sky Forge] July 6 2011 12:54 PM EDT

That is only a part of the reason ENC was created, the other part was to keep Vets from throwing uber gear on a NCB and pwn the ranks.

It would still do this, possibly even better. Since we could possibly lower ENC since it would be doing it's job more effectively. You still wouldn't be able to put a 200M weapon on a 1M MPR char, no matter how you split up the exp.

Zenai July 6 2011 1:07 PM EDT

Titan: If ENC is lowered and completely based on individual MPR yes it would do exactly what you are asking for in the short and long run.

Just my thoughts........

AdminTitan [The Sky Forge] July 6 2011 1:11 PM EDT

So, you think it's a good idea?

Zenai July 6 2011 1:14 PM EDT

Titan: I have been pro Rescale for a while now this falls under that in my opinion.

QBRanger July 6 2011 1:20 PM EDT

Ranger: Yes but not from the start, if you higher the MPR pool gets bigger and so does encumbrance for the whole team. (If I remember this correctly.)

As I remember, and please correct me if I am wrong, every minion starts at 100k ENC and it grows individually per minions level in skills, hp, str, and spells.

Character MPR has no direct effect other than that of the individual minions making the entire characters MPR.

Currently there is no pool of ENC for which minions draw. It is all individual from the creation of a character.

Zenai July 6 2011 1:27 PM EDT

Then I stand corrected. ENC still needs a redo and I honestly do not think making it teamwide is the answer. In realistic terms you learn as you go, as it stands right now ENC reflects this on an individual basis as it should. In my opinion Titans idea of making it strictly by MPR is a good way of doing it.

AdminNemesia [Demonic Serenity] July 6 2011 1:30 PM EDT

Are you all really advocating a massive tank nerf?

AdminTitan [The Sky Forge] July 6 2011 1:33 PM EDT

Hey, I'm not bias. (Well maybe a little) But, yeah, I think this is good.

AdminQBnovice [Cult of the Valaraukar] July 6 2011 1:34 PM EDT

They sure are...

This would bring back the mini tank with the huge weapon and allow mages to actually wear big dbs. Enc is tied to stats because it makes sense for it to be... if we're going to have the stupid thing the current system is pretty damn good.

Zenai July 6 2011 1:37 PM EDT

Nat: I am advocating change which CB has not had much of in a long time.

Just to slam this home since so many here love to go to extremes with everything:

IT DOES NOT HAVE TO BE A MASSIVE NERF!

This can be a little as knocking off 10% of ENC overall.

AdminNemesia [Demonic Serenity] July 6 2011 1:41 PM EDT

My definition of a nerf is lowering the overall effectiveness of something in relation to everything else. Evening the playing field for enc is a buff to multi minion teams, and a massive nerf to tank teams. It doesn't matter whether you increase the mage teams enc to a tanks or lower a tanks enc to a mages or put it right in the middle somewhere.

BTW I don't feel we need a multi minion buff and I would rather not play in mage blender.

AdminTitan [The Sky Forge] July 6 2011 1:43 PM EDT

Now see this is why I like discussing this, I hadn't thought of those points nov. I will have to ponder this some more. But, do you think ENC needs to be "wrangled" in a little more to be effective up top?

AdminQBnovice [Cult of the Valaraukar] July 6 2011 1:49 PM EDT

Honestly no, depending on setup I can be as close as 100m to my enc limit, and my weapons don't hit everyone despite having some of the highest plus in game. I would love to see something done for multi-minion teams though, leave the HP STR ratios right where they are and give AS based HP half credit at least. Something to help the fools who want to run heavy tanks on 4 minion teams with even xp distribution.

AdminNemesia [Demonic Serenity] July 6 2011 1:50 PM EDT

It's called GS and nobody's giving it the love it wants.

AdminTitan [The Sky Forge] July 6 2011 1:54 PM EDT

But could you even get close to your ENC without USD. B/c if that is the case, wouldn't the "best" solution be to lower ENC, but increase the effectiveness of physical weapons, so that it would kindof keep high spenders where they currently are, but increase the effectiveness of non-USD tanks?

Zenai July 6 2011 1:57 PM EDT

Nat: You said massive but I will digress.

Nov: Just because the current system is ok or good does not mean it cannot be adjusted or improved upon. That is my point for all of CB, the entire site is outdated and while good can be made better.

QBRanger July 6 2011 2:07 PM EDT

It's called GS and nobody's giving it the love it wants.

I tried GS and it really sucked.

It is ok for ENC, however, it is fairly useless for anything else. As it has been proven that you need loads more str to increase damage.

Also, DM is a hard thing to avoid.

10/20 character I currently fight have DMs over 4M.

I hate to rely on a spell that may or may not work and if it does not my DBs, my strength and damage all suffer greatly.

GS is unloved and there is good reason. It really sucks for the xp needed. Same with Haste. Of all the spells/skill/stats in CB only AP has less total xp invested for the top 50% of active users.

VA is tied with GS but Haste is lower than both.

If GS was that good, I think people would use it more.

For many years, people have tried and suggested ways to improve these spells, but as long as DM effects them, it will not be successful.

GS overall is a non-starter in CB.

Xenogard [Chaotic Serenity] July 6 2011 2:29 PM EDT

I can only think of one decent way to use gs/haste and it includes an RoS, 4 sets of tank weapons and lots of CBD, and is in no way shape or form cost effective.

Its entirely way to easy to get DMed without RoS protection, and if you rely on the GS for enc its only going to be 10x more difficult for you towards the top because of the amount of DM up there. (10x is a random number I pulled out of no where but you catch my drift.)

AdminQBnovice [Cult of the Valaraukar] July 6 2011 2:32 PM EDT

XP is far too valuable to spend on solely increasing enc, there has to be at least some side benefit, and with GS there is the terrible downside of dm, which compounds your existing enc problems into even lower stats.

QBRanger July 6 2011 3:44 PM EDT

Maybe if you combine SS and GS. Reasoning that you get stronger as your skin hardens?

But likely not.

Zenai July 6 2011 3:57 PM EDT

Ala X-Men heavy hitter Colossus eh?

Sickone July 7 2011 6:00 AM EDT

What it needs is to not affect trained stats, but to reduce item bonuses to an item of lower NW.

So, for instance, if you're at near-ENC-penalty levels with a +15 Corn, when you upgrade it to +16 Corn, instead of penalizing you by drastically cutting base stats, it should penalize you by REDUCING THE CORN TO ONLY GRANT A BONUS OF ONE THAT'S ONLY +15 and some tiny extra.

Basically, ENC should be "this is the effective NW limit, anything above it is useless, NOT damaging".

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] July 7 2011 8:32 AM EDT

Like a MTL, but for gear.

EC would lose what little 'punch' it had left, but nerfing DM a little isn't an issue. ;)

Sickone July 7 2011 10:55 PM EDT

Yup, pretty much ;)

Gohan [Ka-Tet of the Serene] July 7 2011 11:04 PM EDT

Definitely makes sense imo.

AdminNemesia [Demonic Serenity] July 7 2011 11:16 PM EDT

The only way I could see that working is if it still ran off of the same enc amount like .05 .30 ect and that was applied to all items the minion uses in terms of how upgraded it is. It is would take quite a bit of work to figure out which items should be lowered otherwise. After all, you have quite a number of items that it can effect, tattoo included.

AdminQBnovice [Cult of the Valaraukar] July 7 2011 11:37 PM EDT

How the hell would that work with multiple items... sounds like nightmare fuel for coders

AdminTitan [The Sky Forge] July 7 2011 11:46 PM EDT

Well assuming everything was perfectly written already and there was no outstanding issues it'd be easy. But, this isn't the case...

Sickone July 8 2011 5:51 AM EDT

How the hell would that work with multiple items

Well, let's say you have items of NWs X1, Y1, Z1 and so on.
The encumbrance factor is the same as before (0.98 or 0.91 or 0.52, etc).
For those without experience with how encumbrance works, 1.00 would mean no encumbrance, while 0.00 would mean completely over the top encumbrance.

You multiply the exact encumbrance factor E with each NW to reach new "virtual" NWs for each item...
X2 = X1 * E, Y2 = Y1 * E, Z2 = Z1 * E, etc
And then, you "recreate" the effect of that item for the calculated "virtual" NW.

For instance, say you have this:
An Elven Long Bow [6x23000] (+210) worth $275,778,365
on a minion that ends up with an encumbrance of 0.5 (you don't care what exact other items are on this guy for this particular calculation, you only care about the encumbrance factor, which depends on total NW on the minion and max effective NW accepted - you just put on it twice as many as you should - let's see the exact effect).
For the "x", it's easy - you reduce it to 11500 (well, technically, it should be slightly over 11499.5 but let's skip that part and just round up for x).
For the "+", it's more complicated... apparently +210 means very roughly 96,432,163 NW, so after you multiply by 0.5 you get 48,216,081 (rounded down), which translates into somewhere around +158, I think ?

So, with an ENC of 0.5 (loaded up twice as much NW as you should), this:
An Elven Long Bow [6x23000] (+210) worth $275,778,365
transforms termporarily into this:
An Elven Long Bow [6x11500] (+158) worth ~$137.88 mil

This thread is closed to new posts. However, you are welcome to reference it from a new thread; link this with the html <a href="/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=003CQJ">ENC, Y u so complicated</a>